JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
> Carlos E. R. wrote

>> Studies have since demonstrated that the risk
>> of infection that way is negligible, inexistent.

> The risk has not diminished.

Yes, the risk of getting infected that way was always very low.

> The fact that the virus remains active after its supporting
> droplet has evaporated in the air also points to
> virus remaining active for longer on any surface.

Yes, but you don’t get much virus that way.

You get a lot more where it matters with aerosols.

> Except for current eclosion in New Zealand where 1 case has lead to some
> 850 infections that are each traced back and analyzed carefuylly, there
> is very little evidence on how each case in the world was transmitted.

That’s wrong too given there are now so many which must
have been by aerosols particularly with quarantine hotels,
hospitals and even that very early transmission in a choir.

> There are cases that can only be explained
> via air transmission. So we know it happens.

And there are far more of those than from surfaces.

> But few countries have surveillance systems capable of
> tracing back each case to find out how it was transmitted.

You don’t need that to be able to observe that aerosols
are the only way it could have happened with quarantine
hotels and hospitals which have done the surface cleaning
and still got lots of transmission, particularly with hospitals.

> So theye may be plentty of cases that happen
> via surface and we just don't tabulatre it.

We know that is unlikely because so few transmissions have happened
where by surface is the only way it could have happened.

On 2021-09-10 21:20, Rod Speed wrote:

> They are in the rest of the world too. The only real quirk is
> that it isn't possible for the merchant to charge a zero surcharge
> on them and not with credit cards because the merchant terminal
> has no way of knowing if it’s a credit or debit card with applepay.

In canada, whether you tap or use CHIP/PIN, the merchant still asks
credit or debit So by the time you tap iwth debit card set on your
phone, the POS is already programmed to process as Interac debit
transaction instead of credit.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> Wilf wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the UK, there is currently a £45 limit on contactless card
>>>> transactions.
>>>
>>> Which will raise to £100 from 15th October.
>>>
>>>> There is no such limit when using Apple Pay contactless
>>>> transactions.
>>>
>>> There is no such limit with my bank's contactless app (although I
>>> suspect it requires PIN/fingerprint as additional proof of id).
>>
>> Which bank?
>
> Barclays, turns out there *is* a limit but it's £300.

Interesting. Never heard of an in-app contactless feature.

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account to
>> cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid can not
>> withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No exceptions.
>
> Bizarre. We have the reverse, banks are encouraged to get kids
> to open a bank account when they are in primary school and
> they are free to do anything they like with the money in them.

The same here! Having a bank account is seen as part of the education
of a kid, to know and understand how that works. It is very normal
for a kid to have a bank account for their own savings (e.g. from
such birthday presents) and they can get a debit card and pay things
in stores. Also when they have their first job e.g. in a supermarket
they need such an account to receive their salary. So by then they
have to be accustomed to its usage.

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 12:43 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> Basically you can't compare the European/EU payment systems with
>> those of the US. The US is way behind, sometimes decades ('checks'
>> anyone?), and is not really catching on.
>
> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money to an
> individual without needing to know anything but his name.

In EU we can transfer money to someone without knowing anything
but their IBAN (International Bank Account Number). And it is just
as safe because knowing an IBAN gives you only capability to send
money to it, not anything regarded withdrawing or abuse.

In the past when I wanted to transfer money to an individual in the
US I was very amazed that they did not want to give me their account
number, and that this would be "because when I knew their number I
would be able to take money from it". Weird!

Checks have been used here only as payment method in stores, not
for any transfers between individuals. And they have been discontinued
decades ago. There is no way I can write a check to transfer money
to a US citizen.

Chris wrote:

> Never heard of an in-app contactless feature.

One minor annoyance, after every upgrade of the app, you have to confirm
changing the default contactless payment method from google-pay to barclays.

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 4:10 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 11/09/2021 00.18, AJL wrote:
>
>>> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money
>>> to an individual without needing to know anything but his name. No
>>> app info required. For example I generally mail checks in birthday
>>> cards to grandkids around the country because it's safer than
>>> mailing cash and I know that they got them when the check clears.
>>
>> That would backfire here.
>>
>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account
>> to cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid
>> can not withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No
>> exceptions.
>>
>> An cashing a cheque without an account, into cash, incurs a high
>> fee.
>
> Here the parents can countersign the check and use their phone to
> deposit it into their account (no bank trip required). They can then
> later go to the store with the kid to buy the gift, give him cash, or
> combine the money with other cash gifts to buy something really special...

