this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
957 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

35123 readers
64 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It is endlessly frustrating that companies have universally decided that they won't let people say "no" to stuff, ever. There are no longer options to reject stupid-ass new "features", only postponement until next time you open the app/website/program. They'll continue pestering you for the rest of your life. I realize that my frustration may be a little over-zealous, but we deal with these interfaces dozens of times per day and this is user hostile behavior. There isn't really an option to just use another service or program, since the entire technology landscape has been commandeered by a few major corporations, and they all enact the same shitty things as a group.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sinnerman@kbin.social 61 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Every time I go to the ATM to get cash it shows me an ad for a service and the options are "Yes" and "No thanks."

I am forced to choose one. I am forced to thank them for showing me an ad before they give me my own money.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It would be nice if there was a "fuck-off forever" button.

[–] grue@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

It's called a baseball bat.

[–] Synthead@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago
[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago

Jesus where are you from? I never heard of ads in an atm, that scares the sht out of me, something I am trusting my personal data with could end up selling it or using it for ads.

[–] russjr08@outpost.zeuslink.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate this specifically for one of the corner stores at my house. When I use tap-to-pay (or I assume swiping a card), it gives me a "Would you like to register for our rewards program? Selecting no will not impact your ability to complete this purchase" prompt...

Except then I'm forced to actually physically click "No", which circumvents the whole point of not having to touch the POS terminal when using tap-to-pay...

[–] Resolved3874 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tap to pay isn't there to stop you from interacting with the terminal though? I mean yeah it was handy during the pandemic to now have to touch things many other people touch but that wasn't the main idea behind tap to pay.

[–] russjr08@outpost.zeuslink.net 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep, my apologies I should've been a bit more clear - a lot of stores during the pandemic put up signs saying that they preferred for you to use tap-to-pay as a preventative / safety measure, and this store is one of them.

Of course, even during the peak point of the pandemic that prompt was still there, and is still there... and due to the medication that I'm on I am somewhat immunocompromised so I would prefer to not have to touch the screen since everyone who pays using anything that isn't cash has to also touch the display.

[–] Resolved3874 2 points 1 year ago

Ah then yeah that kinda silly. They should at least have a cashier override for that prompt if they are going to brag about not having to touch it.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tap to pay is there for banks to eliminate the last money transaction they weren't taking a cut of: cash payments.

They haven't been trying to get this shit going for almost 2 decades because the convenience othe their customers is their driving motivation...

[–] Resolved3874 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean I hardly use the tap to pay feature on my cards but I use credit cards for everything. Tap to pay is more secure so protects the banks more. Same reason we moved to chips instead of always using mag strips.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I've actually worked in smartcard issuance at some point and tap to pay isn't at all more secure than the cards with smartchips requiring physical contact and a pin code that the banks had finally gotten around to adopt after more than a decade of Visa and Mastercard trying to force them to ditch magstrip (which was laughably insecure).

Tap to pay actuall reduced security because it removed the "locked for anything with a key known only to the user" element and replaced it with a limit on losses (i.e. pinless payments are limited to a certain amount so losses if the card is stolen are limited) and replaced the physical connection requirement with a radio-range one which can be worked around with a directional antenna (something as simple as a pringles can).

Sure, it's better than magstrip, but then pretty much anything is better than magstrip.