I thought the idea was to confiscate the money under the suspicion you would use it for something illegal if you were carrying so much. So they would take you card since it has that kind of purchasing power.
Obviously it does no good for the cops to confiscate CASH if they're trying to track your history/data.
A credit card isn't cash, credit cards emit a very long paper trail. Imagine how easy the police's job would be if criminals actually used credit cards in the manner you describe.
1) Set up legitimate business storefront -- a health spa. 2) Sell drugs out of business. 3) Charge customers for $1500 "luxury massages" at your health spa. 4) Profit.
It's a scam. Retailers should be allowed to refuse these cards, like they did when it was only Discover doing it. But now Visa does it and tells retailers they'll cut off all access unless they bend over.
Retailers can refuse them. There's a local pizza place near me that still does not accept any credit or debit cards, and charges a processing fee to use checks for payment. They've been in business for over 30 years and are doing fine. They would get more business from me if they did accept cards, though. I just don't carry cash that often.
Nobody's holding a gun to these retailers' heads and making them accept Visa. They want the additional business, they agree to the terms to get it.
It's more like Paypal -- you give Apple Pay permission to disperse the fund from your Visa/MC to the retailer,
ApplePay is like neither of these things. It does not give your card information to the retailer, nor does it give the transaction information to Apple. Apple does not act like PayPal as a payment intermediary.
Instead, the system is generating effectively a new card number and security code for every transaction, processing the payment as usual with the bank, and then binning that "card" from existence.
I'm not equating Apple Pay with Apple themselves. Apple does not get the transaction information, you are correct. I am merely speaking in terms of the disconnect between the retailer and the customer's actual credit card data. The retailer is not processing the customer's actual credit card, which is what they signed on with Visa/MC for: a relationship of them, the consumer, and the card issuer. Apple(Pay) is a third party to this, and the agreements the stores have with Visa/MC likely do not force them to accept such arrangements.
How does this not violate these stores' agreements with Visa (etc), which have explicitly partnered with Apple and Google to provide Pay and Wallet as a valid method of using their (virtual) cards at the register?
Because their agreement is to accept credit cards issued by Visa/Mastercard? What makes Apple Pay more secure and private is you're literally not giving the store your card (information) in any form. It's more like Paypal -- you give Apple Pay permission to disperse the fund from your Visa/MC to the retailer, And Apple Pay is using a one-time payment code so you can't just make a nice little list of purchases by a customer from the number being given over and over.
I don't know why CVS or Rite Aid would be so bent out of shape about this. Don't all drugstores nowadays have Loyalty Cards programs in place? Even if you don't have a credit card account number to use the customer is willingly giving them personally identifiable info to link their purchased items to.
Can't wait for them to copy some photos of someone they aren't aware is under 18 in them. Like to hear the force's response to cops in possession of child porn.
I always find it interesting when people post thing like this and never mention the brand/model of the product so the rest of us can avoid it. It's like we've gotten so worked about lawsuits we censor ourselves now.
It's more a matter of what people are really buying a Surface Pro in place of. Not what the marketroids at Microsoft want to claim. People buying a Surface and not a laptop -- only if they weren't really set on a laptop to start with.
Yeah, I was pretty lost on Sony's part in the whole thing until I read the parts that mentioned it a second time. Seems like a pretty weak link to them considering the time between the Powerbook 100 and this "2007" Renaissance.
That's amusing, since the summary is nothing more than the last paragraph of the article copypasta'd. English Comp 101 says it should be a concise summary of the preceding essay's main points.
My home has no POTS and has a choice of either FTTP (fiber to the premises) or cable.
When we first moved in, I choose fiber... because it's fiber! It must be awesome.
AT&T fiber maxes out at 18Mbps and that it at a crazy unaffordable rate. Cheaper service from Comcast is 120Mbps.
It's not the physical medium that matters, it is the service and cost.
I'd do LTE if that had the best bang/buck.
Hello, I work at a support desk that covers most residential Internet types. No, you wouldn't do LTE. At least not if you wanted a meaningfully reliable connection.
It doesn't matter if it has the best speeds for the buck, if you're going to do online gaming, Netflix streaming, VoIP phone, or especially VPN/remote access, you want a wired service instead. I get people who are trying to do work from home setups over fixed wireless service and they got approved to do them by their employer because they met the minimum down/up speeds required. I can only imagine those employers did not know anything about the person's Internet service type because if I'd been them I would have told the employee they were not eligible to work from home.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, it sounds like Microsoft is the victim of FUD being spread by open-source zealots like the original poster AC you're replying to.
CurrentC is Walmart. It is not Google nor Apple.
CurrentC is a coalition of different retailers, Wal-Mart is only one of them.
Don't make it out like this is another evil scheme of Wal-Mart's design.
Well this is Slashdot...
So it still gets reported as news.
The media will be 10x the cost of unbranded spools.
This sounds like more like the beginning of official "state media" to me.
I thought the idea was to confiscate the money under the suspicion you would use it for something illegal if you were carrying so much. So they would take you card since it has that kind of purchasing power.
Obviously it does no good for the cops to confiscate CASH if they're trying to track your history/data.
