7 ms·

You might want to qualify this with “in the US” as chip+pin cards are pretty fast in other countries by comparison. Also there was a great episode of the podca

by nstj 9y ago

You might want to qualify this with “in the US” as chip+pin cards are pretty fast in other countries by comparison. Also there was a great episode of the podcast “Planet Money” a while back which goes into detail on your question [0]: > Today on the show, we bring you a brief history of what's in your pocket. It's a story of convenience vs. fraud—and it also includes a hippie inventor, the origin of the last great upgrade on your card, the magnetic stripe, and why it takes so long to "dip the chip." [0]: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/04/13/474135422/episode-695-put-a-chip-on-it http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/04/13/474135422/episo...

dv35z 9y ago
Thanks! And correct - should have added "in the US" in te title. Just got back from a trip, and am always reminded how archaic USA banking feels compared to most other countries' systems. With the recent industry switch to chip in the US, I'd hope transactions would be faster and easiee - but the implementation seems terrible: confusing POS interfaces, slow chip reading, still need to sign / no PIN, rarely any "bring the mobile POS to your restaurant table" requires still waiting on the waiter for 5min, etc.
- muninn_ 9y ago
  Sure. And that's one of the problems with being first to infrastructure. It's really hard to just "change it all" once something new and better takes hold. It'll get better, even if it's not that great right now. Though, I largely take issue with your statement that U.S. banking feels archaic. I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation. (I'm not arguing regulation bad/good, but it is a fact that the industry is heavily regulated).
  - CaptainZapp 9y ago
    I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation I wouldn't call checks, which are still widely used in the US the forefront of digital technolgy. I think it must have been more than 10 years ago since I've seen my last check and that was an Amex Traveller Cheque
    - Armisael16 9y ago
      You can be at the forefront and still support older stuff.
      - AlphaSite 9y ago
        Considering how long it took chip and pin to become predominant (which is to say still not 100%) I would say US banking is pretty behind most of the world.
        IncRnd 9y ago
        Excellent point. I've never encountered chip and pin in practice in the US, rather chip and signature.
        aminorex 9y ago
        All of my debit card POS uses in NYC have been chip+pin for several months.
    - muninn_ 9y ago
      Yeah so supporting checks doesn't really mean you're not at the forefront of technology. If anything, the fact that US banks allow people to take pictures of checks, and have done so for like the last 5 years at least, is an example of the kind of innovation seen in the US banking system. I actually have to write checks regularly to pay my utility bills, or I have to pay a $2.00 convenience fee to have the transaction processed by a third-party hired by the state. Not to mention, I randomly receive checks in the mail from events I speak at or for travel reimbursement or university reimbursement or the like. I love that I can snap a picture and wham my check is deposited. Not to mention things like Apple Pay, which, without support, configuration, and advice from the banking industry wouldn't be a thing. Naturally they created the technology for the phone, but banks do the rest. How is that not innovation?
      - cat199 9y ago
  - Sean1708 9y ago
    > And that's one of the problems with being first to infrastructure Is this really true? I thought the US only started getting chip and PIN about 4 or 5 years ago?
    - camiller 9y ago
      Most US credit cards are chip and sign (debit uses a pin, but did before chip cards as well). Occasionally I'll see a transaction where the pos wants a pin and the user has no idea what pin because they have never used a pin with that account.
    - bluGill 9y ago
      The US had mag stripes in widespread use first. We are looking at 20 or 30 years ago: most of the rest of the world caught up long ago, but they caught up after the problems with mag stripes were known and so the rest of the world built infrastructure to attempt to fix the now known problems. Note too that the US has a legal limit of $50 if your card is stolen. As such to the consumer there is no incentive to care about security. Other countries don't have that protection and so consumers rightly refused to take a change until things were more secure. All that security comes at a cost, one consumers cannot afford to gamble on, but to a larger business can call cost of doing business and weigh against the cost of upgrading security.
      - AlphaSite 9y ago
        Other countries have the sort of limits. The banks and processors just storing armed vendors into emv using lower ratesas the carrot and legal requir,nets as the stick.
  - mugsie 9y ago
    The US was one of the last countries to get Chip + PIN, and even then they messed it up, and got chip + sign. 90% of the places I use a card in seem to be still swiping the cards, while we have had full chip + PIN implementation here (Ireland) since at least 2005 or 2006.
    - bluGill 9y ago
