Co-op to be first UK store to introduce 'contactless' swipe cards to pay for stuff.

Run_to_da_hills

The Co-operative is to become the first major food retailer to use contactless payment, it was announced today.



Customers will be able to pay for purchases of £15 or less without using a Pin in the majority of the chain's stores by the 2012 Olympics if a trial is successful. Customers will swipe a card over a terminal similar to the Oyster system used on the London Underground. The pilot will begin in 100 stores next year following an agreement with Barclaycard.

No doubt the Oystercard will team up with Barclaycard so that the same card will be compatible, what a great tool for the authorities.

We all know the direction that this is all heading. :eek:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1294638/Co-op-UK-store-try-contactless-payment-PIN-till.html

Jeboa Safari

Thats fairly handy looking

The Highwayman

not in this lifetime, shove it

robtri

sweet.. makes my life easier.....

harsea8

If you mean its a great tool for the authorities to track people, then yes it could be used for that. However, unless they are doing away with the option of paying in cash, you can still "hide" from them if you really want to.

Run_to_da_hills

harsea8 wrote: »

If you mean its a great tool for the authorities to track people, then yes it could be used for that. However, unless they are doing away with the option of paying in cash, you can still "hide" from them if you really want to.

More than likely they will offer some kind on a "loyalty card" incentive with cash discounts to persuade people to use them, people will be so gullible.

Also NFC phones are on the way.

robtri

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

More than likely they will offer some kind on a "loyalty card" incentive with cash discounts to persuade people to use them, people will be so gullible.

Also NFC phones are on the way.

and the option to not use them is there......

Some companies invent stuff to make life easier for its customers...

thecommander

Can't wait. I find having to open my wallet a chore, this will help me retrieve those few lost seconds.

super_furry

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

We all know the direction that this is all heading. :eek:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1294638/Co-op-UK-store-try-contactless-payment-PIN-till.html

That's quite a leap you're making there.

Torakx

robtri wrote: »

and the option to not use them is there......

Some companies invent stuff to make life easier for its customers...

I agree there is ussually an option at the start not to use them.
But this was probably the case with alot of things until everyone was using it,then nobody is able to go outside of that framework because there is a monopoly.
Once all the cash is manipulated out of the picture how will i spend my cash when the banks arent giving it out or the shops arent acepting it.
Eventually i can see everything being a digital transaction and every transaction being taxed.

A possible example but without the tax like a credit card would have might be VHS.
Eventually it will be harder and harder to buy what you want in VHS(not that its better lol).When we go to buy a movie etc its ussually now on DVD afaik.Eventually a personwith only a VHS player will be forced to buy a dvd player.This is ok in my view i guess because the times change and technology moves forward.
But with the cashless society the difference in that example is that every time you buy a dvd somebody takes a couple of euro off you for buying dvd over vhs when you had no choice in the first place.

So dvd is better than vhs and in some peoples opinion cashless society is better than having the option to use cash.(or do people believe we will still be using cash always?)
For me the issue and difference between these examples is that my life does not depend on me watching or buying vhs/dvd but it does rely on my using cash so i am forced to use it for buying goods.
Added to that i will be hassled for bartering by the legal society and i really am forced to use cash.Now its looking like i will be forced to use digital means whereby i will most likely be forced to pay more for the privilege of using something i have no choice over(in the possible future as it looks to me)
I would not be dissapointed if my view of the future is wrong,i would be delighted but it certainly looks to me like people are being steered toward not using cash as much as credit cards or these other easier ways to pay.
It seems the general populationis very easily herded into any situation the banks or gov wish.Just tell people this is useful and they seem to not consider anything past that.People seem to have been controlled to the point now where they simply act without really thinking on things seriously.

ps i home thecommanders commet was sarcasm lol i do laugh aswell that people would fall for this technology on a large scale for the sake of a few seconds.
Although i am one of those people who does strange things for strange reasons.I shop at the tills in shopping centers as appose to self service just incase i am part of the group that puts others in that store out of a job.

robtri

Torakx wrote: »

I agree there is ussually an option at the start not to use them.
But this was probably the case with alot of things until everyone was using it,then nobody is able to go outside of that framework because there is a monopoly.
Once all the cash is manipulated out of the picture how will i spend my cash when the banks arent giving it out or the shops arent acepting it.
Eventually i can see everything being a digital transaction and every transaction being taxed.

