Maybe? Maybe not? My point was that there are perfectly legitimate reasons to have tight security on software that deals with input devices. In the age of sandboxed software I wouldn't be surprised if you can't just get all key presses as non-interactive background software, or if you could get them by reading them from Logi Options.
If you're in the US this sounds like a normal card. If you're in a lot of other places you won't have heard of it because it's not available and it sounds amazing because it wouldn't make any money in more regulated countries.
Considering the impact on prices, cashback is basically reverse redistribution. It makes the situation worse for the poorest customers to give money to the banks and their richest customers.
Yep if you use a card in the US the company just takes 2c from your left pocket and puts it in your right pocket in a form that's more difficult to use.
And if you don't use a card, the business takes 2c from your left pocket and keeps it.
It's a great trick though, people really buy into the whole points/cashback thing and don't realise they're being paid with their own money
It's usually more than 3 cents out of your left pocket and 1.5-2 into your right one, even if you do everything right and never incur interest charges or fees.
> It's a great trick though, people really buy into the whole points/cashback thing and don't realise they're being paid with their own money
Even better, they become poorly-paid lobbyists for the entire scheme, since it successfully makes them feel like they're getting "luxury" items/services for free by "gaming the banks", when they're really just participating in a loyalty scheme exactly as designed.
Sure, it's possible to eke out a net cash profit here and there, but all in all, it's just a great counterexample to homo economicus.
It’s not being paid with my own money. If I can get 2% cash back, then the situation is I either pay 98% of $x, or $x.
Nowadays though, many sellers are offering at least 3% or higher discounts for not using credit card. My mobile network provider, home ISP, daycare and kids activities, insurance, taxes, healthcare, tradespeople, and even Target offers a 5% discount if you do not use a credit card.
It’s basically only travel, restaurants, and non Target retail that earns credit card rewards. Although sign up bonuses make it worth paying the additional credit card fees sometimes.
> It’s not being paid with my own money. If I can get 2% cash back, then the situation is I either pay 98% of $x, or $x.
The counterfactual isn't getting or not getting 2% cash back, it's the merchant paying or not paying ~3% in fees, a part of which you get back from your issuing bank as a kickback to keep participating in and advocating for this scheme.
Of course this would require regulatory action. Absent that, the status quo represents the stable equilibrium.
Well if you can get $100 worth of X on credit card for $98, but you can buy the same thing with cash for $97, aren't you actually paying 150% of the "cash back" with your own money? ¯\\_(ಠ_ಠ)_/¯
Even as somebody really disliking the current interchange fees in the US, 4% is a money grab on the merchant's side that I find hard to empathize with.
Even if the merchant pays the sticker price for card acceptance, it's usually just below 3%, unless international cards are involved. Add to that the fact that cash transactions in restaurants are often accounted for in "more tax efficient ways", and it feels even more icky.
My point is if credit cards didn't exist, the $1 thing would cost 98c, so in that sense it's your money.
Admittedly that is overstating it a bit because not everyone uses a rewards card. In reality the 2% cashback is 1% your own money being given back to you and 1% money from people paying in cash being transferred to you (normally regressively as someone else pointed out).
If you get a discount for paying cash, then it really is just your own money
They are all over the place, especially small businesses. A cash only (paper money) price is typically less than debit card or other electronic “cash” discounts because tax evasion is assumed.
Next time you have an independent contractor do some work, after they give a price, ask them if they will accept 90% or even less if you pay cash.
My barber has a sign with a cash price, a Zelle/Venmo price, and a credit card price.
Like I said, I don't think I've ever seen them. For instance, you can't go into a Walmart or Best Buy and ask for a cash discount. Maybe a small business offers them, but I live in a small town (pop < 4k) and our grocery store and hardware store don't offer a cash discount. Neither do our gas stations offer a discount for paying for gas with cash, as the other reply mentions.
I'm not disputing they exist, just that it's exceedingly rare and not the norm.
> My barber has a sign with a cash price, a Zelle/Venmo price, and a credit card price.
I'm half joking and half serious, is he intentionally trying to confuse customers? Why do Zelle/Venmo have their own prices, and what price do I pay if I just want to pay with the debit card on my phone?
From someone who lives in bay area (so not <4k), this is exceedingly common. Of course Walmart does not have a small business owner on-site who can oversee such adjustments, but think mom and pop / single owner stores. They do it all the time.
