I use my credit and debit cards the same way today as I did before smartphones existed. I never invited the extra surveillance middleman of Google/Apple into my transactions. And the convenience of tapping or swiping a plastic card is simpler than using my phone anyway. Is this not possible in Spain?
I'm with you. Low-tech works just fine. I hate the idea of having to depend on a working phone just to pay for things.
But isn't the promise of Apple Pay that you never expose your real credit card # to the merchant? So they can't track you? I know Walmart in Canada really resisted Apple Pay for a few years because it would mean no more ability to track people by their payment methods.
> But isn't the promise of Apple Pay that you never expose your real credit card # to the merchant? So they can't track you? I know Walmart in Canada really resisted Apple Pay for a few years because it would mean no more ability to track people by their payment methods.
Yes, this is exactly what Walmart does in the US since they still don't accept Apple Pay/Google Pay. When I go in and make a purchase using my credit or debit card, they'll associate it with my Walmart account and it'll show up as a "recent order" in the Walmart app because I have the same card saved there for ordering groceries online. They use those in-store purchases to recommend things to add to my grocery orders all the time.
> since they still don't accept Apple Pay/Google Pay. When I go in and make a purchase using my credit or debit card, they'll associate it with my Walmart account
Why wouldn't they be able to do that with at least Google Pay?
I pay with my phone using Google Pay at a Swedish grocery store chain and it's connected to my loyalty account there.
(Since I don't use Apple Pay I don't know if the same works there.)
I guess I'm not familiar with how Google Pay actually works, I assumed it was the same as Apple Pay. With Apple Pay the merchant gets a randomized card number on every transaction.
Too late to edit my comment, but it looks like I didn't quite understand how Apple Pay works either. After a little more research on both of them, here's the gist of it: Apple Pay and Google Pay both create a "Device Account Number" for your card, and this number never changes. When you tap your phone to pay, it generates a one-time cryptogram for the transaction which will always be unique. I was under the impression that merchants only get the cryptogram, but that's not the case – merchants get both the cryptogram and the DAN during the purchase.
The problem is, since the DAN is a stable number that never changes per card, they can save it and use it to recognize you across visits. That's how stores can tie Apple Pay/Google Pay transactions to loyalty programs without scanning a separate card. The DAN doesn't differentiate between online/in-app purchases and physical purchases either, though the number is different between devices (i.e. use phone to pay in-store, use computer or tablet to shop for groceries). But realistically, Apple Pay/Google Pay would only marginally improve the privacy in the Walmart scenario, which is a bummer.
We used to have a "cash card" in Sweden in the 90's[0]. It flopped because nobody wants to keep manually re-filling it with value all the time. It's much more convenient to have a card that pulls from your bank account (either instantly via debit or monthly via credit). In the mass market, convenience always trumps privacy.
The places where a "cash card" have gained popularity have all been using the "backdoor" of public transit payments that are so ubiquitous they also get accepted by retail (e.g. Suica in Japan, Octopus in HK, EasyCard in Taiwan, etc)
Ah, yes, we had those in The Netherlands as well (Chipknip), everybody hated those cards (though if I remember correctly most debit cards also doubled as a Chipknip card), but many parking meters used them for some time.
Governments frown upon KYC-less digital purse cards. Gotta force everyone to share their national ID number to just open a bank account to keep out drug dealers, terrorists, or NSFW game peddlers.
Banks generally don't like disposable digital purse cards. They make money off fees and interest. If a product doesn't rope you into a customer "relationship" where you link your pay deposits or later might get a mortgage or car loan they can only make money off fees. Enjoy paying $5 to activate a $100 prepaid debit card!
Credit cards provide convenience and cash back benefits. Some might prefer to pay cash for everything for ultimate privacy, and that's fine. But credit cards are the compromise I make. I can still pay cash when I think it's appropriate for a given transaction.
Using Google or Apple Pay so I can tap my phone instead of my card gives me no extra benefit that I care about and complicates my ecosystem with another party.
Yep. In Germany credit cards are a nuisance for banks. If you want one with cash backs and easy chargeback functionality, you are free to pay 60€ a month for an American Express Platinum card that works exactly nowhere in EU.
How dare Europe force card companies to distribute the cost of being poor on all customers. Cashback is effectively a special fee levied exclusively on those who don't qualify.
I was told the other day that the people most likely to choose to avoid the extra 2.5% fees are the wealthier.
In New Zealand, most low margin business (like cafes) ask you to accept an ~2.5% transaction fee (if you use a credit card or paywave). You can avoid the fee by using a debit card with a chip.
I'm unsure what choice the poorer make. If you're actually low income, maybe you don't go to cafes.
I did notice that a thrift store didn't charge the extra 2.5%: so perhaps poorer people have more pressure to use cards with fees?
Amex is noted for its high fees - so perhaps it is a bathtub where only the middleclass care.
When you have to care for money, visibility doing so feels like exposing weakness. But when you care for the little amounts while it's clear that this is unrelated to need, it turns into showing off a quality.
Yes, but in Spain all of our cards are Visa or Mastercard, afaik, so you can't really avoid using American tech in your daily payments (unless you use cash, which remains a very convenient method, by the way).
