This isn't anything new though. Been like that for the last 15 years at least. Always pay in the local currency (your bank/visa/mastercard will give you a better rate then the merchant)
It seems to be built into the credit card terminals. So it's a visa thing, not on the shop.
I had that with very small shops in non-touristy areas of Mexico where it was absolutely clear to not be a scam attempts by the shops owner. They had no idea what the terminal asked.
Their payment processor (the people they rent the machine off of) offers them this oppurtunity to 'unlock hidden revenue for merchants'[1][2][3] and they are happy to do this.
I don't think parent is claiming that the shop owner is trying to scam someone. But these prompts have been around for at least 15 years, I'm also sure about that, this isn't new by any measure. And yeah, also came across shop owners who don't know what it is about, and then you have to chose.
Makes sense that shop owners in non-touristy areas haven't seen them before, as you'll only see that when the card has a default currency that differs from the default currency of the terminal.
On the other hand, almost every merchant and waiter in Spain told me, when handing me the card terminal, to select "local currency" (decline the first swindle attempt) then "don't convert" (decline the second swindle attempt). There's obviously some required workflow where they must pass the terminal to the customer, but they are wise to the payment gateway's trick to extract additional value from the transaction. They don't want their customer bilked, or to take the reputational damage when the customer leaves an angry review.
So if your Mexican merchants "don't know" what their terminal says? Either you were their first foreigner, or they're useful idiots, or they know.
I just think they genuinely don't know. I was years into travelling before I learned about this 'trick'.
For my part, I'd just always assumed the charge would be ultimately converted by my bank in any case. Seems obvious now I look back, but I honestly just didn't think about the trick.
Just as an example that gives evidence for this, sometimes you'll go to the same place multiple times and the norm is they ask but occasionally someone won't. So it's not a policy.
I presume the people who don't just don't know about it, don't want to bother me and aren't aware it will make a difference.
He could have merely been the first to do the math and bring it up. I could easily see most tourists overlooking this sort of thing, or not mentioning it because they're already accustomed to it.
Very true, but the other half is to ensure you don’t use a card with a foreign transaction fee, which will cost you 3-4%. There are free cards like the Amazon Prime Visa that don’t have it, but that fee is very common.
The other thing I hate to see is people using the currency conversion desks at airports, or buying foreign currency from their banks in advance of trips. They give you awful rates.
Assuming you’re traveling to a civilized country, just stick your card in an ATM when you land and pull out the cash you need. Good banks don’t even charge their own ATM fee, so your total cost is the $3-4 that the ATM owner charges, and you get a pretty fair rate.
When the ATM withdrawal usually costs you nothing, or in some cases when the bank does not have an agreement with the ATM company it can cost you 1,39$ then 3-4$ is a ripoff.
Also people buy currency locally - before the trip - where I am from, and all the rates are displayed, both in a bank or in currency exchange. You can compare. And even when someone is lazy they can just ask friends which place has the best rates, everybody seems to know which (and the answers are true and conistent, I checked). Buying locally at a currency exchange is the cheapest option.
> The other thing I hate to see is people using the currency conversion desks at airports
If I've just arrived home with $30 left of whatever currency was used in the place I came from, they could be taking a 30% cut and it would still be worth it to just due it there rather than physically visiting a bank.
That is, if the currency is one they're even willing to exchange.
This isn’t that. I understand if you came to a US store with Canadian dollars, they’d be unlikely to give you the posted exchange rate for them, if the took them at all. Here we’re talking about paying with a credit card that will automatically pay in the local currency, and having the POS terminal, on whoever’s behalf, try and intermediate that to charge a higher rate than the credit card would have, under the false pretence of simplifying payment somehow. It’s not convenience, it’s preying on ignorance.
Almost. To such a degree I would call it a very dark pattern.
There is however one very good argument for. Currencies with very high volatility. Think extreme inflation. If you accept their conversion you know what you pay in your own currency. You have then mitigated a risk.
