- 2021-02-16: The [Citibank vs. Revlon case](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-16/citigroup-loses-fight-to-get-back-millions-in-mistaken-transfer) is pretty interesting (and high in schadenfreude). It boils down to a "no take backsies" kind of argument. Apparently it's an accepted part of the finance world that take-backsies is allowed and legal if the judge decides that all parties involved could reasonably be expected to view it as a mistake at the time the transaction occurred. But this only applies for *obvious* mistakes and the debate is basically over how much you can expect someone who receives money to be like "are you sure? are you SURE you want to do something that totally makes sense?" - More [citibank news](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-17/citi-can-t-have-its-900-million-back) and the whole situation is even crazier than I thought it was. I'm not entirely sure I understand it well enough to do it justice, but I think the tldr here is that Citibank and Revlon did some kind of loan restructuring that their software wasn't designed for, and the poor guy in charge of clicking the buttons on the computer at Citibank had to deal with this a really unintuitive, antiquated ui, and accidentally sent like 900 million dollars to some hedge funds who didn't realize it was "in error" so a judge says they get to keep the money.