A possible example but without the tax like a credit card would have might be VHS.
Eventually it will be harder and harder to buy what you want in VHS(not that its better lol).When we go to buy a movie etc its ussually now on DVD afaik.Eventually a personwith only a VHS player will be forced to buy a dvd player.This is ok in my view i guess because the times change and technology moves forward.
But with the cashless society the difference in that example is that every time you buy a dvd somebody takes a couple of euro off you for buying dvd over vhs when you had no choice in the first place.

So dvd is better than vhs and in some peoples opinion cashless society is better than having the option to use cash.(or do people believe we will still be using cash always?)
For me the issue and difference between these examples is that my life does not depend on me watching or buying vhs/dvd but it does rely on my using cash so i am forced to use it for buying goods.
Added to that i will be hassled for bartering by the legal society and i really am forced to use cash.Now its looking like i will be forced to use digital means whereby i will most likely be forced to pay more for the privilege of using something i have no choice over(in the possible future as it looks to me)
I would not be dissapointed if my view of the future is wrong,i would be delighted but it certainly looks to me like people are being steered toward not using cash as much as credit cards or these other easier ways to pay.
It seems the general populationis very easily herded into any situation the banks or gov wish.Just tell people this is useful and they seem to not consider anything past that.People seem to have been controlled to the point now where they simply act without really thinking on things seriously.

ps i home thecommanders commet was sarcasm lol i do laugh aswell that people would fall for this technology on a large scale for the sake of a few seconds.
Although i am one of those people who does strange things for strange reasons.I shop at the tills in shopping centers as appose to self service just incase i am part of the group that puts others in that store out of a job.

Nice post... (seriously)

While i agree that a cashless society might not be the best, I can see why they strive towards it, on a lot of practical levels it makes sense.

But we have had credit cards and laser cards for a long time now.. 1950's to be precise. and since there intorduction there is more cash in society than before..


I would add... that a credit card can save a hell of a lot more than a few seconds... think about buying online compared to buying in a shop... a few hours it can make up...

bonkey

Torakx wrote: »

I agree there is ussually an option at the start not to use them.
But this was probably the case with alot of things until everyone was using it,then nobody is able to go outside of that framework because there is a monopoly.

I'm struggling to think of examples of what you feel is probably the case.

A possible example but without the tax like a credit card would have might be VHS.
Eventually it will be harder and harder to buy what you want in VHS(not that its better lol).When we go to buy a movie etc its ussually now on DVD afaik.Eventually a personwith only a VHS player will be forced to buy a dvd player.This is ok in my view i guess because the times change and technology moves forward.

The ability to record and play back audio and video has gone through several revisions in my lifetime, but the fundamental concept - the medium - still remains.
Similarly, Ireland has changed currency twice in my lifetime, and has changed the actual notes and coins more than that....but the medium of cash remains.

So yes...VHS will some day become as obsolete as the 8-track is today. That will make them as obsolete as the old shilling is, or the 50p piece.
Today, I can still record a video signal...both from TV and using a handheld camera...just as I can have a pocket-full of currency in the form of cash.

Cash is a medium. AV-recording is a medium.
Any given currency is a form, just as VHS is.

Forms change. Media tend to be a lot more resilient.

In terms of media...TV was apparently the end of cinema and radio. Video was the end of cinema. The Internet was the end of radio, tv, recorded audio, video, and printed media. Amazingly...none of these media have gone away. Their positioning and use may have adapted, and the technology (the form) may have progressed, but the medium remains.

It seems the general populationis very easily herded into any situation the banks or gov wish.

We're still using cash.
This suggests that either its not as easy as you suggest, or the banks & government have had no real interest in getting rid of cash up to now.

Torakx

I get what your saying and fully agree.
What i was saying with those examples is that in the case of the medium of currency i think we will lose more of our currency when roped into using cashless currency.It might only be a half a percent or something but i am sure it will be there somewhere and profitable over the old currency version.
Before coin was brought in for mainstream society afaik tallysticks were the norm and came at no extra cost to anyone as it was a form of accounting for the barter system.
Then we had a progression with coins being used and people could collect coin and save by bartering items for it.
Then we came up with cash based on gold silver etc and now we are working with lien currency but at a price.
Its this price i am considering when talkign about cashless society in the future.
I want to bring back the god damn tally sticks
But what we are talking about is the issue of monopoly really or maybe globalisation..

robtri

Torakx wrote: »

But what we are talking about is the issue of monopoly really or maybe globalisation..

