using mobile to pay at a drive thru..........think again
07 October 2018, 09:06 PM
#7
I always thought if the car was out of gear with handbrake on it was ok to use a phone? didn't know the engine had to be stopped as well - how many taxis could be caught at taxi ranks, etc
Trending Topics
07 October 2018, 10:38 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Wait a minute in the article it says on private land. I thought normal traffic laws didn't apply. If you are on private land normal speed limits do not apply and you don't even need a license. Admittedly car parks etc are slightly different but being on your phone to pay for something shouldn't apply. Its like they don't understand texting vs mobile pay. They are two very different things even though they are on the phone. Have the police seriously got nothing better to do.
08 October 2018, 01:45 PM
#10
1. The majority of people who use phone-pay services will also still possess bank cards, so in reality all they're doing is multiplying the possible attack vectors open to fraudsters to get at their money.
2. If they don't also still possess bank-cards, they're now in a position of being reliant on:
a. Merchants actually supporting their chosen phone-pay service,
b. Constantly having to carry their phone with them,
c. Constantly having to make sure their phone is charged
etc, etc
Bottom-line, who cares if it's more secure, if it means becoming surgically attached to your phone, just to enjoy the benefits of that extra security?
(and yes, I am playing Devli's Advocate slightly here, but there are times when that's very well justified)
08 October 2018, 02:20 PM
#11
There are so many problems with the above, I almost don't know where to start:
1. The majority of people who use phone-pay services will also still possess bank cards, so in reality all they're doing is multiplying the possible attack vectors open to fraudsters to get at their money.
2. If they don't also still possess bank-cards, they're now in a position of being reliant on:
a. Merchants actually supporting their chosen phone-pay service,
b. Constantly having to carry their phone with them,
c. Constantly having to make sure their phone is charged
etc, etc
Bottom-line, who cares if it's more secure, if it means becoming surgically attached to your phone, just to enjoy the benefits of that extra security?
(and yes, I am playing Devli's Advocate slightly here, but there are times when that's very well justified)
1. The majority of people who use phone-pay services will also still possess bank cards, so in reality all they're doing is multiplying the possible attack vectors open to fraudsters to get at their money.
2. If they don't also still possess bank-cards, they're now in a position of being reliant on:
a. Merchants actually supporting their chosen phone-pay service,
b. Constantly having to carry their phone with them,
c. Constantly having to make sure their phone is charged
etc, etc
Bottom-line, who cares if it's more secure, if it means becoming surgically attached to your phone, just to enjoy the benefits of that extra security?
(and yes, I am playing Devli's Advocate slightly here, but there are times when that's very well justified)
People become MoZo's - Face glow Mobile Zombies.
08 October 2018, 02:53 PM
#12
There are so many problems with the above, I almost don't know where to start:
1. The majority of people who use phone-pay services will also still possess bank cards, so in reality all they're doing is multiplying the possible attack vectors open to fraudsters to get at their money.
2. If they don't also still possess bank-cards, they're now in a position of being reliant on:
a. Merchants actually supporting their chosen phone-pay service,
b. Constantly having to carry their phone with them,
c. Constantly having to make sure their phone is charged
etc, etc
Bottom-line, who cares if it's more secure, if it means becoming surgically attached to your phone, just to enjoy the benefits of that extra security?
(and yes, I am playing Devli's Advocate slightly here, but there are times when that's very well justified)
1. The majority of people who use phone-pay services will also still possess bank cards, so in reality all they're doing is multiplying the possible attack vectors open to fraudsters to get at their money.
2. If they don't also still possess bank-cards, they're now in a position of being reliant on:
a. Merchants actually supporting their chosen phone-pay service,
b. Constantly having to carry their phone with them,
c. Constantly having to make sure their phone is charged
etc, etc
Bottom-line, who cares if it's more secure, if it means becoming surgically attached to your phone, just to enjoy the benefits of that extra security?
(and yes, I am playing Devli's Advocate slightly here, but there are times when that's very well justified)
I can't think of the last shop I went into that didn't have contact less payments either, I'm sure some of the smaller places probably don't offer it, but its only a matter of time
The only issue with it is the £30 limit
09 October 2018, 10:52 AM
#17
All this moaning about people being on their phones, show's how the average age of scoobynetters (me included) is going up.
Apple pay is secure to a reasonable degree as of now, therefore safe to use. Yes, it's another vector but not one that your average thief will be bothering with.
Moan about tech at our peril, it's fast becoming literally the only hope we have to defeat our problems like climate change and others.
Apple pay is secure to a reasonable degree as of now, therefore safe to use. Yes, it's another vector but not one that your average thief will be bothering with.
Moan about tech at our peril, it's fast becoming literally the only hope we have to defeat our problems like climate change and others.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
funky_monk_flying
Was it you?
9
16 February 2002 05:04 AM