They're also incurring a shit-ton of liability in storing magstripe copies - something that's a PCI violation however you interpret the standards. That means that in the case of fraud the cardholder (phoneholder?) will be considered liable instead of the bank or merchant, and as soon as that happens the inevitable class-action lawsuit against Samsung (far more lucrative than going after LoopPay would have been) will be a doozy.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Google also insisted on getting in the middle of the transaction with their Wallet, and if my understanding is correct the results basically ended up providing an inferior experience to merchants since the cards ultimately got recognized as card-not-present. Apple on the other hand worked closely with everyone in the chain rather than trying to muscle their way in. If you're a merchant, the difference between paying card-present and card-not-present is often around 1% (because CNP has a lot more fraud associated with it). Apple's use of tokenization adds more security as well - its just a better thought out system.
Having said all that your point about the launch country was also completely valid. Again, Google tried (IMO) to be far too arrogant for their own good.
In a lot of ways its similar to the 3G issues. Many dinged the original iPhone for launching without 3G at a time when that was cutting edge and not very well supported. Once the iPhone 3G came out, all the issues had been resolved and it was a very smooth experience for users (and had been done in close partnership with AT&T). Some other phones had loudly claimed 3G before then and often had frustratingly poor network connectivity, sometimes amusingly slower than the iPhone's 2G had at the same time.
System integration: its important in all sorts of areas.
Its really aggravating too that US banks will refuse to offer chip-and-pin even though they could. Chip-and-signature is better than magstripe but its still a royal PITA whenever you travel in Europe.
Their PCI wording on the website is intentionally deceptive, I feel. When asked about PCI they talk specifically only about the fact that their datacenter is compliant in the storage of card numbers.
Its strictly against PCI requirements to store trackdata in any way, with the single exception of reading it in-memory and relaying it upstream to another PCI compliant service provider. Since this is exactly what their product does, I fail to see how they can claim its compliant (and, as I mentioned, they very carefully don't ever actually say that it is).
That still bites me every now and then after all these years, and continues to introduce discussions as to at what point in backend code the typo should be fixed.
If a checkbox is not checked does it still not come in on the post / get ?
if not then it is still broken on arrival.
Is a textarea still not a text control?
if not then it is still broken on arrival.
I think you're confusing HTTP with HTML.
HTTP/2 over TLS could have been made mandatory. But for some easy-to-guess reason they "decided" otherwise.
Because its the wrong "they" to be making that decision. The working group for HTTP/2 should never be dictating how they feel its use should be restricted. There's plenty of other opportunities for people at the appropriate levels of the chain to make that recommendation. This is a big part of the point of a layered technology.
4 000 000 000 is 10 characters once the whitespace is stripped out. Roughly the same number in HEX is FF FF FF FF, a saving of 20%
You're kidding, right? The number 4 billion can be represented in 32 bits, or the same total space as 4 ASCII characters.
Considering that the most commented on article today has 44 comments (not uniqued by user), I'd say that "a lot" is stretching the truth. Besides, if it was really all that, you wouldn't be here trying to talk about it.
I only disagree in that, version control just isn't that hard and doesn't take that much education to get started with. A lot of the problem really is more about it looking intimidating with a couple of new terms people need to get used to. I could show a person how to use git as a normal user in about 5 minutes.
I'd like to see that. Bear in mind that the user in question is likely to be an expert in things that you know nothing about, yet has never even been exposed to the idea of a distributed versioning system. Just explaining why even when they go through the process of committing it nobody else can see it is likely to take up quite a bit of your time.
Shame on Google for including a pre-checked checkbox to download Chrome as part of the package. That's download.com level shady.
Good or bad, your products need to stand alone when there's nothing whatsoever tying them together other than the downloader.
there are a LOT of people who dont live in cities in the US
There are also a LOT of people who do live in cities. They don't have anything like European-normal broadband value either.
I think there's more going on here than just European "socialism" vs. American "capitalism". Demographics, for instance, are wildly different for the US.
Average population and population density for countries 1-15: 34 million and 193/km^2
United States population and population density: 316 million and 34/km^2
Well, that explains why all of our large cities are so well-connected with gigabit fiber for $50/mo, at least.
Oh, wait, they're not are they? The simple fact that Montana exists shouldn't be used to excuse terrible service and pricing in NYC, Houston, Seattle, or any other major US city.
That'd be similar to trying to privately build the portion of the road system to get to your front door, then driving a subsidized car over them to help defray the costs.
Infrastructure is one of those things that actually does work better when left to the society as a whole. Service providers, on the other hand, work far better privately in competition with one another over government-secured infrastructure.
But the others subsidized the build. We subsidized the service. There's a difference.
Yup. We've made that mistake before, too - running government-funded trains over privately held tracks is ludicrous compared to the alternative, yet that pattern the "compromise" we keep making again and again resulting in nothing more than guaranteed payments from taxpayers to some of the largest corporations in the country.