I've worked in banks in New Zealand and the UK for the past eight or nine years, and we try to tell people that it's the merchant who's meant to contact *their* bank to get the auth code. The only merchants who refuse to do this are in the states. I've always just assumed things work differently over there.

Because of this: http://youtu.be/3AJCdmW33fM

Really? 15% of the population have over half a million dollars in assets that don't include their primary residence?

That's an interesting point, and I don't know how your banks get away with it. Here in NZ, although money will sometimes be held to make sure that there's nothing wrong with the deposit (fraudulent, or not enough money in the sending account) you earn interest from the day the money is deposited, not cleared. The bank still earns money on that deposit, of course, but only as much as they would for whatever money you already have in your account - there's no incentive for them to keep your money uncleared longer than necessary for risk management.

One of the forum posts on last.fm said the subscription price would go to a flat three [euros, pounds, dollars] for everyone.

that's why we have staff involved in the process, to remove that mechanical error issue. There's a whole bunch of ways we work around that issue - if the cardholder has told us they'll be in that country, the card's not stopped; if we can contact them on their mobile, the card's not stopped; if someone at home tells us they're overseas, the card's not stopped; if we can tell from their spending on other cards they're overseas, the card's not stopped. The system's not perfect, but we very rarely block a card unneccessarily.

he's somehow managed to make Magic:The Gathering even dorkier...

I work for a bank, and we have a fraud detection system which relies on contacting the customer if a suspicious transaction occurs on their credit card. Essentially, if a transaction breaks particular rules (multiple transactions at petrol stations in quick succession, say, or use of card in multiple countries in unlikely timeframes) we contact the customer. If we cannot do so, a temporary block is placed on the card until we can verify the transaction is legitimate.

I know this isn't very widespread yet - of the five main banks in New Zealand, I know that three use it. I imagine, however, that it won't be long until this is standard practice in the banking industry.

I think you're right in that some people will not give up their cash without a fight, but it's certainly not true in the vast majority of cases. Here in New Zealand, we've had EFTPOS for many years now, to the point where I don't remember a time when it wasn't around (born in '83). It is so prevalent that I'm shocked at the very rare occasion where it's not available.

I barely use cash myself, and mostly see it as an inconvenience. I know for a fact that I'm not the only one who thinks so, and I believe that the majority of my countrymen agree with me. Why on earth would you want to carry round bits of metal or plastic that you never seem to be able to get rid of entirely, when one or two cards will provide you with the same benefits with greater convenience and security? If I lose my EFTPOS card, I call the bank, cancel it, and arrange a replacement. If I lose cash, that's it - it's gone.

Although there is always the risk of fraudulent activity of my cards (much, much higher on my credit card than my EFTPOS card), every bank in this country, and I would expect in the world, has an agreement with their customers that if the customer does not contribute directly to the fraud, they are not liable for any stolen funds. Again, if someone steals my card, I'm inconvenienced for a couple of days, but if someone steals cash it's gone forever. I know which I prefer.

get it by torrent - http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4059049/New_scientology_dox__The_Computer_Frank_Oliver_Dox