4 ms·

> having to wear a safety belt is also an inferior experience but we do it for safety We do it for our safety, but chip cards are for bank's safety. Consumers

by 4ad 10y ago

> having to wear a safety belt is also an inferior experience but we do it for safety We do it for our safety, but chip cards are for bank's safety. Consumers are not liable for fraud anyway, only the bank wins. Let me put it another way. Americans consumers love their magstripe; they wouldn't if they lost money. At the end of the day, chip or magstripe, the consumer has the same amount of money in his bank account. Right now the banks bear the cost of fraud. They are moving a small amount of that cost to the consumer through by annoying him with imposing a poor UI upon him. Why should the consumer accept that?

Nursie 10y ago
Because otherwise the consumer pays for the fraud and the insurance anyway. Why do you think US credit card transaction fees to merchants are so damn high?
- 4ad 10y ago
  > Why do you think US credit card transaction fees to merchants are so damn high? Because until recently, the law was that merchants were not allowed to charge discriminatively based on cash vs. card. Since americans love their CCs and unlike in Europe, CCs are a massive part of retail sales, it was not too difficult for the credit card mafia to impose whatever fees on merchants. Here in Europe, fees are capped through regulations, not out of credit card companies good will. I mention this because chip cards can only protect against using a physical clone of a card, while the vast majority of fraud happens online, where the card is not present and the chip is not used at all. The fraud profile is the same in Europe and the US, yet the fees are vastly different. That has nothing to do with chip vs. magstripe.
  - Nursie 10y ago
    The fraud profile is absolutely not the same in the EU and the US, where cloned cards are frequently used to withdraw cash and make physical purchases. Yes, fees in the EU are capped by law, but to think cards are not used just as much used in places like the UK as they are in the US ... Have you been living under a rock for 30 years? And no, the chip doesn't protect online, other features do. One way or another, the US consumer pays for the much higher levels of fraud that the stripe allows.

by 4ad 10y ago

Nursie 10y ago

Because otherwise the consumer pays for the fraud and the insurance anyway. Why do you think US credit card transaction fees to merchants are so damn high?

4ad 10y ago
> Why do you think US credit card transaction fees to merchants are so damn high? Because until recently, the law was that merchants were not allowed to charge discriminatively based on cash vs. card. Since americans love their CCs and unlike in Europe, CCs are a massive part of retail sales, it was not too difficult for the credit card mafia to impose whatever fees on merchants. Here in Europe, fees are capped through regulations, not out of credit card companies good will. I mention this because chip cards can only protect against using a physical clone of a card, while the vast majority of fraud happens online, where the card is not present and the chip is not used at all. The fraud profile is the same in Europe and the US, yet the fees are vastly different. That has nothing to do with chip vs. magstripe.
- Nursie 10y ago
  The fraud profile is absolutely not the same in the EU and the US, where cloned cards are frequently used to withdraw cash and make physical purchases. Yes, fees in the EU are capped by law, but to think cards are not used just as much used in places like the UK as they are in the US ... Have you been living under a rock for 30 years? And no, the chip doesn't protect online, other features do. One way or another, the US consumer pays for the much higher levels of fraud that the stripe allows.