> It stores data in plain text on your card So does your credit card
And your credit cards don't lock themselves once they are out of range.
Coin: A step in the wrong direction
181–190 of 193 posts
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#182The hating on Coin is unbelievable. It seems like a great first step towards backwards-compatible card consolidation. Are there going to be issues with it? Of course. Will it last in the long run? Well, the phone thing is obvious, kids. I bet these guys are aware of that and have a plan. Regardless, its an innovative piece of hardware that moves the ball. That's better than any of the shit I've built.
> The hating on Coin is unbelievable. It seems like a great first step towards backwards-compatible card consolidation.
It's a great first step towards consolidating the worst and most insecure aspects of credit cards.
It's not going to work with modern cards, because it can't copy chips. And if you have an old mag-strip card, you should really get a new one, rather than consolidating the old one.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, it's like the classic Spolsky critique of the "Cue Cat". It's solving a problem that I don't have. I carry a wallet anyway to contain my ID, my cash, and other cards that are not credit cards. Carrying a couple of credit cards along with all that is not a problem. I personally don't have any hate for Coin or what they are trying to do; I hope they are successful. But it's not something I would buy.
Exactly. Currently in my wallet: a California driver's license, a Green Card, a medical insurance card, and a gym card which works via barcode. There's also a credit and a debit card. Thats's just 2/6 which I could replace with Coin.
I have a debit card for my personal account, a debit card for a joint account I share with my SO, a general purpose credit card and 4 store credit cards. All of which use magnetic strips and could be replaced by coin. Yes, I have to carry my ID and insurance card as well, but coin would drastically reduce the bulk of what I carry and make that minimalist wallet I ordered off kickstarter all the more useful. I think it's brilliant, even if it is a stop-gap until we get proper NFC adoption.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#184Two issues with Coin. One is this has been done before, exact same approach, and it did not work out because the card issuers didn't buy in (a credit card is also part of the issuing bank's brand). Maybe that's changed in the past few years, but I am skeptical. The second issue is it's solving a problem that isn't really a problem. I use two cards on a regular basis. I have others but rarely need to carry them with m…
> One is this has been done before, exact same approach, and it did not work out because the card issuers didn't buy in The card issuers don't have to buy in to anything. You program the Coin yourself using your existing cards. > I use two cards on a regular basis. I have others but rarely need to carry them with me. So I can reduce two slots in my wallet to one. Doesn't seem like enough of a benefit to me. Ah, the o…
> The card issuers don't have to buy in to anything. You program the Coin yourself using your existing cards.
They do define the policies that merchants have to follow, including whether to accept payments from this device.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can only act as a physical proxy to a digital account which uses magnetic stripes as its primary physical form of transaction.
The data on a magstripe is just that: data. I'm suggesting that digital services could offer you a digital "magstripe" without the need to ship cards.
The data on the magstripe is the trivial tiny visible part of the credit card system iceberg. The major difficult part of the system (and any system that wants to replace/improve creditcards) is the merchant & issuer network + the international legal&liability issues, not the technical thingy given to cardholders.
If you make a finished perfect technical device that's better than creditcards - great job, you're 1% done in replacing CC's, wake me up when you're atleast 33% done on the other major issues.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#186The hating on Coin is unbelievable. It seems like a great first step towards backwards-compatible card consolidation. Are there going to be issues with it? Of course. Will it last in the long run? Well, the phone thing is obvious, kids. I bet these guys are aware of that and have a plan. Regardless, its an innovative piece of hardware that moves the ball. That's better than any of the shit I've built.
For me, it's like the classic Spolsky critique of the "Cue Cat". It's solving a problem that I don't have. I carry a wallet anyway to contain my ID, my cash, and other cards that are not credit cards. Carrying a couple of credit cards along with all that is not a problem. I personally don't have any hate for Coin or what they are trying to do; I hope they are successful. But it's not something I would buy.
Github solves a problem that I don't have, but that doesn't mean it's a bad product right?
Not to argue with you specifically, but the concept of "solves a problem I don't have" isn't really an issue. I use Uber frequently because I don't drive (NYC), you may not if you have a car. Is Uber a shitty company? Nope, its pretty awesome, but it solves a problem for a small subset of people.
Same with Coin.
I highly doubt YC would have taken on coin if they didn't have a large market to go after. Whether or not it applies to me is less important and that seems to get lost in these conversations (which is weird being on HN).
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#187>> Visa requires that merchants ship a product prior to charging any Visa debit card This is very new to me. This source here: http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/card-acceptance-guide... States: >> You should not bill the customer until merchandise has been shipped That is a best practice, not a requirement.
Look on page 13: >> Transactions cannot be deposited until goods or services have been shipped.
Very good find. Thank you.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
>cashiers have never so much as glanced at my cards Depends on where you shop. Some stores (particularly big box stores -- Best Buy comes to mind) always ask to see the card and ID. If they do, it's a showstopper for it to not be real. There's NO WAY a store with that policy would let you buy something with an anonymous black "card". Not only does this scream "FRAUD!", it almost certainly WILL be used for fraud, almo…
> Some stores (particularly big box stores -- Best Buy comes to mind) always ask to see the card and ID It seems odd that big stores would require this, since this is explicitly forbidden in the merchant agreements. Also, I've never experienced this myself in the US. 1. http://www.mastercard.us/support/problems-using-mastercard.h... "A merchant must not refuse to complete a transaction solely because a cardholder ref…
Even more stores than ask for ID ask to see the card for signature verification. That would similarly be impossible (or easily forged) on a Coin.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, it's like the classic Spolsky critique of the "Cue Cat". It's solving a problem that I don't have. I carry a wallet anyway to contain my ID, my cash, and other cards that are not credit cards. Carrying a couple of credit cards along with all that is not a problem. I personally don't have any hate for Coin or what they are trying to do; I hope they are successful. But it's not something I would buy.
Github solves a problem that I don't have, but that doesn't mean it's a bad product right? Not to argue with you specifically, but the concept of "solves a problem I don't have" isn't really an issue. I use Uber frequently because I don't drive (NYC), you may not if you have a car. Is Uber a shitty company? Nope, its pretty awesome, but it solves a problem for a small subset of people. Same with Coin. I highly doubt…
>its pretty awesome, but it solves a problem for a small subset of people. Same with Coin. I highly doubt YC would have taken on coin if they didn't have a large market to go after.
Not to quibble, but you have some contradictions lurking in there. On one hand, you're saying that, like Uber, Coin solves a problem for a small subset of people. OTOH, you're saying that they are addressing a big market.
It's an important distinction if you're making the argument that the parent's personal need for the service doesn't matter. That is, if this is supposed to be a mass-market product, then "random" people (including the parent and others on HN) opining about their need for it is much more relevant than in the case of a niche product that is intended for a small audience.
Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their FAQ says that future versions will support chip cards. https://onlycoin.com/support/faq/
Consider this: The incentive for the banks in using chip and pin cards is that they are supposed to be near impossible to clone, and thus there is a "liability inversion": Unlike with mag-stripe + signature cards, with EMV cards, the assumption is that if the pin was used, the customer is liable. With some exceptions. Couple that with massively reduced fraud. Now, if they allow a method for cloning these cards, both…
I don't work for Coin and I don't have any idea if they can pull off chip card support or not. I simply said that they claim it's under development.