No What RTDH and this thread is about the complete removal of cash from society...

Anyway there needs to be a monopy on issuing of money... lets face it you cant have any joe soap go and print it.. that would never work...

Torakx

robtri wrote: »

No What RTDH and this thread is about the complete removal of cash from society...

Anyway there needs to be a monopy on issuing of money... lets face it you cant have any joe soap go and print it.. that would never work...

Its worked in the past.So i dont see the need to have a monopoly.
And i dont even think the idea of everyone using the same currency is bad.
Its just that we lose control of it and also with the current monetary system the general public are losing money and resources.
Im all for convenience but not at the price they are asking.

What rtth is saying is that we are not in a cashless society yet, but with every addition to promote it, we are looking to be going in that direction.

Yitzhak Rabin

When I lived in Hong Kong, they had this. Your Octopus card allowed you to travel on all the transport forms(buses, taxi, subway, ferry etc.) , You could buy stuff in the shops like 7/11, you could buy food in large supermarkets and restaurants.

It made life much easier. Instead of fluting around for change on a bus, you just swiped your card.

Also, for people worried about privacy, it was all anonymous. You just bought your card at the station and then topped it up with cash at any shop, transport station etc. all over the city.

Do you not see the advantages of that system RTDH? What are the possible drawbacks?

Yitzhak Rabin

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

When they eventually become registered to users.

Well they introduced card payment in 1979.

They introduced the Octopus card in 1997

30 years and still no move to register them to users? In fact the only outcome of the introduction is to make the life of 7million residents of Hong Kong easier.

Run_to_da_hills

Edit: Once they become registered to users they become the ultimate tracking device for the authorities.

Yitzhak Rabin

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Edit: Once they become registered to users they become the ultimate tracking device for the authorities.

Every single one of your threads comes down to this though. They could be used for xyz. There is no evidence that they will be used for nefarious purposes by the government(who you elect by the way, so its you, in a roundabout way).

Where do you draw the line?

Would you have prevented computers and the internet for their abilities to track people?

Would you ban cars because they can be used to run over people?

Would you ban mobile phones? credit cards? laser cards? atm machines?

Run_to_da_hills

yekahs wrote: »

Well they introduced card payment in 1979.

They introduced the Octopus card in 1997

30 years and still no move to register them to users? In fact the only outcome of the introduction is to make the life of 7million residents of Hong Kong easier.

Had Octopus being a registered card system 10 years ago I doubt if even 1/4 of the amount of people would be using them today.

yekahs wrote: »

Every single one of your threads comes down to this though. They could be used for xyz. There is no evidence that they will be used for nefarious purposes by the government(who you elect by the way, so its you, in a roundabout way).

Where do you draw the line?

Would you have prevented computers and the internet for their abilities to track people?

Would you ban cars because they can be used to run over people?

Would you ban mobile phones? credit cards? laser cards? atm machines?

I have nothing at all against this technology and I use it myself however I would like to be vigilant about its potential and where it can go should it find its way into the wrong hands.

We only have to look at our history books.

I don't think that the Jews living in Amsterdam or Warsaw under Nazi control in WW2 would have been too comfortable using registered smart cards to board trams, busses, trains and make their day to day purchases with electronic cash cards, etc. They would have been sitting ducks for the authorities.

bonkey

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I have nothing at all against this technology however I would like to be vigilant about where it can go should it find its way into the wrong hands.

We only have to look at our history books.

Could you imagine being a Jew in Amsterdam or Warsaw under Nazi control under such a system, every time you board a tram, make a purchase, phone call, send a text, your location is pin pointed within 15 feet.

Fine for us here but for Palistinians living in Israel or certain populations living in the UK or US life could be made into hell with such a system.

By looking at our history books, we can see that the atrocities you refer to occurred without this technology. So by looking at our history books, all we see is that technology neither causes such atrocities, nor does the lack of it prevent them from occurring.

Technology may be utilised, but that's a completely different kettle of fish.

Run_to_da_hills

bonkey wrote: »

By looking at our history books, we can see that the atrocities you refer to occurred without this technology. So by looking at our history books, all we see is that technology neither causes such atrocities, nor does the lack of it prevent them from occurring.

Technology may be utilised, but that's a completely different kettle of fish.

Hitler make great use of Hollerith technology when rounding up and assigning Jews to various labour the death camps didn't he?

