I was speaking more broadly about the lack of personal responsibility, and largely the attitudes many people seem to have around this.
I was not referring to any particular regulations.
My original opinion stands and my sympathy remains absent, but I do accept your wider points around shared responsibility.
A debate that hasn’t resulted in attacks or toxicity. We are really setting a good example. 
So would I, but I think this is the part I disagree with really. Understanding what is and isn’t protected I feel goes beyond the knowledge of a lot of people.
Also client money should be separate for e-money institutions, they shouldn’t be holding any of it (at least in the U.K. that’s how it works) and there should be accounting practices that prevent money from going missing like this.
I don’t actually know how this is regulated in the US and tbh US finance regulation still seems to be an absolute mess, which is deeply troubling for all of us.
Personal sympathy is one thing, I was more trying to make the point that this should really not be seen as a story of ‘people were just stupid with their money’ and should really be seen as a colossal f-up for the regulators.
Agreed. However, I expect those people to learn. Lack of knowledge can be costly - that’s life.
It certainly is a failure for the regulators.
This particular US story hasn’t informed my opinion, as it doesn’t really interest me.
My commenting is based on a wider and more broad view of these things, and subjective.
Can’t point at the businesses and say it’s their fault every time.
Without knowing the facts it’s easy for us here to have an opinion but having worked in fraud and the data seen from a legacy bank POV, I can imagine Revolut has far better systems in play and wouldn’t have just let it slip if it was out of character (granted mistakes aren’t impossible, but generally very infrequent).
Stuff like this is near 100% the customers fault at some point in time. It’s not easy to access someone’s account without you letting them in one way or another.
Are you talking about the same thing? I.e the collapse of Synapse and the $96 million hole in their accounts?
Me?
I thought it was the revolut £21k loss or something 
Ah okay well I thought we were discussing this
I don’t know anything about a revolut thing 
My bad 
Yes, but in one case quoted in this forum somewhere, there was a 50% charge to administrative expenses when they got wound up. Safeguarding that emoney places do is way less secure than bank FSCS protection.
That’s not what happened in this case though - the money is literally missing - like no one knows where it is. If it was just the admin fees then sure that wouldn’t be a failure of a regulator.
That’s what the software says it does but I doubt it stands up to testing vs the newest voice cloning software.
This isn’t a new story, there’s already been security industry reports that some of the big banks (e.g HSBC) can be beaten fairly easily.
Many are good at detecting the older and more simple voice cloning methods but the new ones really are much better.
Context as I cba to read?
£4.34 for everyone 
Unless my maths was off
Also, I’m too poor for Apple AI 
*if you can afford the £1000 or so for a device that runs it
Running a 14 Pro. I’m poor
I wonder if it will be based on your card spend, that’s probably a fairer split.