Yeah, I hope that those breaches lit a fire under some people's asses. I was hit by both of them, and more (like 3 or 4) in the span of a year or less.

Cool, thanks for this FAQ too!

Super informative post - thank you very much! I think you pretty much answered all my questions. I appreciate it.

That's funny, I just linked the same article above and had not noticed this point because I was looking for something else! Anyway, thanks - it's encouraging to hear that they seem to be planning to go all the way to chip and pin, and that some banks are already issuing cards for both signature/pin.

I hope that they won't eventually try to push fraud liability to the consumer, as apparently they do in Europe! I definitely wouldn't put it past the financial industry though.

Some banks do have some better facilities for this. Someone replied above me about Chase Quickpay (I'm not familiar with it), and I use the P2P transfer at Capital One 360 all the time. It does still use ACH so it's a two-business day wait for the money to become available at the other end, but it's very easy to use from the bank's website.

That's interesting. I would like to learn more, if you have any references you can provide. I vaguely recall reading something to that effect, but I think I wrote it off as being either subtly implied, or just conjecture on someone's part, or it being dependent on some onerous pre-conditions. In other words, it seemed to me to be something that was not very likely to happen. I would love to get some confirmation otherwise.

That's not always the case. Regarding the actual exchange rate, I had read before that the exchange rate on card transactions are more favorable to the traveler than doing a cash exchange (likely because of the volume that the banks do).

Regarding the extra fees that some banks charge on foreign transactions (many charge 3%), thankfully not all banks charge that! For instance, Capital One is one of the few that does not charge a foreign transaction fee to their cardholders.

While I kind of agree with your sentiment, the signature in chip and signature refers to the signature you have to make on the terminal, not the signature on the back of the card.

Thanks for the confirmation, and additional info about the bike rental stations. I don't think the Target breach had anything to do with the move to chip cards. There was a deadline established years ago for everyone to move to the new system by October 2015 (in most cases). This article has some pretty good information on this shift, and current progress.

Let us know which banks you've found so far that are issuing chip and pin cards. I've been following this for a while and looked a few months ago and they were very rare. However, someone commented further down that Wells Fargo cards are both signature and pin, which is pretty cool.

Good point, I think I remember reading this justification as well. Oh well, give the customer a substandard product that doesn't cause them any inconvenience.

From that page, it sounds like Wells Fargo did the right thing and enabled PIN as well as signature. Good to know for the future if I need a US credit card with chip and pin. Thanks!

In case you didn't know, the cards that most banks are now issuing in the US are chip and signature, not chip and pin like in Europe, and I understand that there are some spots that DO NOT accept chip and signature, like unattended tolls, unattended gas stations, and possibly some unattended transportation ticket purchases (trains, etc).

Pretty frustrating that credit card issuers decided to go this route in the US with some bullshit justification that people wouldn't know how to use the cards (WTF?).

While the chip and signature is more resistant to skimming and duplication, it is no more secure than the old magnetic stripe cards if your physical card is stolen. I think they did this to prevent an increase in support costs instead (people requesting to reset PIN numbers, etc).

You have to admit that drones are on an entirely different scale of inequality than your examples though. Unlike your examples, the person receiving a drone attack had absolutely zero chance to inflict any physical harm on the person executing the attack. That is not the case for pretty much any other scenario, even something as far fetched as tanks vs clubs.

Remember that open source licenses (as well as creative commons) are actually made possible by copyright laws. If there were no copyright laws, the GPL, for instance, would be completely unenforceable because anyone would be able to do whatever they wanted to do with their copy.

What this decision affects is the new idea that APIs are copyrightable, which could have many yet unknown effects throughout the software industry, open and closed source.

Are the moderators out of their minds today? Some awfully silly comments are getting modded up in this story.

The reason that you don't make minimum wage $100 an hour is because the objective is not to close businesses, but instead to just give employees a chance to survive on a basic level out from their full-time wages. Government (as an expression of larger society) does well to ensure that business owners don't get rich by making their employees poor and by making them have to go on government assistance. $15 an hour is a good and reasonable minimum wage for an area with such a high cost of living.