The fact you have the visa or mastercard logo doesn't mean you can't avoit to use their tech for your daily payments.
Example, in France most debit and credit cards are called "carte bleue" (literally blue card) but all of them either have a visa/mastercard logo. However when you pay with them you can decide with the merchant to use the CB system or the visa/mastercard. Sadly very few people know that and do the selection.
Interesting. I don't think there's anything similar here in Spain, though. On the other hand, in this same thread, somebody said Visa acquired that "Carte Bleue" system, and Wikipedia states it was discontinued in 2010. So maybe it's not possible to use anything other than visa/mc in France anymore
You mention an interesting thing I didn't realize before. Carte Bleues, the brand, seems to have been sold to Visa but CB, the payment system would still be a separate thing and now mean Carte Bancaire. It is not helped by the fact that french people literally adopted carte bleue as a generic name for payment cards.
Thanks for the info. By the way, is there any difference, apart from not having to rely on foreign parties, for the buyer between selecting CB or Visa/MC for his payment? And I suppose it's the shop owner who decides the default when the buyer doesn't choose.
> I use my credit and debit cards the same way today as I did before smartphones existed.
How exactly are you doing that? with 3D Secure online credit card transactions now require confirmation in the mobile app (or via OTP sent by SMS, but this is being phased out, as it is insecure)
And when your local model generated video gets uploaded, YouTube will just remove it then.
Local models will always be disadvantaged on compute power anyway. Hobbyists can do what they want locally but the culture will be dominated by what the tech and media giants permit. They'll now have the power centralized at time of creation and not just upon publication on their own platforms.
Right, this article overlooks the difference between a first encounter and regular encounters. The concise representation pays off when you do learn it, as long as it's executed well.
And I'm fine with a bit of cognitive exploration to figure out a green check and red X scheme rather than see a whole table column filled up with words like "active" and "inactive". The former allows more columns on screen at once. Horizontal scrolling is a worse impediment to assimilating information from a table.
I would almost always rather have the words; words are things I can easily search for and manipulate using the text-processing tools in my possession.
Personally, my brain "page faults" whenever it has to interpret an emoji, which makes most use of in-line icons far worse than the text they represent. I expect few people have this problem, but I also expect that I'm not the only one with it.
I agree that certain icons that are common parlance can increase cognition ( vs. x). However I think expanding a users icon lexicon and forcing memorization can actually harm cognitive experience.
Our users are context switching across dozens if not hundreds of digital experiences a day. Forcing memory recall is a tax. The question is always "whats the ROI?"
IMO color and words go just as far as an icon without relying on net new visual language.
As per your comment on horizontal scrolling, I couldn't agree more. Horizontal scrolling is booty. However, depending on the job to be done you can avoid overly wide tables with customizable columns, expandable rows, hover states, and strategic truncation.
I certainly would prefer those strategies over relying on a unique icon language that isn't part of the dozen or so immediately recognizable icon schemas already familiar to users.
Women getting to vote was woke, integrated schools were woke, interracial marriage was woke, unmarried women getting a credit card was woke. Spending your life being mad about progress that's going to happen no matter how much you fight it is a terrible deal.
I'm grateful that I spent a significant part of my life forced to solve problems and forced to struggle to produce the right words. In hindsight I know that that's where all the learning was. If I'd had a shortcut machine when I was young I'd have used it all the time, learned much less, and grown up dependent on it.
I'd argue that choosing words is a key skill because language is one of our tools for examining ideas and linking together parts of our brains in new ways.
Even just writing notes you'll never refer to again, you're making yourself codify vaguer ideas or impressions, test assumptions, and then compress the concept for later. It's an new external information channel between different regions of your head which seems to provide value.
Eh 1953 was more about what’s going to happen to the people left behind, e.g. Childhood’s End. The vast majority of people will be better off having the market-winning AI tell them what to do.
Or how about that vast majority gets a decent education and higher standard of living so they can spend time learning and thinking on their own? You and a lot of folks seem to take for granted our unjust economy and its consequences, when we could easily change it.
How is that relevant? You can give whatever support you like to humans, but machine learning is doing the same thing in general cognition that it has done in every competitive game. It doesn't matter how much education the humans get - if they try to make complex decisions using their brain then, silicon will outperform them at planning to achieve desirable outcomes. Material prosperity is a desirable outcome, machines will be able to plot a better path to it than some trained monkey. The only question is how long it'll take to resolve the engineering challenges.
There are some facts which makes it not outside the realm of possibility. Like computers being better at chess and go and giving directions to places or doing puzzles. (The picture-on-cardboard variety.)
If people are feeling entitled to a certain pace of spectacle and action as they write off everything in between as virtueless boredom, that's more damaging to the culture than a certain percentage simply no longer watching movies. That's how we get Netflix dumbing down their movies for everyone. There's nuance and value to a scene you may not immediately and consciously notice. And on a more meta level, pacing contributes to the overall experience of a movie even if there's not necessarily important subtext to a given scene that doesn't have action or explicit plot development.
Exactly. This is the holy grail of advertising. Seamless and undisclosed. That, and replacing vast amounts of labor, are some of the only uses that justify the level of investment in LLM AI.
reply