Think contractors. They also do it all the time. When I did a remodel a couple of years back, he asked for cash. It was a small amount so I did not think much until my accountant told me I will need receipts if I wanted them added to my house's capital /cost. I asked the contractor and he stalled me for weeks while also saying I will need to pay more for receipts, until one day I forgot chasing (and am thinking of it now) and just let it go I guess.
>I'm half joking and half serious, is he intentionally trying to confuse customers?
He is sharing some of the savings from tax evasion with the customer.
I do not know if he can accept electronic payments from a debit card on the phone. I presume Zelle/Venmo is simpler than figuring out a system to separate debit cards and credit cards.
>just that it's exceedingly rare
Discounts for non credit card payment methods (such as ACH/debit card/Zelle/Venmo/paper cash) seem more and more common to me. Bigger businesses likely won't engage in tax evasion allowing for bigger discounts for paper cash, but fewer and fewer of my expenses are worth paying with a credit card.
I'm seeing it more often. They don't say cash discount, they say they're charging a fee for using a credit card.
What annoys me is debit card fees are supposed to be capped in the U.S. But for unclear reasons many payment processors don't honor this, even large processors like PayPal and Square. Merchants tell me the debit card fee is same as a credit card.
My local government charges a 2.9% fee for use of credit or debit card as well.
I was using "more regulated" as a lazy catch all, but I'm actually British and now live in Australia. The Apple Card would be pretty amazing in either market in my experience. The UK seemed to max out at 0.5-1% back at scale (not including sign up incentives). Australia is similar, although here credit cards are disincentivised even more.
The UK is very similar to the US, very neoliberal.
They have a little more consumer protection but not a lot.
Here in Spain cards don't tend to provide any cashback, also they hurt your credit rating (in contrast with the US where they improve it and people end up shuffling cards). They're pretty unpopular here, most people just use debit cards. I prefer it too, if I don't need credit to buy something I don't want to use it. I currently don't have any loan or credit active which is the best situation in case I'd want to get a mortgage.
We do have some cards like revolut which provide some benefits but you have to pay a monthly sub. It's more promotional stuff like 'free' Uber one, perplexity, tinder etc. I don't find those terribly useful except for perplexity but they give that away free with a lot of things. Uber one in particular really sucks because it's way more expensive than local alternatives (cabify for rides, glovo for meals) even with the discount.
Credit cards are, oddly enough, one place in which the US has absolutely amazing consumer protection laws. Debit cards do not share these protections by law (though many banks offer some of them).
So, if you move to the US, getting a credit card, even if you never intend to carry a balance, is a wise idea.
- You cannot be held responsible for more than $50 of fraudulent charges
- You are not required to report a card missing within a short period of time to claim that charges are fraudulent
- Because your bank account is not directly linked to the credit card, fraudulent charges occur with the credit bank's money, not yours, so you do not have to fight to have them declared fraudulent before you can use money in your account
> Debit cards do not share these protections by law
No, debit cards are covered by Regulation E, which also caps liability for fraudulent transactions, requires your issuer to provide provisional credit until the dispute case has been resolved etc.
The only practical difference in terms of the minimum fraud protections afforded by law is that you're out your own money instead of the bank's until you get that provisional credit, which can be a problem if it causes other transactions (utility bills etc.) on your checking account to bounce.
Where the two really differ significantly is for non-fraud disputes (goods/services not as expected etc.): Reg Z has explicit protections there; Reg E doesn't really talk about these.
But practically, it also doesn't really, because...
> though many banks offer some of them).
No, both Visa and Mastercard require require issuers to extend zero liability protections going beyond these regulations, so it's effectively all banks. (Capital One might be able to relax their own rules now that they own Discover, but I highly doubt they'd risk the consumer backlash for questionable benefit, since they can also just make merchants pay for card-not-present lost/stolen/card credential theft fraud and cover card-present fraud like everybody else in the US.)
Hmm point #2 is not really required here either. In the past I have been skimmed once and I was notified by the bank before I even noticed the transactions. They had noticed because several cards used at a specific public ATM had been skimmed and abused, they removed the transactions immediately and sent me a new card. Very proactive, I didn't have to do anything.
Point #3 doesn't really play here because the credit card is simply a loan in your name and you are liable for the full amount regardless. You could simply not pay the bill but then the insane interest builds up.
I will never move to the US though anyway. I won't even visit until the situation improves.
#3 is a reason not to use a debit card but to use credit instead. If you pay your balance in full every month, on time, then there is no interest due at all. So even after you get your bill, if the card has been used fraudulently, it's not your problem and you can't be stuck with the bill.
I was using the generic "you", not you specifically. Many people don't understand this about credit cards in the US. If an entire nation of people use something that nobody you know does, then either they are all idiots in a way that nobody you know is, or there is something that makes it uniquely valuable there. The consumer protection angle is the unique value proposition (and it covers quite a lot of things).
I don't think consumers are idiots but I do think the system is skewed towards unhealthy borrowing. These protections and cashbacks are nothing but an incentive to keep it the same. The exact same could be done with debit cards after all. The banks are making money off the late payments and customers are incentivised to buy things they can't really afford.
Don't forget this system already collapsed in a big way in 2007 and it had massive global ramifications.
The UK still has EU-equivalent interchange rate caps that they inherited form pre-Brexit times. The only thing that's changed so far is that transactions between the UK and EU can be charged higher interchange rates again.
Huh? Cashback cards on VISA/Mastercard have all but disappeared, I think Lloyds still do one but it has a promo of 1% for the first year then drops to 0.25% after. American Express will give you 0.75% on first 10k spend then 1.25%. 2% is unheard of (unless it's promo or heavily capped).
+1 – it's all well and good for me to buy just some vegetables this week, because I have a pantry full of hundreds of dollars worth of basics, spices, a herb garden, bulk (more expensive) rice/pasta, etc. I also have a single 9-5 job so can spend an hour each day cooking.
But if I had an empty kitchen, lacked the funds to invest in bulk purchases, and had 30 minutes to cook and eat, I'd be eating very differently.
It doesn't, that's Android Webview which is distributed separately. It may however bundle its own instance of the Chrome networking library which is a few MB itself.
For apps like Gmail and a handful of others, they are big enough that they need multiple layers of fallback. e.g. they can't just use a networking layer, they need a fallback separate implementation in case that breaks, so that they can recover. They might have 2 or even 3 options for some of the critical parts, all so that if stuff goes wrong they can as close to guarantee recovery as they can get.
Mobile is quite specific in this regard, because you don't have hardware access, network is heavily restricted, battery reduces the amount you can do, etc.
> Course, I’ve never looked at Beads either, and it’s 225k lines of Go code that tens of thousands of people are using every day. I just created it in October. If that makes you uncomfortable, get out now.
> If you appeared in a puff of smoke before the authors of that paper, just after publication — a few months before half of them cleaved from OpenAI to form Anthropic — and carried with you a laptop linked through time to the big models of 2026, what would their appraisal be ? There’s no doubt in my mind they would say: Wow, we really did it ! This is obviously AGI!
I really don't think this would be the reaction. I'd say they would (or should) look at the systems we have now and see a very clear path between where they were then and where we are now, with all the positives _and negatives_. We still get hallucinations. We still get misalignment, if anything as capabilities have improved so has the potential for damage when things go wrong. It's pretty clear to me that late 2025 models are just better versions of what we had in 2021.
That's not to say they're not more useful, more valuable, they absolutely are! But that's all about product integrations, speed, and turning up the dial on inference compute. They're still fundamentally the same things.
The next big step forward, the thing that LLMs are obviously missing, is memory. The fact we're messing around with context windows, attention across the context space, chat lookup and fact saving features, etc, are all patches over the fact that LLMs can't remember anything in the way that humans (or pretty much any animal) can. It's clear that we need a paradigm shift on memory to unlock the next level of performance.
We have LLM memory, it's a training data from which the model was initially programmed. To allow adding or changing LLM memory, we would need to retrain model completely or partially. And that is not realistic any time soon. All other attempts at LLM memory would be just an obscure hack of splitting context window into parts and feeding input from different files. Literally nothing would change if you input half of the query from one file, half from another called "memory.txt" or if you just input whole query from a single file twice as big.
> It's clear that we need a paradigm shift on memory to unlock the next level of performance.
I think this is on point to the next phase of LLMs or a different neural network architecture that improves on top of them, alongside continual learning.
Adding memory capabilities would mostly benefit local "reasoning" models than online ones as you would be saving tokens to do more tasks, than generating more tokens to use more "skills" or tools. (Unless you pay more for memory capabilities to Anthropic or OpenAI).
It's kind of why you see LLMs being unable to play certain games or doing hundreds of visual tasks very quickly without adding lots of harnesses and tools or giving it a pre-defined map to help it understand the visual setting.
As I said before [0], the easiest way to understand the memory limitations with LLMs is Claude Playing Pokemon with it struggling with basic tasks that a 5 year old can learn continuously.
These are all very much in the same category of hacks that I mentioned.
A cat doesn't know its way around a house when it's born, but it also doesn't have to flick through markdown files to find its way around. A child can touch a hot stove once and be neurotic about touching hot things for the rest of their life, without having to read flash cards each morning or think for a few minutes about "what do I know about stoves" every time they're in the kitchen.
Call them a "hack" all you want, they seem to work. What's particularly intesting is how claude has been trained on skills, so it doesn't need to be taught how to use a skill, so that's been baked into it.
I'm not claiming they don't work in some sense, but as a user you have to be fairly deeply aware of how they work, context engineering is A Thing, you have to tell LLMs to remember stuff, etc.
We're hacking around the fact that the models don't learn in normal use. That's in no way controversial.
A model that continuously learnt would not need the same sort of context engineering, external memory databases, etc.
You speak the truth but looking back, what I reacted to is
> It's clear that we need a paradigm shift on memory to unlock the next level of performance.
and my take is that we might not need to get there to get the next level of performance, based on how well the latest models are able to utilize these hacks of a memory feature. On top of that, Claude was specifically RLHF'd to have the skills concept, so it's good with those. We disagree. Let's let time see who ends up being right.
Chatbots are rife with this sort of thing. I found a delivery company's chatbot that will happily return names, addresses, contact numbers, and photos of people's houses (delivery confirmation photos), when you guess a (sequential) tracking number and say it was your package. So far not been able to get in touch with the company at all.
At the very least these systems allow angry customers direct access to the credit card plugged into your LLM of choice billing. At worst they could introduce company-ending legal troubles.
I worked at a company that wanted to implement an AI chatbot. I was helping to review the potential issues. On the first try I realised it was given full access to all past orders, for all customers via an API it could query in the background. So I could cajole it to look up other people's orders. It took less than 3 minutes of checking to figure this out.
Often engineers and especially non-technical people don't have the immediate thought of "let's see how I can exploit this" or if they do, they don't have the expertise to exploit it enough to see the issue(s). This is why companies have processes where all serious external changes need to go through a set of checks, in particular, by the IT security department. Yes, it's tedious and annoying, but it saves you from public blunders.
Such processes also make sure that the IT security department knows of the new feature, and can give guidance and help to the engineers about IT security issues related to the new feature. So if they get feedback about security issues from users they won't freak out and know who to contact for support. This way, things like accusing the reporter for "blackmailing" don't happen.
In general, this fiasco seems to show that Eurostar haven't integrated their IT security department into their processes. If there was trust and understanding among the engineers about what the IT department does, they would have (1) likely not released the tool with such issues and (2) would have known how to react when they got feedback from security researchers.
Which leads to a conclusion, either the makers don't know enough to know it's standard (which suggests they aren't well informed enough to make a modern smartphone), or they do know but decided to include it to pad their spec sheet (which suggests disingenuous marketing).
They could just be transparent and know their techy customers are interested in these sorts of things. Possibly, they want to assure customers that their off-brand phone includes such features.
That would also be my reading. I'm the type of nerd who's interested in minute details of his devices. I'm looking for a new phone currently and my spreadsheet includes columns like the UFS version, minimal brightness (as measured by some independent news site), whether it has a barometer, dual-frequency GNSS, etc. It always requires retrieving info via third parties such as https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jXtRCoEnnFNWj6_oFlVW... (GPSTest database), https://phyphox.org/sensordb/, the video mode list on gsmarena.com, etc.
I haven't yet found a manufacturer that publishes sufficient detail such that I can fill out all relevant columns from their official spec page. They're never detailed enough so I can only applaud including more details. There will always be fields that aren't relevant to different subgroups of the audience...
Same position, different results. I'm maybe 20% faster. Writing the code is rarely the bottleneck for me, so there's limited potential in that way. When I am writing the code, things that I'd find easy and fast are a little faster (or I can leave AI doing them). Things that are hard and slow are nearly as hard and nearly as slow when using AI, I still need to maintain most of the code in my head that I'd need to without AI, because it'll get things wrong so quickly.
I think what you're working on has a huge impact on AI's usability. If you're working on things that are simple conceptually and simple to implement, AI will do very well (including handling edge cases). If it's a hard concept, but simple execution, you can use AI to only do the execution and still get a pretty good speed boost, but not transformational. If it's a hard concept and a hard execution (as my latest project has been), then AI is really just not very good at it.
reply