That was banned here decades ago as it's easy to steal people's cheques
that way. Only the account payee can cash/deposit a cheque.

Gifting money is easy via direct deposit to their bank account.

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> They are in the rest of the world too. The only real quirk is
>> that it isn't possible for the merchant to charge a zero surcharge
>> on them and not with credit cards because the merchant terminal
>> has no way of knowing if it’s a credit or debit card with applepay.

> In canada, whether you tap or use CHIP/PIN,
> the merchant still asks credit or debit

That’s fucked, we wave the phone or watch at the merchant terminal.

> So by the time you tap iwth debit card set on your
> phone, the POS is already programmed to process
> as Interac debit transaction instead of credit.

Still fucked.

On 11/09/2021 08.39, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 2021-09-10 19:15, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Not really, the interaction is local, between the driver machine and
>> your card (which has a chip and memory). Internet is not needed.
>
>
> A connection is needed to verify that your card is
> 1-valid
> 2-has sufficient funds.

Not with this type of cards, storage of the funds is local.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/09/2021 11.24, Chris wrote:
> AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
>> On 9/10/2021 4:10 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 11/09/2021 00.18, AJL wrote:
>>
>>>> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money
>>>> to an individual without needing to know anything but his name. No
>>>> app info required. For example I generally mail checks in birthday
>>>> cards to grandkids around the country because it's safer than
>>>> mailing cash and I know that they got them when the check clears.
>>>
>>> That would backfire here.
>>>
>>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account
>>> to cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid
>>> can not withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No
>>> exceptions.
>>>
>>> An cashing a cheque without an account, into cash, incurs a high
>>> fee.
>>
>> Here the parents can countersign the check and use their phone to
>> deposit it into their account (no bank trip required). They can then
>> later go to the store with the kid to buy the gift, give him cash, or
>> combine the money with other cash gifts to buy something really special...
>
> That was banned here decades ago as it's easy to steal people's cheques
> that way. Only the account payee can cash/deposit a cheque.
>
> Gifting money is easy via direct deposit to their bank account.

But not to kids, at least in my country. They can not withdraw from
their own accounts a single cent till they are 18.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/09/2021 03.32, Rod Speed wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
>> AJL wrote
>>> Frank Slootweg wrote
>
>>>> Basically you can't compare the European/EU payment systems with
>>>> those of the US. The US is way behind, sometimes decades ('checks'
>>>> anyone?), and is not really catching on.
>
>>> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money to an
>>> individual without needing to know anything but his name. No app info
>>> required. For example I generally mail checks in birthday cards to
>>> grandkids around the country because it's safer than mailing cash and I
>>> know that they got them when the check clears.
>
>> That would backfire here.
>>
>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account to
>> cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid can not
>> withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No exceptions.
>
> Bizarre. We have the reverse, banks are encouraged to get kids
> to open a bank account when they are in primary school and
> they are free to do anything they like with the money in them.
> No credit card until they are older tho, mostly 18, some banks 16.

Yes, they are encouraged to have one, since birth. Traditionally, money
gifts at put there "for your university".

>
>> An cashing a cheque without an account, into cash, incurs a high fee.

Exception: cashing at the same office where the cheque was emitted.

> New Zealand has scrapped checks completely now. We, Australia are
> getting close to that with few stores accepting them anymore.
> We still have bank checks for high value transactions like buying a car. 

I have not seen a cheque perhaps in two decades now. I suppose you can
still have them, but no idea.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 12:43 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Basically you can't compare the European/EU payment systems with
> > those of the US. The US is way behind, sometimes decades ('checks'
> > anyone?), and is not really catching on.
>
> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money to an
> individual without needing to know anything but his name. No app info
> required.

As Rob mentioned, we only have to know hir IBAN, International Bank
Account Number, *or* - as I said - hir mobile number. We don't even need
to know hir name. (And that *can* be done with a smartphone, but also
via the web or even with a paper form (for those who don't have or don't
want to use Internet).)

