CHAI wrote to ALL <=-
My question is concerning Apple Pay, for you Apple users. When sending money via Apple Pay, does the recipient have to have an Apple account?
My mom has and iPhone, and I have an Android, hence the reason for the question. The solution seems simple. Simply use Google Pay on both
iOS and Android devices. However, I'm assuming Apple Pay will integrate better with the iOS environment.
My mom has and iPhone, and I have an Android, hence the reason for the question. The solution seems simple. Simply use Google Pay on both iOS and Android devices. However, I'm assuming Apple Pay will integrate better with the iOS environment.
Or better and easier still, use PayPal :)
ROBERT WOLFE wrote to CHAI <=-
Or better and easier still, use PayPal :)
Or better and easier still, use PayPal :)
That's what we ended up doing. Two factor on PayPal still uses SMS. I
was concerned that it would be too much of a hassle for her, as she's
not patient with technology. It sounds silly that copying a code from SMS to the PayPal app would be enough to annoy her, but it could. She didn't seem to be bothered with the process, however.
paypal is a crooked company. i'd rather use google pay.
My question is concerning Apple Pay, for you Apple users. When sending money via Apple Pay, does the recipient have to have an Apple account? My
Re: Re: Apple Pay
By: MRO to ROBERT WOLFE on Sun Oct 07 2018 11:26 am
paypal is a crooked company. i'd rather use google pay.
You don't think Google is a crooked company? I've been getting more and more suspicious of Google all the time.
Jagossel wrote to Chai <=-
When did PayPal started to provide 2FA? I remember when I started to
move to 2FA a couple of years ago, PayPal didn't have 2FA then; which
was dumb, if you ask me: my bank already implemented 2FA while PayPal didn't.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I don't use Apple Pay, but I don't think the recipient has to have an Apple Pay account, at least not for all things. I've seen stores and restaurants that accept Apple Pay, and I doubt they have an Apple Pay account (though I could be wrong). I thought it was similar to paying
via credit card, but where you tap your phone on the device and it
sends your payment info.
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
paypal is a crooked company. i'd rather use google pay.
You don't think Google is a crooked company? I've been getting more
and more suspicious of Google all the time.
They certainly are now. I was cussing at my Google Home today. They've disabled about 80% of its functionality, because I have web history and location history turned off. To get my Google Home back to full functionality, I have to enable their "spyware" features. I turned those features off for a reason.
If my account were to be hacked, location history gives an attacker insight to every place I go. As for web history, we went decades serving people ads without spying on them. I don't see why we need to do that now.
Stick a Coca-Cola logo on my Google Chrome interface, but don't serve me ads based on where I had lunch today. Just because the information is benign, doesn't give them the right to do it. I hope Congress puts a stop to that.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
If my account were to be hacked, location history gives an attacker insight to every place I go. As for web history, we went decades serving people ads without spying on them. I don't see why we need to do that now.
Maybe just 2 decades? ;) The web isn't that old..
It's not all Google's fault. Their ad customers are the one's demanding access to this information.
Oh, I meant that in the field of advertising, the business has gone on for decades without the need to spy on people (pre-Internet). They were able to make money in advertising using generic ads before we had the Internet,
It's not all Google's fault. Their ad customers are the one's demanding access to this information.
This reminds me of when I heard not too long ago that people were suspicious that Facebook was using the microphone to record their conversations, because some people were reporting that it seemed they would just mention a product or company in conversation and Facebook would show them ads for that.
On 10-09-18 12:01, Chai wrote to Nightfox <=-
Oh, I meant that in the field of advertising, the business has gone on
for decades without the need to spy on people (pre-Internet). They
were able to make money in advertising using generic ads before we had
the Internet, and I think they can do it now. I'm somewhat comparing apples to oranges, but I'm comparing old school TV show advertising
(Red Skelton Show) to today's electronic advertising infrastructure.
It does take more advertising revenue for the services we receive
today, but I do not think that means we have to have targeted
advertising.
It's not all Google's fault. Their ad customers are the one's
demanding access to this information.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
Yeah, marketing is all about showing ads as effectively as possible,
and they'll want to get information about their possible customers if
they can so they can show them ads they think are the most relevant to them. Not that I think they really need to..
This reminds me of when I heard not too long ago that people were suspicious that Facebook was using the microphone to record their conversations, because some people were reporting that it seemed they would just mention a product or company in conversation and Facebook
would show them ads for that.