If your own currency is volatile then you might gamble and win. If the foreign currency is volatile you will usually win by paying in the foreign currency. If both are volatile then it is a blind gamble.
The important part here are the settlement dates. Your bank usually do not calculate the exchange rate of the eaxct purchase time.
That is the excuse for the "service". But it is still not wanted and I consider it evil.
When traveling places with rampant inflation you will notice that sellers always negotiate 2 prices. One in the local currency and one in what is considered an easy to use hard currency such as USD or Euros.
Forgeries and less cash flowing around has made it harder to use other less know but otherwise hard currencies.
So sellers never care what currency you choose to settle in as very close to zero sellers have multiple accounts on the same terminal. And those who really need it will always negotiate in different currencies.
You might have experienced something like this at times when visiting Argentina or Turkey.
So the "service" is only there for those who want to understand what they pay in their own currency or mitigate a settlement date. And will pay for it!
Local terminal holders rarely care. But the ATM mafias (such as EuroNet) do very much so. Because they actively are playing the mitigation game and are allowed to add fees.
I strongly feel this field should be very heavily regulated. But too much money is involved. And if you look at where VISA and MasterCard are located you will understand that is not a regulation happy corner of the planet.
Historically (like, 15+ years ago when I did the SEA backpacking circuit) there have been some cards with ridiculous fees for international transactions. Like, a flat $10 per transaction. Back then when I saw prompts like this on card terminals I assumed it was targeted at those cardholders (or people who had heard stories of those and were unsure and worried what they would be charged and wanted to be reassured by a number in their home currency)
Just so everyone is aware, it is still considered a foreign transaction regardless of which option you pick. So if you are using a card that charges for that, then you will be charged a foreign transaction fee. It is a foreign transaction fee, not foreign currency fee.
I think that’s exactly a big part of why this scam was developed. If you aren’t that informed, don’t know your credit card terms by heart, but you’ve heard about those “foreign fees” it’s very plausible that this service would save you money. Not likely of course, since the scam is obfuscated and hidden in a dollar amount presented without the computation.
If you’re in a place that wants dollars or euros because their currency is “bad” (volatile or unable to freely exchange for dollars), they prefer dollars. You can tell because you get a better than official exchange rate.
I have to say I’ve never been somewhere that the currency was so volatile the settlement date mattered. Carrying local currency would be part of your risk? This could only come up in the almost-all-digital-currency modern world.
And now you need to install and learn 10 different programs instead of one. Excel is used a lot because you can do so much with it which is also one of its downsides when people build things with it they really shouldn’t.
RTF works with anything. On XLS and the rest. it should be a common ground like RTF for word processing. And I don't mean CSV/TSV, but a truly open core standard. No, nothing like HTML5 where it grew up organically like a disease, with bloat on top.
Also, input and output shouldn't be allowed to be mixed by design. Data in one sheet, and formulae output in another. And no automatic parsing should be done, ever. Remember Excel with Genomics, or the issues mangling dates. Or worse, locales, which are another issue under Unix.
Depending on the contract it might not be allowed to run public network services from your home network.
I had a friend doing that and once his site got popular the ISP called (or sent a letter? don't remember anymore) with "take this 10x more expensive corporate contract or we will block all this traffic".
In general why the ISPs don't want you to do that (in addition to way more expensive corporate rates) is the risk of someone DDoS that site which could cause issues to large parts of their domestic customers (and depending on the country be liable to compensate those customers for not providing a service they paid for)
Only drm free steam games. The ones with the steam drm require steam client to be running to launch (steam itself can be in offline mode but it still needs to be running)
Games using things like steam input might also require steam to be running so there is some drm free games that might not run also. Some of those will if you move them outside the steam folder / rename Steam.exe. If you leave them in the steam folder the game will start steam for you if when you launch it.
I don't think AMD had the money to properly execute on both Zen and this K12 ARM chip. So they chose the more safer bet of Zen which seems to have worked out really well for them.