> For example I generally mail checks in birthday cards to
> grandkids around the country because it's safer than mailing cash and I
> know that they got them when the check clears. I put a check in a
> wedding card and lay it on the unguarded gift table - same reasons.
> I leave a check for the yard guy under the mat. Since everybody knows
> the system how long do you think cash would last there? Etc etc. And I
> occasionally even get a check in the mail myself which I can easily cash
> using just my phone, no bank trip required. So in some ways I kinda like
> still being a dinosaur...

Yes, while they (checks) still exist, you might as well use them to
your advantage. I think that in the cases you mention, we would use gift
cards or cash.

As others mentioned, for us US checks are a pain. For example my
US broker kept sending me small dividend checks which I couldn't cash
without extreme cost - some $30 for a single check - and even selling
shares had way too prohibitive costs, both for the sale and for the
(electronic) transfer of the proceeds). So now I still have some shares
and dividend in the US and I can't do anything with them/it! :-)

On 11/09/2021 04.12, sms wrote:
> On 9/10/2021 4:10 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 11/09/2021 00.18, AJL wrote:
>>> On 9/10/2021 12:43 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>>> Basically you can't compare the European/EU payment systems with
>>>> those of the US. The US is way behind, sometimes decades ('checks'
>>>> anyone?), and is not really catching on.
>>>
>>> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money to an
>>> individual without needing to know anything but his name. No app info
>>> required. For example I generally mail checks in birthday cards to
>>> grandkids around the country because it's safer than mailing cash and I
>>> know that they got them when the check clears.
>>
>> That would backfire here.
>>
>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account to
>> cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid can not
>> withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No exceptions.
>>
>> An cashing a cheque without an account, into cash, incurs a high fee.
>
> One bank I use had prepaid debit cards for kids that the parent could
> fund. I had them set up to give my kids their allowance each week. But
> kids can have checking accounts here too. There were no fees at all
> <https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/youth-checking-account>.

Time ago, I remember that a group of high schoolers were preparing a
trip, making activities to raise the money and keeping it in a bank
account opened for the purpose. But when the time came to pay the trip,
the bank refused because they were minors. There was a big row, because
the bank had not warned them, despite knowing the purpose of the account.

I don't remember when this was, but it seems that the regulations have
changed here since, and that they can do withdrawals - but some
activities need supervision. It is not clear.

<https://www.finanzasparamortales.es/puede-un-menor-de-edad-abrir-una-cuenta-corriente/>

Nowadays, all persons of adult age and with capacity to act, who do not
have a current account attached to a bank, could fit into an elevator.
Having a current account is a useful way to receive a salary, direct
debit a payment or save your savings, but from what age can you open an
account?

It is actually possible to open a current account from birth, although
this statement requires some nuances. First of all, no minor can do it
independently. It will be the legal representative who will carry out
the formalities on their behalf, except for an emancipated minor (over
16 and under 18 years of age) who can act on their own.

How to open an account for a minor?

The legal representative, father or mother in most cases, will have to
go to the financial entity that he/she has considered, either for the
profitability offered or for other circumstances, and present the
following documentation:
- Family book that guarantees the link
- DNI of the legal representative
- DNI of the minor or provisional NIF

The bank will carry out the procedure and on the same day, after having
made a deposit in it, the account will be operative. Therefore, it is a
simple bureaucratic procedure to open a current account for an
unemancipated minor.

The card format offered is debit and with it it will be feasible to make
purchases in physical and online stores, as well as withdraw money.

Before 2007 it was even more feasible, since it was not necessary to
present the minor's ID card. However, this circumstance ended up
changing due to the increase in tax fraud that originated through this
type of accounts.

