back to article NFC gains Wi-Fi connection, loses name

With Wi-Fi-connected toggles and single-wire-protocol SIMs, everyone seems to be trying to make NFC work, even if it's not going to be called that any more. Advocates of Near Field Communications (NFC) keep holding trials of the technology - there's even one here in Barcelona during the Congress - but users and operators still …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward

    Personally I do get the point

    and I think it's a bad idea. I really don't care if I need one or two things to wave around to intentionally pay or have them both sit in my pocket so someone else can swipe me dosh wirelessly. If I pay for something I want the action to be something physical like stuffing a card in a slot and hitting some buttons, or god forbid, handing over actual cash. The latter has the upside of not generating a paper trail that can last for the better part of a decade, outside of my control.

    That privacy aspect alone means all current electronic payment systems fail. Fix that and we can talk. And keep the user friendlyness in mind. Like, require a phyical action to pay so swiping by some passing crook won't work. Oh, and make your protocols a bit more solid than the EMV industry swiss cheese standard crap, thanks.

    1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      It exists already..

      .. but the problem is the transfer of liability.

      You see, replacing the current systems costs money. It is cheaper to keep what is there and handle the losses as the cost of doing business. After all, the CC company doesn't have the liability any longer - you do. The losses are not high enough to justify investment in something new.

      And you have only one choice: play by their rules, or not play at all.

      Straw poll: if I could sell you a means of payment that was absolutely fraud proof, but you'd have to pay USD $100 to buy it, would you? I would because I care about online and transaction security, but I appear to be an exception.. Note: this would be something new, not another credit card.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        What are they selling again?

        That's the problem, isn't it. You don't get a choice. Worse, you don't even get a choice to not use a bank. While it would be worth a hundred dollars or euros or pounds to me, I'd expect the bank to eat the cost for the privilege of sitting between me and my money. Their "trustworthyness" to handle other people's money is why they are a bank, but if all they can do is pay up for goofs (and they'll struggle to even do that, once you prove you haven't fallen afoul of their liability shifting!) then they're not really adding any value.

        Thus, collectively they're a monopolist cartel. And entry to market is artificially made much harder because all the regulations and moral laws restricting who can be a bank and all the extra required paperwork to do what a bank does.

        But yes, new technology isn't really helping there. No real need for NFC or whatever to take off when it doesn't fundamentally change the game, which it won't because it can't.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021