      I don't want pin. I have half a dozen credit/debit cards in my pocket (the card I use for almost everything, my backup card just in case the first is lost, my HSA card, my company card, a debit card, and the store care for a store I shop at often) there are another half a dozen that the issuers want me to carry but are not worth the space they take up. I cannot mentally manage that many different pins. verification comes in 3 parts: something you carry (card), something you know (card number, pin), something you are (your signature, fingerprint). Generally you need two. However since the card number is memorable (hard but possible) the pin is no additional security.
      - Dayshine 9y ago
        Signature isn't something you are, it's not in any of those three categories, it's closer to your address. Chip + pin = Something you carry (card/chip) + something you know (pin). You need the physical card to use it, card number isn't sufficient.
      - mugsie 9y ago
        Signature is also not something "you are" - it is an easily faked thing, that is basically never actually verified. PINs can be changed, so if you came up with a way of memorising them, its easy. You also don't need PINs for things like loyalty / membership cards traditionally - just for payment cards.
      - LordKano 9y ago
        I don't use my PIN either, for a different reason. I force them to process it as a credit card because I get the consumer protections of the CC processing agreements. If I use my PIN, it's more like an ATM transaction. LK
  - jedikv 9y ago
    USA still hasn't adopted the faster payment model of same-day payments between the banks (without charge). Compare that to the UK which most payment transactions are completed within 4 hours
    - Osmium 9y ago
      > within 4 hours It's usually quoted as hours, but in practice is often 'instant.' More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service US is archaic in many ways too: the necessity for paper checks in many situations (and still having to pay for them in many banks), no contactless payment cards, the aforementioned dire signature/chip situation... It's certainly anything but at the 'forefront of digital technology.' Not to mention fees. Fees everywhere! The effort it takes to avoid meaningless 'gotcha' fees is just insane -- and must surely stifle innovation too, in creating friction against change.
  - zkms 9y ago
    > I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation. Transferring money with ACH takes multiple business days, this is not at the forefront of digital technology.
    - muninn_ 9y ago
      One example of an inefficiency (especially without any reasoning behind why this inefficiency is happening) doesn't mean much.
    - jdmichal 9y ago
      First, most ACH transactions clear in the same day [0]. Second, that's also completely ignoring newer networks like clearXchange / Zelle, which clears in minutes [1]. [0] https://www.nacha.org/news/what-ach-quick-facts-about-automated-clearing-house-ach-network https://www.nacha.org/news/what-ach-quick-facts-about-automa... "Specifically, the NACHA Operating Rules require that ACH credits settle in one to two business days and ACH debits settle on the next business day. Recent enhancements to the NACHA Operating Rules now enable same-day settlement of virtually all ACH transactions." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearXchange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearXchange
signal11 9y ago
In the UK, the older generation of readers are pretty slow. The newer models are pretty fast, I'm not sure if it's also because they have reliable broadband connections but they basically ask you to remove the card almost as soon as you insert it.
- rsynnott 9y ago
  The ones that use GPRS can also be _fairly_ fast, though it introduces a couple of seconds of unavoidable latency. They're not long for this world, though; some countries are already shutting down GPRS networks. The really slow ones just used dial-up. They mostly seem to be gone now.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  We have the same console as I've seen in Tesco petrol station. Ours take a lot longer for auth, I'm guessing that Tesco have a local stopped card list to check against and don't do a full auth with the bank in order to save time. Might be wrong, just my assumption based on contactless payment being almost instantaneous (like that petrol station).
  - Reason077 9y ago
    I'm pretty sure that Transport for London do something similar (ie: transactions get batched and then charged at end of day, blacklisting for bad cards). However, using a contactless chip card is still a lot slower compared to using an Oyster card. Where as the Oyster card seems to process in a matter of milliseconds, the contactless card takes perhaps 2 seconds or more. With a long queue of people all using contactless, this potentially adds up to quite a significant delay at the ticket gates.
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      It would help if they had more Oyster readers and/or better situated ones - at one popular station I use, there's two readers, side-by-side, right next to a tiny exit hole. Even just moving those two a couple of metres apart would improve the flow of humans greatly.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jimnotgym 9y ago
I'm glad you added that. In the UK chip and pin machines are fastest using the Ethernet connection, much slower on the phone line. One advantage of the phone connection however is reduced PCI requirements. SAQ B is simpler than SAQ B-IP

