3 ms·

Since Walmart keeps popping up in other comments, I'll do devil's advocate using the exact same argument other people used: If you don't want to buy on Walmart

by whstl 1y ago

Since Walmart keeps popping up in other comments, I'll do devil's advocate using the exact same argument other people used: If you don't want to buy on Walmart and their custom payment system, then just go to a competitor. With that said: this is an unrealistic scenario. Walmart doesn't pay the famous 30% to ApplePay, only a regular CC-like fee (probably less). Also, physically they can just accept contact payments where they don't interact with Apple but it still works with the iPhone wallet. Online, they can just use credit cards instead of ApplePay, which iPhones have autofill for, and probably not lose much.

cosmic_cheese 1y ago
That only works if competitors aren’t doing the same exact thing. There’s also situations where you don’t have a choice. In many parts of the US the only reasonably accessible store (and sometimes grocery store) is a Walmart.
- bigyabai 1y ago
  HN's time-honored scapegoat. "Corporations can't be trusted - that's why I trust Apple to fight them" is a ridiculous pretense to support consolidation. If Apple uses their de-facto position of privilege to demand people use their products as a solution, then they have become the problem. The exact same problem as Wal-mart insisting you download their wallet app. There is a real solution to this, where we codify our social limits through legislation and open standards to prevent these horrible "leopards ate my face" scenarios that everyone seems to hate so much. Or we could keep trusting Apple, and see how many F1 advertisements that nets us in the long-run.
  - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
    Legislation would be better, no question. Have you seen US politics, though? Not just lately, but for the past couple of decades. Electing knowledgable politicians who are willing to stay properly abreast of technology and work for the interests of their constituents is nigh impossible. The ones that get into office are most often out of touch and in someone’s pocket because they grandstand on polarizing topics that information-deficient and single-issue voters flock to. I try to vote for candidates who I think will do good that way, and it makes some impact on the micro scale, but on the national scale it’s like trying to drain the Pacific Ocean with a thimble.
    - bigyabai 1y ago
      I've seen the politicians that Apple relies on to prevent legislative reform: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff-apple-iphone-tax-170021e8fad22878d0183b5d48971087 https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff-apple-iphone-tax-170... Are you now going to argue that Tim Cook is a really nice guy who practices genuinely principled leadership? I hope not, he's only there to convert your loyalty to something more liquid and fungible.
      - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
        Nope, it’s clear he does what he thinks is best for the company and its shareholders. Companies aren’t your friend. Even without that, the US political system is broken and the alternatives have their own glaring issues that either lie in the blind spots of or are actively ignored by their proponents.

by whstl 1y ago

cosmic_cheese 1y ago

That only works if competitors aren’t doing the same exact thing. There’s also situations where you don’t have a choice. In many parts of the US the only reasonably accessible store (and sometimes grocery store) is a Walmart.

bigyabai 1y ago
HN's time-honored scapegoat. "Corporations can't be trusted - that's why I trust Apple to fight them" is a ridiculous pretense to support consolidation. If Apple uses their de-facto position of privilege to demand people use their products as a solution, then they have become the problem. The exact same problem as Wal-mart insisting you download their wallet app. There is a real solution to this, where we codify our social limits through legislation and open standards to prevent these horrible "leopards ate my face" scenarios that everyone seems to hate so much. Or we could keep trusting Apple, and see how many F1 advertisements that nets us in the long-run.
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  Legislation would be better, no question. Have you seen US politics, though? Not just lately, but for the past couple of decades. Electing knowledgable politicians who are willing to stay properly abreast of technology and work for the interests of their constituents is nigh impossible. The ones that get into office are most often out of touch and in someone’s pocket because they grandstand on polarizing topics that information-deficient and single-issue voters flock to. I try to vote for candidates who I think will do good that way, and it makes some impact on the micro scale, but on the national scale it’s like trying to drain the Pacific Ocean with a thimble.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    I've seen the politicians that Apple relies on to prevent legislative reform: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff-apple-iphone-tax-170021e8fad22878d0183b5d48971087 https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariff-apple-iphone-tax-170... Are you now going to argue that Tim Cook is a really nice guy who practices genuinely principled leadership? I hope not, he's only there to convert your loyalty to something more liquid and fungible.
    - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
      Nope, it’s clear he does what he thinks is best for the company and its shareholders. Companies aren’t your friend. Even without that, the US political system is broken and the alternatives have their own glaring issues that either lie in the blind spots of or are actively ignored by their proponents.