Digital Man wrote to Chai <=-
Re: Re: Apple Pay
By: Chai to Nightfox on Tue Oct 09 2018 12:01 pm
Google could say 'no'. But honestly, Google and the others are
competing for the ad dollars and do so by offering more and more "targetted advertising" - mean the ad buyers can (theoretically) get
more bang for their buck. It is absolutely Google's (and Facebook's) fault.
If my account were to be hacked, location history gives an attacker insight to every place I go. As for web history, we went decades serving people ads without spying on them. I don't see why we need to do that now. Stick a Coca-Cola logo on my Google Chrome interface, but don't serve me ads based
on where I had lunch today. Just because the information is benign, doesn't give them the right to do it. I hope Congress puts a stop to that.
I'm reading now that there was a bug that caused a leak in Google+ profiles. Gender, birthdays, E-mail addresses.
good thing i dont go for that g+ shit
This reminds me of when I heard not too long ago that people were suspicious that Facebook was using the microphone to record their conversations, because some people were reporting that it seemed they would just mention a product or company in conversation and Facebook would show them ads for that.
Honestly, that does not surprise me. I've often wondered the same about my Google Home, although I've seen no evidence of it doing that for anything other than what I say after a wake word. I'm tempted to gift the thing.
I wonder how effective their system really is though. If I buy an Arduino on Amazon, I get ads for Arduino's on just about everything I visit.
I think I'd be more likely to buy a gadget that I may not even know exists, not
more of the same.
Google kind of wastes money. They could increase revenue simply by putting a stop to all the dead end projects that they end up killing.
I'm reading now that there was a bug that caused a leak in Google+ profiles. Gender, birthdays, E-mail addresses.
another thing that freaked me out is i have a walmart account where i buy 1-2 things online a year. they track my credit number purchases each week at the actual local store and i can view them online!
I have heard that Amazon's Alexa does, and Amazon is transparent about it. They claim Alexa is recording conversations just for quality purposes only: improvement in the speech recognation. Honestly, I would not be surprised if Google Home/Assistant is doing the same thing.
On 10-09-18 21:46, Chai wrote to Digital Man <=-
I'm reading now that there was a bug that caused a leak in Google+ profiles. Gender, birthdays, E-mail addresses.
What's worse is they tried to cover it up.
MRO wrote to Chai <=-
another thing that freaked me out is i have a walmart account where i
buy 1-2 things online a year. they track my credit number purchases
each week at the actual local store and i can view them online!
MRO wrote to Chai <=-
good thing i dont go for that g+ shit
MRO wrote to Chai <=-
another thing that freaked me out is i have a walmart account where i buy 1-2 things online a year. they track my credit number purchases each week at the actual local store and i can view them online!
Wal-Mart has long had an interest in tracking people via their credit card numbers. Target received some unwanted media attention for that some years ago, as well. Seems like it had something to do with a teen buying a pregnancy test, or something feminish. They were sending targeted snail mail ads based on what she was purchasing in the store.
I'm reading now that there was a bug that caused a leak in Google+
profiles. Gender, birthdays, E-mail addresses.
What's worse is they tried to cover it up.
So much for "Do no evil". :/
numbers. Target received some unwanted media attention for that some years ago, as well. Seems like it had something to do with a teen buying a pregnancy test, or something feminish. They were sending targeted snail mail ads based on what she was purchasing in the store.
On 10-11-18 09:25, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
So much for "Do no evil". :/
I heard Google doesn't use that slogan anymore.
On 10-11-18 09:25, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
So much for "Do no evil". :/
I heard Google doesn't use that slogan anymore.
I wonder why. ;)
Re: Re: Apple Pay
By: MRO to Chai on Tue Oct 09 2018 11:32 pm
good thing i dont go for that g+ shit
Not many people did. Still, I have a google/youtube/gmail account, so who knows: my birthdate might've been leaked!!!
a phone number or anything.
It seems like everything is becoming more and more interconnected these days. It can make things convenient in some ways, but I don't like that they have more and more information about me.
MRO wrote to Chai <=-
good thing i dont go for that g+ shit
I made an account long ago, just to see what it was like. I wish I would have deleted it.
On 10-11-18 16:09, Digital Man wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I wonder why. ;)
My guess is because it was subjective and naive. I doubt that anyone at Google *thinks* what they're doing is evil. But public companies are legally required to put profits (share-holder value) above all else,
and that results in behavior that many would consider "evil" or at
least "not good". So, that clause, if they still had it, would
contradict their legal obligation to their share-holders.
Sysop: | Eric Oulashin |
---|---|
Location: | Beaverton, Oregon, USA |
Users: | 93 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 04:09:45 |
Calls: | 5,156 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 8,491 |
Messages: | 352,737 |