A credit card isn't cash, credit cards emit a very long paper trail. Imagine how easy the police's job would be if criminals actually used credit cards in the manner you describe.
1) Set up legitimate business storefront -- a health spa.
2) Sell drugs out of business.
3) Charge customers for $1500 "luxury massages" at your health spa.
4) Profit.
That doesnt stop ads in the middle of a video though.
It does for me. Either that or I haven't seen any vids that have those ads interrupting it.
I really doubt most clueless users will suddenly be taking to the command line to install stuff.
The problem isn't so much clueless users, but users who think they're not.
How about ... hell, how about a phone book? Nice quiet read .. no end of the world catastrophies to worry about, just some lousy advertising.
A book that tracks everyone's location -- nice choice.
If they decide to add advertising down the road and you don't like that, you could, I guess, STOP USING THE FUCKING SITE.
*golfclap*
It's a scam. Retailers should be allowed to refuse these cards, like they did when it was only Discover doing it. But now Visa does it and tells retailers they'll cut off all access unless they bend over.
Retailers can refuse them. There's a local pizza place near me that still does not accept any credit or debit cards, and charges a processing fee to use checks for payment. They've been in business for over 30 years and are doing fine. They would get more business from me if they did accept cards, though. I just don't carry cash that often.
Nobody's holding a gun to these retailers' heads and making them accept Visa. They want the additional business, they agree to the terms to get it.
Sounds like a list of ingredients for perfume. Rosetta perfume, anyone?
Unlock the language of the opposite sex!
(I know, we're talking about a comet here... but still)
Are we gonna get one of these articles every week from now on?
It's more like Paypal -- you give Apple Pay permission to disperse the fund from your Visa/MC to the retailer,
ApplePay is like neither of these things. It does not give your card information to the retailer, nor does it give the transaction information to Apple. Apple does not act like PayPal as a payment intermediary.
Instead, the system is generating effectively a new card number and security code for every transaction, processing the payment as usual with the bank, and then binning that "card" from existence.
I'm not equating Apple Pay with Apple themselves. Apple does not get the transaction information, you are correct.
I am merely speaking in terms of the disconnect between the retailer and the customer's actual credit card data.
The retailer is not processing the customer's actual credit card, which is what they signed on with Visa/MC for: a relationship of them, the consumer, and the card issuer. Apple(Pay) is a third party to this, and the agreements the stores have with Visa/MC likely do not force them to accept such arrangements.
was a pretty cool read.
How does this not violate these stores' agreements with Visa (etc), which have explicitly partnered with Apple and Google to provide Pay and Wallet as a valid method of using their (virtual) cards at the register?
Because their agreement is to accept credit cards issued by Visa/Mastercard? What makes Apple Pay more secure and private is you're literally not giving the store your card (information) in any form. It's more like Paypal -- you give Apple Pay permission to disperse the fund from your Visa/MC to the retailer, And Apple Pay is using a one-time payment code so you can't just make a nice little list of purchases by a customer from the number being given over and over.
I don't know why CVS or Rite Aid would be so bent out of shape about this. Don't all drugstores nowadays have Loyalty Cards programs in place? Even if you don't have a credit card account number to use the customer is willingly giving them personally identifiable info to link their purchased items to.
Can't wait for them to copy some photos of someone they aren't aware is under 18 in them. Like to hear the force's response to cops in possession of child porn.
How does it get any ventilation?
I always find it interesting when people post thing like this and never mention the brand/model of the product so the rest of us can avoid it. It's like we've gotten so worked about lawsuits we censor ourselves now.
I'm not sure the Surface Pro line is really competing with the iPad, though. I mean, according to Microsoft themselves, a Surface Pro 3 is equivalent to a MacBook Air.
It's more a matter of what people are really buying a Surface Pro in place of. Not what the marketroids at Microsoft want to claim.
People buying a Surface and not a laptop -- only if they weren't really set on a laptop to start with.
Yeah, I was pretty lost on Sony's part in the whole thing until I read the parts that mentioned it a second time.
Seems like a pretty weak link to them considering the time between the Powerbook 100 and this "2007" Renaissance.
Sorry, cannot understand summary.
That's amusing, since the summary is nothing more than the last paragraph of the article copypasta'd.
English Comp 101 says it should be a concise summary of the preceding essay's main points.
My home has no POTS and has a choice of either FTTP (fiber to the premises) or cable.
When we first moved in, I choose fiber... because it's fiber! It must be awesome.
AT&T fiber maxes out at 18Mbps and that it at a crazy unaffordable rate. Cheaper service from Comcast is 120Mbps.
It's not the physical medium that matters, it is the service and cost.
I'd do LTE if that had the best bang/buck.
Hello, I work at a support desk that covers most residential Internet types.
No, you wouldn't do LTE. At least not if you wanted a meaningfully reliable connection.
It doesn't matter if it has the best speeds for the buck, if you're going to do online gaming, Netflix streaming, VoIP phone, or especially VPN/remote access, you want a wired service instead. I get people who are trying to do work from home setups over fixed wireless service and they got approved to do them by their employer because they met the minimum down/up speeds required. I can only imagine those employers did not know anything about the person's Internet service type because if I'd been them I would have told the employee they were not eligible to work from home.