1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WN2gT-0007ux-LZ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:04:09 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.219.46 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com;
Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WN2gS-0003rS-OC
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:04:09 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id i7so7193346oag.5
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 09:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.213.104 with SMTP id nr8mr868875obc.81.1394467443409;
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 09:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.71.231 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 09:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3w9c_UX3dd+7LdWNXCEwjnAG+bYWxqKYo_fzakWQu=Bg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP3w9c_UX3dd+7LdWNXCEwjnAG+bYWxqKYo_fzakWQu=Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:04:02 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6pDELtQTHXu7p_jTqirC5RP7hmI
Message-ID: <CANEZrP11WDsQD4KFfd8Fi4zfXKRM9vVZkZ-oznMJvjY=5=A31A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c32c369d8c8204f442c0cb
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WN2gS-0003rS-OC
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Instant / contactless payments
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:04:09 -0000
--001a11c32c369d8c8204f442c0cb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I just did my first contactless nfc payment with a MasterCard. It worked
> very well and was quite delightful - definitely want to be doing more of
> these in future.
>
A bit more competitive intelligence - turns out that the experience isn't
quite so good after all. After trying a few more times to use contactless
payments, I found it has a ~75% failure rate based on my usage.
By far the biggest problem is also the most predictable - it's very common
here for merchants to require minimum payment sizes before they'll accept
credit cards, often quite high, like 20 CHF or more. But the PIN-less mode
only works for payments below a certain threshold, I haven't quite figured
out what it is yet, but in the UK it's 20 GBP so maybe it's about 30 CHF.
So there turns out to be an incredibly thin price range in which the simple
touch-to-pay system actually works. Most of the time, either they:
a) Reject cards entirely because the payment is too small
b) Don't have the right hardware, or the hardware just mysteriously fails
to work.
c) Require a PIN because the payment is too large
I'm sure Bitcoin can do better than this.
--001a11c32c369d8c8204f442c0cb
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">I just did my first contactless=
nfc payment with a MasterCard. It worked very well and was quite delightfu=
l - definitely want to be doing more of these in future.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>A bit more competitive intelligence - turn=
s out that the experience isn't quite so good after all. After trying a=
few more times to use contactless payments, I found it has a ~75% failure =
rate based on my usage.</div>
<div><br></div><div>By far the biggest problem is also the most predictable=
- it's very common here for merchants to require minimum payment sizes=
before they'll accept credit cards, often quite high, like 20 CHF or m=
ore. But the PIN-less mode only works for payments below a certain threshol=
d, I haven't quite figured out what it is yet, but in the UK it's 2=
0 GBP so maybe it's about 30 CHF. So there turns out to be an incredibl=
y thin price range in which the simple touch-to-pay system actually works. =
Most of the time, either they:</div>
<div><br></div><div>a) Reject cards entirely because the payment is too sma=
ll</div><div>b) Don't have the right hardware, or the hardware just mys=
teriously fails to work.</div><div>c) Require a PIN because the payment is =
too large</div>
<div><br></div><div>I'm sure Bitcoin can do better than this.</div><div=
><br></div></div></div></div>
--001a11c32c369d8c8204f442c0cb--
|