by nstj 9y ago

dv35z 9y ago

Thanks! And correct - should have added "in the US" in te title. Just got back from a trip, and am always reminded how archaic USA banking feels compared to most other countries' systems. With the recent industry switch to chip in the US, I'd hope transactions would be faster and easiee - but the implementation seems terrible: confusing POS interfaces, slow chip reading, still need to sign / no PIN, rarely any "bring the mobile POS to your restaurant table" requires still waiting on the waiter for 5min, etc.

muninn_ 9y ago
Sure. And that's one of the problems with being first to infrastructure. It's really hard to just "change it all" once something new and better takes hold. It'll get better, even if it's not that great right now. Though, I largely take issue with your statement that U.S. banking feels archaic. I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation. (I'm not arguing regulation bad/good, but it is a fact that the industry is heavily regulated).
- CaptainZapp 9y ago
  I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation I wouldn't call checks, which are still widely used in the US the forefront of digital technolgy. I think it must have been more than 10 years ago since I've seen my last check and that was an Amex Traveller Cheque
  - Armisael16 9y ago
    You can be at the forefront and still support older stuff.
    - AlphaSite 9y ago
      Considering how long it took chip and pin to become predominant (which is to say still not 100%) I would say US banking is pretty behind most of the world.
      - IncRnd 9y ago
        Excellent point. I've never encountered chip and pin in practice in the US, rather chip and signature.
        aminorex 9y ago
        All of my debit card POS uses in NYC have been chip+pin for several months.
  - muninn_ 9y ago
    Yeah so supporting checks doesn't really mean you're not at the forefront of technology. If anything, the fact that US banks allow people to take pictures of checks, and have done so for like the last 5 years at least, is an example of the kind of innovation seen in the US banking system. I actually have to write checks regularly to pay my utility bills, or I have to pay a $2.00 convenience fee to have the transaction processed by a third-party hired by the state. Not to mention, I randomly receive checks in the mail from events I speak at or for travel reimbursement or university reimbursement or the like. I love that I can snap a picture and wham my check is deposited. Not to mention things like Apple Pay, which, without support, configuration, and advice from the banking industry wouldn't be a thing. Naturally they created the technology for the phone, but banks do the rest. How is that not innovation?
    - cat199 9y ago
- Sean1708 9y ago
  > And that's one of the problems with being first to infrastructure Is this really true? I thought the US only started getting chip and PIN about 4 or 5 years ago?
  - camiller 9y ago
    Most US credit cards are chip and sign (debit uses a pin, but did before chip cards as well). Occasionally I'll see a transaction where the pos wants a pin and the user has no idea what pin because they have never used a pin with that account.
  - bluGill 9y ago
    The US had mag stripes in widespread use first. We are looking at 20 or 30 years ago: most of the rest of the world caught up long ago, but they caught up after the problems with mag stripes were known and so the rest of the world built infrastructure to attempt to fix the now known problems. Note too that the US has a legal limit of $50 if your card is stolen. As such to the consumer there is no incentive to care about security. Other countries don't have that protection and so consumers rightly refused to take a change until things were more secure. All that security comes at a cost, one consumers cannot afford to gamble on, but to a larger business can call cost of doing business and weigh against the cost of upgrading security.
    - AlphaSite 9y ago
      Other countries have the sort of limits. The banks and processors just storing armed vendors into emv using lower ratesas the carrot and legal requir,nets as the stick.
- mugsie 9y ago
  The US was one of the last countries to get Chip + PIN, and even then they messed it up, and got chip + sign. 90% of the places I use a card in seem to be still swiping the cards, while we have had full chip + PIN implementation here (Ireland) since at least 2005 or 2006.
  - bluGill 9y ago
    I don't want pin. I have half a dozen credit/debit cards in my pocket (the card I use for almost everything, my backup card just in case the first is lost, my HSA card, my company card, a debit card, and the store care for a store I shop at often) there are another half a dozen that the issuers want me to carry but are not worth the space they take up. I cannot mentally manage that many different pins. verification comes in 3 parts: something you carry (card), something you know (card number, pin), something you are (your signature, fingerprint). Generally you need two. However since the card number is memorable (hard but possible) the pin is no additional security.
    - Dayshine 9y ago
      Signature isn't something you are, it's not in any of those three categories, it's closer to your address. Chip + pin = Something you carry (card/chip) + something you know (pin). You need the physical card to use it, card number isn't sufficient.
    - mugsie 9y ago
      Signature is also not something "you are" - it is an easily faked thing, that is basically never actually verified. PINs can be changed, so if you came up with a way of memorising them, its easy. You also don't need PINs for things like loyalty / membership cards traditionally - just for payment cards.
    - LordKano 9y ago
      I don't use my PIN either, for a different reason. I force them to process it as a credit card because I get the consumer protections of the CC processing agreements. If I use my PIN, it's more like an ATM transaction. LK
- jedikv 9y ago
  USA still hasn't adopted the faster payment model of same-day payments between the banks (without charge). Compare that to the UK which most payment transactions are completed within 4 hours
  - Osmium 9y ago
    > within 4 hours It's usually quoted as hours, but in practice is often 'instant.' More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service US is archaic in many ways too: the necessity for paper checks in many situations (and still having to pay for them in many banks), no contactless payment cards, the aforementioned dire signature/chip situation... It's certainly anything but at the 'forefront of digital technology.' Not to mention fees. Fees everywhere! The effort it takes to avoid meaningless 'gotcha' fees is just insane -- and must surely stifle innovation too, in creating friction against change.
- zkms 9y ago
  > I'd say U.S. banking is, if nothing else, generally at the forefront of digital technology despite heavy regulation. Transferring money with ACH takes multiple business days, this is not at the forefront of digital technology.
  - muninn_ 9y ago
    One example of an inefficiency (especially without any reasoning behind why this inefficiency is happening) doesn't mean much.
  - jdmichal 9y ago
    First, most ACH transactions clear in the same day [0]. Second, that's also completely ignoring newer networks like clearXchange / Zelle, which clears in minutes [1]. [0] https://www.nacha.org/news/what-ach-quick-facts-about-automated-clearing-house-ach-network https://www.nacha.org/news/what-ach-quick-facts-about-automa... "Specifically, the NACHA Operating Rules require that ACH credits settle in one to two business days and ACH debits settle on the next business day. Recent enhancements to the NACHA Operating Rules now enable same-day settlement of virtually all ACH transactions." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearXchange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearXchange

signal11 9y ago

In the UK, the older generation of readers are pretty slow. The newer models are pretty fast, I'm not sure if it's also because they have reliable broadband connections but they basically ask you to remove the card almost as soon as you insert it.

rsynnott 9y ago
The ones that use GPRS can also be _fairly_ fast, though it introduces a couple of seconds of unavoidable latency. They're not long for this world, though; some countries are already shutting down GPRS networks. The really slow ones just used dial-up. They mostly seem to be gone now.
pbhjpbhj 9y ago
We have the same console as I've seen in Tesco petrol station. Ours take a lot longer for auth, I'm guessing that Tesco have a local stopped card list to check against and don't do a full auth with the bank in order to save time. Might be wrong, just my assumption based on contactless payment being almost instantaneous (like that petrol station).
- Reason077 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure that Transport for London do something similar (ie: transactions get batched and then charged at end of day, blacklisting for bad cards). However, using a contactless chip card is still a lot slower compared to using an Oyster card. Where as the Oyster card seems to process in a matter of milliseconds, the contactless card takes perhaps 2 seconds or more. With a long queue of people all using contactless, this potentially adds up to quite a significant delay at the ticket gates.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    It would help if they had more Oyster readers and/or better situated ones - at one popular station I use, there's two readers, side-by-side, right next to a tiny exit hole. Even just moving those two a couple of metres apart would improve the flow of humans greatly.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jimnotgym 9y ago

I'm glad you added that. In the UK chip and pin machines are fastest using the Ethernet connection, much slower on the phone line. One advantage of the phone connection however is reduced PCI requirements. SAQ B is simpler than SAQ B-IP