Finally, banking has been immersed in a huge digitalization process for
some time now. Currently, many banks allow you to open a current
account, even if you have not been a customer before, at the click of a
button. These accounts do not charge maintenance or basic operating
fees, but, for the moment, it is a service exclusively for adults or
emancipated minors.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/09/2021 02.38, nospam wrote:
> In article <nc9t0ixbvc.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor>, Carlos E. R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>> Except that merchants do not accept Apple/Google Pay here.
>
> apple and google say otherwise:

Maybe, but the merchants say they don't, and that's where I look before
trying to do a purchase, not at Apple/Google/Samsung information.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/09/2021 03.55, %% wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
>> On 11/09/2021 01.16, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Joerg Lorenz wrote
>>>>>>> Am 09.09.21 um 22:30 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
>>>>>>>> On 09/09/2021 19.56, sms wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.techradar.com/news/barely-anyone-is-using-apple-pay-in-stores-anymore>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "New research released Tuesday by PYMNTS.com found that only 6% of
>>>>>>>>> shoppers with iPhones in the US had used the platform to pay for
>>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>>> in-store purchases at some point in the past year."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They don't talk about Google Pay or Samsung Pay but I suspect
>>>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>>>> numbers are even lower for those systems, see
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.statista.com/statistics/722213/user-base-of-leading-digital-wallets-nfc/>.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Even though there are a lot more Android devices in the world
>>>>>>>>> than iOS
>>>>>>>>> devices, Apple Pay has more users than Google Pay and Samsung Pay
>>>>>>>>> combined (and many of the Samsung Pay users are probably also
>>>>>>>>> part of
>>>>>>>>> the Google Pay number and vice-versa).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This 6% number surprised me since in my area paying with your
>>>>>>>>> phone
>>>>>>>>> appears to be at a much higher level than 6%, But I live in
>>>>>>>>> Silicon
>>>>>>>>> Valley where people are more tech-savvy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The increase in contactless credit cards has apparently been
>>>>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>>>>> for the general lack of interest in paying with a phone.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here (Spain) there are other platforms for paying with the phone,
>>>>>>>> provided usually by banks directly. I would not use either Apple or
>>>>>>>> Google pay, giving them even more information about myself, but I
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> used the one from my bank - and I simply do not like it, as it is
>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>> faster and easier to pay with the contactless card (here everybody
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> CL since years). Just a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is what I called an electronic cash transaction. In Europe
>>>>>>> they are
>>>>>>> the real growth area. In Switzerland they call it "Twint". Even
>>>>>>> P2P-Transactions are possible. Thats the way we clear money
>>>>>>> issues in
>>>>>>> the wider family.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.twint.ch/en/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's another one. No, I was talking of an specific bank app that
>>>>>> replaces the card, and the phone works as if it were the NFC card.
>>>>>> Quite
>>>>>> cumbersome.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Open the phone, identify.
>>>>>> 2) Open the banking app, identify.
>>>>>> 3) Line up to pay at the supermarket. Unload your goods into the
>>>>>> "belt".
>>>>>> 4) The bank app has timed out and closed. Open it up again - and it
>>>>>> takes a few seconds to respond after identification.
>>>>>> 5) People in the line get politely restless.
>>>>>
>>>>> That’s where you are doing it wrong. You should be
>>>>> putting your stuff on the belt, wait till the checkout
>>>>> monkey has scanned most of the items, then setup
>>>>> your phone to make the payment. No one then has
>>>>> to wait for you to do anything.
>>>
>>>> And that's what you don't understand,
>>>
>>> We'll see...
>>>
>>>> the bank app takes a minute to be ready before I
>>>> can wave it at the machine reader. I tried two banks.
>>>
>>> And apple pay doesn’t, so you should be using that.
>>
>> Except that merchants do not accept Apple/Google Pay here.
>
> That’s wrong.
> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207957
>
>>>> So I prefer to prepare the app in advance,
>>>> while I'm in the line doing nothing but waiting.
>>>
>>> Makes more sense to do that after you load your
>>> stuff onto the belt and only fire up the app if you
>>> are stupid enough to use the app instead of applepay.
--------******
>
>> Back to insulting.
>
> Nope.
>
>> zap.
>
> Fat lot of good that will do you, stupid.

····································*******

That you changed name proves your intention to insult.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

"AJL" <noemail@none.com> wrote

| > It�s very easy to print up some checks with that information.
| | Same with info obtained for credit card fraud.
| | > but then you�re in for the hassle of trying to get the money back.
| | But I WOULD get it back in the end, just like credit card fraud.
|

Maybe. I wouldn't depend on that. Have you locked your
credit? I don't know the exact term used, but you can contact
the 3 credit reporting agencies in the US and lock your credit.
Then no one can apply for a credit card in your name. If you
want a new card you need to temporarily unlock it. Since identity
theft has become common, it makes sense.

That lock also comes in handy when store clerks harass me
about getting a store credit card. "Oh, you know I'd love to,
but I keep my credit locked. Haven't you done that yourself?
Oh, dear." :)

Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 11/09/2021 11.24, Chris wrote:
>> AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/10/2021 4:10 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 11/09/2021 00.18, AJL wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I still find checks very handy. It's an easy way to transfer money
>>>>> to an individual without needing to know anything but his name. No
>>>>> app info required. For example I generally mail checks in birthday
>>>>> cards to grandkids around the country because it's safer than
>>>>> mailing cash and I know that they got them when the check clears.
>>>>
>>>> That would backfire here.
>>>>
>>>> Kids can have a bank account, and you normally need a bank account
>>>> to cash a cheque (and it goes into your account). However, the kid
>>>> can not withdraw a cent out of his own account till he is of age. No
>>>> exceptions.
>>>>
>>>> An cashing a cheque without an account, into cash, incurs a high
>>>> fee.
>>>
>>> Here the parents can countersign the check and use their phone to
>>> deposit it into their account (no bank trip required). They can then
>>> later go to the store with the kid to buy the gift, give him cash, or
>>> combine the money with other cash gifts to buy something really special...
>>
>> That was banned here decades ago as it's easy to steal people's cheques
>> that way. Only the account payee can cash/deposit a cheque.
>>
>> Gifting money is easy via direct deposit to their bank account.
>
> But not to kids, at least in my country. They can not withdraw from
> their own accounts a single cent till they are 18.

That does seem really very odd. How are kids supposed to manage their
money? Many 15+ year olds have jobs and need to get paid here. How does
that work in Spain?

Under 18s here can get fully working accounts but no overdraft or credit
cards and limits to spending money in some things like gambling.

We do also have children's savings account where they're held for the child
in their name but money can't be withdrawn by them until they're 16. The
money is managed by their parents.

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote

| > > > So they weren't really operating
| > > > as a payment service. It was more like software authors were
| > > > PayPal empoyees who got paid as PayPal saw fit.
| >
| > > it wasn't like that at all.
| >
| > It is with the transfer between the paypal
| > account and the bank account.
| | Actually PayPal acts as an escrow account for most of their transactions.
|

I expect that it's probably different for people using
it as a way to pay than it is for people who use it as
way to get paid, as Rod Speed said. In any case, there's
no sense arguing with nospam. The less he knows about
a topic, the more vehemently certain he'll be. And as near
as I can tell, there are very few topics he knows
anything about. Maybe cameras. And how to spend money
on Apple products. Beyond that? Not likely. But he deserves
credit for being very talented at sounding like he knows
something.

I think, also, that shareware authors have always lacked
leverage. They tend to be mom-and-pop, self-employed.
At first, software listing sites would gladly post
a listing about any software because it was basically free
content, with income coming through banner ads. Later,
with less visitors and the PC craze dying down, listing sites
began pressuring authors to buy ads. CNet announced that
it would be required, as I recall. That was controversial
among authors. First, most didn't get enough sales to justify
ads. Second, it was dishonest to claim to be a "software
library" with ratings while also depending on the authors
for income.

At one point Tucows
rejected my software, with an extensive rating of numerous
factors, such as ease of use, ease of uninstall, etc. I received
the rejection notice a bit less than 2 minutes after they visited
the webpage for the program. They were playing hardball. If
I didn't buy something I wasn't going to get approved.

The download sites were over a barrel because the whole
model of being a software listing site wasn't working anymore.
So they were trying to come up with a new approach. The
authors were also over a barrel. It was hard to make money on
shareware, and getting harder. The listing sites were pretty
much the only way to get the word out. But by essentially
selling good reviews while pretending to be "libraries" they were
throwing away their credibility, such as it was.

Around that time I also dealt with my payment service
going bankrupt. RegisterHouse. Nice people. British. But
they just weren't making money. By the time the lawyers got
through I think I lost something like $300 that I was owed
for the final month. (I received a listing of who was owed what.
Interestingly, only a handful of us was selling more than
maybe $30 worth in a month, with many people selling
nothing.)

Then I went to ShareIt as a payment service. Over time,
less and less people were buying shareware. Most types of
programs were available for free. For example, IrfanView
took away the business from commercial image viewers.
PowerArchiver and others killed WinZip. If a program could
be made without too much trouble then someone would make
it and give it away for free.

The last time I sold a program through ShareIt, the buyer
asked for a refund a couple of days later. I had no say in the
matter. ShareIt kept their cut and I lost about $4. After that
I decided to stop selling software. I couldn't even find a
way to quit the service. That's how much communication
there is with payment services. But to be fair, that's a
problem with digital altogether. Companies make profits by
being automated, with no employees. So there's no way
to have a relationship with most of them.

If you've always used Macs then this is probably a world you
wouldn't know very well. The Mac shareware market was more
controlled by Apple. As I recall, people had to get a license
and use Apple tools. Shareware made a profit but there wasn't
much of it. It seems like there's always one progrram of each type
that everyone uses. In the Windows world, circa 2000, it was wild.
Everyone was buying a PC for fun and downloading [mostly]
free software. It was a matter of pride to have 6 image viewers
and 8 startup managers. :) Microsoft made good tools for
writing software and provided good docs. It was a business with
no certification or training required. But the craze ended.

Awhile back I looked into the possibility of contracting to write
custom software for small companies. But I didn't really have
connections. And it had become an international market. There
was a website online where people would propose custom jobs.
It was a joke. Someone wanted a music player program. Someone
in China or India bid $8. Maybe they'd get paid. I expect
probably not.

"allen" <allen@spam.com> wrote

| > In fact Apple doesn't use your personal data at all
| | %% (aka Rod Speed) is wrong .
| | "What data is Apple collecting?
| https://www.macrumors.com/guide/apple-id/
| | When you use an Apple ID and especially when using an Apple ID with
iCloud,
| Apple collects certain data about you.
|

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/i-checked-apples-new-privacy-nutrition-labels-many-were-false/ar-BB1dcX7Z

http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=13519
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/18/03/28/2022200/tim-cook-says-apples-customers-are-not-its-product-unlike-facebook#comments

(see comment from dszd0g, about the 4th one down.)

Apple spying on iPhones:

https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-security-spying/apple-iphones-allow-extraction-of-deep-personal-data-researcher-finds-idUSL2N0Q100I20140726

Apple is basically the new AOL. A walled garden that's easy
to use, consumer-centric. I once saw where a friend had
installed iTunes on Windows and Apple set 3 processes to
run at startup!

They do it all inhouse. Google takes bids for ads in real
time. You load a webpage, Google knows who you are and
sells you out to the highest bidder, while the page is loading.
Russian hackers bid for an ad, get themselves an iframe
in your webpage, and use cross-ssite scripting to take over
your computer. Great fun had by all. :) With Apple it works
differently. They manage the whole operation. So technically
they can say they didn't sell your data... maybe.

In article <xaY_I.155715$T_8.51231@fx48.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> There are exceptions to this, namely on-board purchases on an aircraft
> where they are allowed to process transactions without authorization and
> process them when they next land.
>
> Note that the airline has much info on each passenger, so if there is
> fraud, they can contact the passenger.

if the card is stolen, they'll have someone else's info.

In article <0ieu0ix8rg.ln2@minas-tirith.valinor>, Carlos E. R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> Except that merchants do not accept Apple/Google Pay here.
> >
> > apple and google say otherwise:
>
> Maybe, but the merchants say they don't, and that's where I look before
> trying to do a purchase, not at Apple/Google/Samsung information.

banks aren't going to offer it if it doesn't work, which it does, so
they do.

you also didn't read the links of people who have used it there.

your phone might not support it, but that only means *you* can't use
it, until you get a new phone that does.

In article <shi8l7$1re$1@dont-email.me>, Mayayana
<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>
> If you've always used Macs then this is probably a world you
> wouldn't know very well.

you're not one to talk about the world of macs.

> The Mac shareware market was more
> controlled by Apple.

nope. apple does not (nor cannot) control what developers do, whether
it's shareware, freeware or commercial. anyone can write anything, for
whatever reason they want. that's always been the case.

> As I recall, people had to get a license

nope. no license is required.

> and use Apple tools.

writing windows apps requires windows tools, writing android apps
requires google's tools, etc. nothing unusual about that.

you have previously said you use visual studio. guess who created that.

why is it ok to use microsoft tools to write windows apps but not use
apple tools to write mac apps?

but if you insist, there are alternative non-apple development tools,
including one from microsoft.

> Shareware made a profit but there wasn't
> much of it.

oh yes there was, and still is.

In article <shi9ec$7ui$1@dont-email.me>, Mayayana
<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

>
>
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/i-checked-apples-new-privacy-nutriti
> on-labels-many-were-false/ar-BB1dcX7Z

privacy nutrition labels are provided by the app developer.

unfortunately, some developers lie about what data they collect.

apple isn't collecting that data.

>
> http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=13519

that's a data breach of an fbi computer and shows what the fbi
collects, not what apple collects.

> https://yro.slashdot.org/story/18/03/28/2022200/tim-cook-says-apples-customers-
> are-not-its-product-unlike-facebook#comments

that doesn't say what you think it does.

> (see comment from dszd0g, about the 4th one down.)

like you, that person doesn't understand what he's reading.

> Apple spying on iPhones:
>
> https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-security-spying/apple-iphones-allow-extr
> action-of-deep-personal-data-researcher-finds-idUSL2N0Q100I20140726

that's 7 years old and is about information in the phone itself. it's
also long been patched.

> Apple is basically the new AOL. A walled garden that's easy
> to use, consumer-centric. I once saw where a friend had
> installed iTunes on Windows and Apple set 3 processes to
> run at startup!

so what? lots of apps have background processes. they're needed for
itunes to work and are idle almost all of the time.

don't ever look at the idle processes on a unix box. it's a lot more
than 3.

> They do it all inhouse. Google takes bids for ads in real
> time. You load a webpage, Google knows who you are and
> sells you out to the highest bidder, while the page is loading.
> Russian hackers bid for an ad, get themselves an iframe
> in your webpage, and use cross-ssite scripting to take over
> your computer. Great fun had by all. :) With Apple it works
> differently. They manage the whole operation. So technically
> they can say they didn't sell your data... maybe.

apple doesn't manage anything developers do.

Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> I have not seen a cheque perhaps in two decades now. I suppose you can
> still have them, but no idea.

I suppose you are thinking about EuroCheques, that was a system that
was setup somewhere in the seventies. These were "guaranteed" in the
sense that a merchant who accepted one written by a client up to
a certain amount (comparable to 150 euro) would always get the amount
from the bank, even when the client did not have the balance in their
account. The bank would go after the money, the merchant would not
have to. I think that does not exist in the USA.

These were used for two purposes:

- paying for goods in a store
- when travelling, to get cash from your account while abroad in
another country where this system existed (like France, Spain, Italy).
you would usually go the the post office to cash them, and there
was obligation to show an ID (passport).

It was not usual to mail one to a private person or a company to
transfer money. In fact that wasn't legally possible as the receiver
had to witness the writer of the cheque signing it and compare the
signature with one on a special card that was used with the system.
(it wasn't a credit- or debit card, just a signature card)

Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 11/09/2021 08.39, JF Mezei wrote:
>> On 2021-09-10 19:15, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>> Not really, the interaction is local, between the driver machine and
>>> your card (which has a chip and memory). Internet is not needed.
>>
>>
>> A connection is needed to verify that your card is
>> 1-valid
>> 2-has sufficient funds.
>
> Not with this type of cards, storage of the funds is local.

We had those cards as well but they were phased out.
The Dutch don't like part of their money being parked on a sheet
of plastic where it can be only used for one purpose.

The system stored transaction records in the terminals which were
sent to the bank in a batch transmission (e.g. end of the day over
a phone modem), and the transactions included the balance of the
card so the bank had an offline "track" of what happened with the
card balance.

So it would be infeasible to mess with the funds stored on the card
without the bank finding out about it eventually.