You are not supposed to use EUID for age verification. Instead you use the age verification system.
EUID is made for working with government agencies, banks, etc where you need proper identification of the person and the age verification for verifying ones age (it doesn't even say how old you are just that you are over X years old)
End goal is to unify them into the same app at some point but the certificates/validation flows are different. Also as the use cases are very different for the proper identification a whilelist is used on who is allowed to request it. With age verification as it is just a certificate that anyone can validate against the public key so no whitelisting possible (or wanted really)
That is exactly what EU is doing with its age verification law. Basically the service provider just has to accept the certificate and check that it is valid and all the cert says is "is over X years old".
And the fact that the companies have to implement the system themselves is just crazy. It is very obvious that if the government require such a check it has to provide the proof/way of checking just like in the physical world it provides the id card/passport/etc used for checking this.
> just like in the physical world it provides the id card/passport/etc used for checking this.
In Sweden it wasn't the government that provided id cards, but the post office and banks. It became the government's job sometime after Sweden joined the EU, after the introduction of the common EUID standard.
Yeah we have something similar here in Finland with banks doing most of the (strong) identification.
This also makes things difficult for immigrants for the first month or two in the country as a lot of services (like making a phone or internet contract) require this identification to use but it is also a bit of a hassle to get a bank account (but getting a new bank account in a different bank once you have a bank account to do the strong verification takes like 2 minutes)
There is a government system but most don't use it but I expect once the eu digital identity wallet thing rolls around a lot of ppl will switch (or be required to?) to that
But very importantly this government, bank id, the identification part of the eu id wallet or really any identification system should not be used for age verification as it actually identifies the user not just give a proof that the user is over X years old.
These systems likely could be extended to just provide age information. If there truly was a wish for it. The suomi.fi systems can be configured. To pass or not pass address for example. So I see no need to pass personal identity number.
Yes and the "backend" (what provides the certificate to the app) for the age verification app for Finland will most likely be suomi.fi (or some dvv.fi thing directly) systems.
But we can't realistically expect every service that needs age check to work with 27 (eu countries) different systems but instead we need to unify it into a single api contract which is what this age verification app basically does.
We have BankID in Norway, run by DNB (I think). A single service that uses my personnummer (like a social security number but actually unique) as my user name and logs me in to almost all government services, banks, insurance companies, etc.
And unfortunately it's also used in some places outside the ones you're mentioning, e.g. private persons renting out their camper (I've seen this). Which opens the doors to fraud, as has happened too many times (the fraudsters make it look like a normal bank-id lookup, gets you to do it twice, and then they have enough to open your bank account and withdraw money. If they can get you do to it three times they also have enough to remove the limit on withdrawal, and empty your account).
The system is highly convenient and pretty safe, but it does still need vigilance from the user. Which is tricky, re all those phishing attempts and click-scams which people fall for again and again and again.
> And the fact that the companies have to implement the system themselves is just crazy.
Isn’t this how most industry regulations work? It’s not like the government provides designs to car companies to reduce emissions or improve crash safety.
Government does issue passports for identiftying their citizens when traveling. It is the one who made/enforces the law that requires that so it is the one who has to provide the means to do that.
Or are you suggesting that anyone should be able to make their own passport?
Or a bit closer example. If there was no official id cards/passports/etc (there currently is no official way of proving your age online) and the government made a law that mandates that one has to be over X to buy alcohol. Who’s job is it to provide the means to prove that you are over X?
For the car a proper analogy would be the goverment requiring drivers license. Who provides the drivers license? Should every manufacturer provide its own?
I think you’re purposefully ignoring my point and misunderstanding the analogy.
Yes, there are things that the directly issues and provides. But the vast majority of regulations are like this one where it basically says “I don’t care how you do it, but you need to check the age of your customers.”
As another example, the government doesn’t make soap but it does mandate that restaurants have hand washing stations.
reply