undefined | Better HN

0 pointsJoeKM12y ago0 comments

Why is this? If everyone else is using it to the degree that swiping is (quoted from another post) "ancient history", then why is the U.S. so behind?

I don't live in a big city, but I travel a fair amount across the U.S. I have never seen a chip reader.

0 comments

gamble12y ago

It was forced in Europe and Canada by shifting liability for fraud on swipe transactions to the merchant. Chips are very effective at preventing point-of-sale fraud. Mastercard and Visa had not tried to push it in the US, but they are getting more active now. As of this year, their processors are required to support chip transactions. By 2015 they will start shifting liability for certain transactions to the merchant if a chip card isn't used.

pbreit12y ago

Because it's a massive investment in replacing all POS hardware and cards for almost no gain (in fact, the customer experience is decidedly worse).

skeletonjelly12y ago

Worse? It's one extra step. Besides here in Australia the chip is already old tech. RFID is the new hotness. So much in fact it's killing the association that manages debit cards (EFTPOS)

amatix12y ago

In New Zealand it's certainly been worse - chip transactions consistently take 30+ seconds longer than swipe ones (ie. at least twice as long as the old way, just waiting around for the damn card reader)

Though the new Visa PayWave/MC PayPass tap-and-go stuff is really quick and super-easy, but not many merchants have it installed yet.

tbeseda12y ago

Consumer paranoia (many claim chips/RFID is unsafe) in addition to outfitting millions of retailers. Chip readers is where Square should be, IMO.

nraynaud12y ago

strange, because copying or reading a chip is very hard (last time I heard about it it was with a electron microscope), where copying a strip can be done in the same swipe as the transaction. I think I have seen a card in Germany with a different pin for the strip and the chip.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse