Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 359 posts

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#341

Post by TACIXAT »

grok2 wrote: post #32
teknologist wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not as safe. There was news about people putting their own QR codes on rental bikes so that people mistakenly send cash to them in China.

It seems to me that QR codes could make it easy for someone to replace the original QR code with a different QR code at any place that accepts them and the merchant is none-the-wiser (unless there is some form of integration back to their PoS system) -- it seems like this could be a new form of skimming (stick your own QR code over any merchants :-)).

If most are screen based, you could just dynamically generate them and have them expire after N minutes. If someone wants a printed one make them jump through an application process for a long standing code.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#342

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

lostboys67 wrote: post #205
tsukaisute wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wish everyone would hop onboard quicker. We still need a lot of consumer education. For example, Apple Pay works great at Whole Foods. I use it every time. Other people in line painstakingly pay with credit cards, despite holding an iPhone in their other hand. The new chip cards take longer to process, even, 5 seconds or so.

So I have to have a apple phone worth several hundred dollars plus the extortionate mobile charges in the USA instead of a free credit card with tap and go I know which one I prefer

I use Android Pay all the time at Whole Foods in the US and it works great. It's faster than a chip card, and it links directly to my existing card.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#343

Post by InitialLastName »

Simon_says wrote: post #216
nopzor wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average american has something like 10k in credit card debt.

That actually does not at all address whether most Americans carry credit card debt or not.

True fact. I wonder what the median credit card debt is.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#344

Post by DrScump »

dragonwriter wrote: post #339
DrScump wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally (and excluding AmEx), requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement.

Even when that was true (which, as a sibling comment notes, it is not anymore), it was common anyway.

The statute says:

"(3) NO RESTRICTIONS ON SETTING TRANSACTION MINIMUMS OR MAXIMUMS.–A payment card network shall not, directly or through any agent, processor, or licensed member of the network, by contract, requirement, condition, penalty, or otherwise, inhibit the ability of any person to set a minimum or maximum dollar value for the acceptance by that person of any form of payment.”

It does not inhibit state or local jurisdictions from banning merchants from setting card minimums in their individual credit card consumer transactions.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#345

Post by DrScump »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #338
DrScump wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What law is that? State or Federal?

Federal. It was part of Dodd-Frank. That specific part was often referred to as the "Durbin amendment".

The Federal government does not have nexus in individual retail credit card transactions (aside from offenses like civil rights violations, e.g. "we don't sell to your kind!").

The Durbin amendment (see quoted statute in other comment) prevents networks from forcing small merchants to accept small charges, not merchants from imposing minimums on consumers.

State and local laws can still prohibit CC minimums via statute or via licensing.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#346

Post by TheCoelacanth »

DrScump wrote: post #345
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal. It was part of Dodd-Frank. That specific part was often referred to as the "Durbin amendment".

The Federal government does not have nexus in individual retail credit card transactions (aside from offenses like civil rights violations, e.g. "we don't sell to your kind!"). The Durbin amendment (see quoted statute in other comment) prevents networks from forcing small merchants to accept small charges, not merchants from imposing minimums on consumers. State and local laws can still prohibit CC minimums via statu…

> requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement

That is exactly the type of agreement that the Durbin amendment prohibits. I don't see any mention of state or local laws prior to now, so that seems like a complete non sequitur to me.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#347

Post by DrScump »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #346
DrScump wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Federal government does not have nexus in individual retail credit card transactions (aside from offenses like civil rights violations, e.g. "we don't sell to your kind!"). The Durbin amendment (see quoted statute in other comment) prevents networks from forcing small merchants to accept small charges, not merchants from imposing minimums on consumers. State and local laws can still prohibit CC minimums via statu…

> requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement That is exactly the type of agreement that the Durbin amendment prohibits. I don't see any mention of state or local laws prior to now, so that seems like a complete non sequitur to me.

... because it appears that you haven't read the statute (it's quoted in my other comment thread). For credit cards (as opposed to debit), it affects processors only.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#348

Post by TheCoelacanth »

DrScump wrote: post #347
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement That is exactly the type of agreement that the Durbin amendment prohibits. I don't see any mention of state or local laws prior to now, so that seems like a complete non sequitur to me.

... because it appears that you haven't read the statute (it's quoted in my other comment thread). For credit cards (as opposed to debit), it affects processors only.

> it affects processors only

Yes, exactly like I said. It prevents processors from requiring merchants not to have minimum charges. In other words, it prevents processors from making agreements with merchants where "requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement". It doesn't stop someone else from stopping the merchant from having a minimum charge, but it does stop the type of merchant-processor agreement that you described.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#349

Post by DrScump »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #348
DrScump wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... because it appears that you haven't read the statute (it's quoted in my other comment thread). For credit cards (as opposed to debit), it affects processors only.

> it affects processors only Yes, exactly like I said. It prevents processors from requiring merchants not to have minimum charges. In other words, it prevents processors from making agreements with merchants where "requiring minimum purchases is a violation of the merchant-processor agreement". It doesn't stop someone else from stopping the merchant from having a minimum charge, but it does stop the type of merchant…

I don't see how you differ from what I wrote.

The start of the thread was the claim that the Durbin amendment made it illegal for merchants to set CC minimums for consumer purchases. That's the false interpretation.

Re: In Urban China, Cash Is Rapidly Becoming Obsolete

#350

Post by teknologist »

TACIXAT wrote: post #341
grok2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that QR codes could make it easy for someone to replace the original QR code with a different QR code at any place that accepts them and the merchant is none-the-wiser (unless there is some form of integration back to their PoS system) -- it seems like this could be a new form of skimming (stick your own QR code over any merchants :-)).

If most are screen based, you could just dynamically generate them and have them expire after N minutes. If someone wants a printed one make them jump through an application process for a long standing code.

They do for individual payments but storeowners sometimes tape their printed QR codes to walls and counters and they seem to want accommodate this use case too (essentially POS-less or "bring your own POS")
Post reply on HN