I am sure if IBM provided him with the bar code or RFID he would have jumped at it.

bonkey

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Hitler make great use of Hollerith technology when rounding up and assigning Jews to various labour the death camps didn't he?

I am sure if IBM provided him with the bar code or RFID he would have jumped at it.

Hitler used Hollerith technology, sure. The modern computer is a vastly more advanced version of the same....but no-one here seems to be saying we should oppose their use and ban them from society because of the misuse they could potentially be applied to.

This is ultimately where the "slippery slope" argument that you're making fails. There is nothing inherently evil about the computer, nor about its predecessors. While it has undoubtedly been (mis)used to assist in atrocity, it has also been used to save countless lives.

It is a tool. Like any tool, it can be used or misused.

RFID is also a tool. It too can be used or misused. That alone doesn't make it a problem, nor does use herald misuse.

mushypleas

I don't know about governments. But I can find it pretty easy to see how a cashless society would be beneficial to other powerful bodies in our society, namely banks and businesses.
how it serves businesses:
1 swipe transactions means no people working on cash registers=lower wage bills.
2 sometimes i don't buy things if i don't have the cash on me, this won't happen in a cashless society so i'll buy whatever i like.
3 like tesco do with their clubcards they could monitor each transaction and plan their shops more efficiently.

banks:
1 a society without cash has all of its currency in banks.
2 atm/laser card use is charged, they'd probably charge the use of swiping as well. i think they charge both retailer and customer for laser card use.
3 with all your money in the bank they'd know how much you have and probably treat you accordingly. (that one is a bit harsh on banks but its true that they are nicer to big clients)

I think that a cashless society would be a mistake. Money is a property. I wouldn't want a bouncer in my front garden saying 'go ahead' before I could get into my house. So why should I let a bank be the gatekeeper to all of my finances. I think it's important to have money in circulation which is not in any bank. We should be taking power away from institutions and giving power to individuals and the other way around.

I hope that if a cashless society is ever introduced that the majority of people will have voted for its introduction. But considering what happened with the lisbon treaty we'll probably be asked the same question until big business gets what it wants.

Run_to_da_hills

mushypleas wrote: »

I don't know about governments. But I can find it pretty easy to see how a cashless society would be beneficial to other powerful bodies in our society, namely banks and businesses.
how it serves businesses:
1 swipe transactions means no people working on cash registers=lower wage bills.
2 sometimes i don't buy things if i don't have the cash on me, this won't happen in a cashless society so i'll buy whatever i like.
3 like tesco do with their clubcards they could monitor each transaction and plan their shops more efficiently.

banks:
1 a society without cash has all of its currency in banks.
2 atm/laser card use is charged, they'd probably charge the use of swiping as well. i think they charge both retailer and customer for laser card use.
3 with all your money in the bank they'd know how much you have and probably treat you accordingly. (that one is a bit harsh on banks but its true that they are nicer to big clients)

I think that a cashless society would be a mistake. Money is a property. I wouldn't want a bouncer in my front garden saying 'go ahead' before I could get into my house. So why should I let a bank be the gatekeeper to all of my finances. I think it's important to have money in circulation which is not in any bank. We should be taking power away from institutions and giving power to individuals and the other way around.

I hope that if a cashless society is ever introduced that the majority of people will have voted for its introduction. But considering what happened with the lisbon treaty we'll probably be asked the same question until big business gets what it wants.

The most fearful thing about an enclosed cashless / smart card system is that you could be completely isolated from society if you don’t obey.



Scenario: Your name comes up as a suspect. All the authorities have to do is put a tab on your card so that it will block you from the privileges of any commercial transaction.

yermanoffthetv

Err does anyone else see the problem that if this card can make payments "without contact" whats to stop a clever criminal copying your details via a wireless scanner type thing, hidden in a backpack? You may say theres security measures on it but give it 6 months of mainstream use and I guarentee theyll have found a way around.

Run_to_da_hills

yermanoffthetv wrote: »

Err does anyone else see the problem that if this card can make payments "without contact" whats to stop a clever criminal copying your details via a wireless scanner type thing, hidden in a backpack? You may say theres security measures on it but give it 6 months of mainstream use and I guarentee theyll have found a way around.

Like so.

Hackers will also have a [URL="[IMG]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmajlKJlT3U[/IMG]."]field day[/URL].

Esel

bonkey wrote: »

RFID is also a tool.

That's a bit harsh. Oops, sorry - thought you said RTDH!