nanog mailing list archives
Re: Dear Linkedin,
From: valdis.kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:34:55 -0400
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 12:29:46 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
It is far preferable for the merchant to request ID and verify that the signature matches the ID _AND_ the picture in the ID matches the customer.
Maybe from the anti-fraud standpoint, but not necessarily from the merchant's viewpoint. It's only better if nobody's standing in line. If matching the ID and signature and picture reduces fraud from 4% to 3%, but increases the time to serve the customer by 5%, you're losing money due to fewer sales/hour. And the local supermarket can save a *whole* bunch of money if they can get me to scan my own stuff and pay with a debit card with minimal/no interaction with the staff. Sure, might be a bit higher fraud rate, but being able to run 4 almost-unattended checkout lines more than covers it. Figure a warm body costs $8/hour - as long as the added fraud is under $32/hour, they're coming out ahead.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: Dear Linkedin,, (continued)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Joe Greco (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Owen DeLong (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, John Levine (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Jared Mauch (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Jay Ashworth (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Owen DeLong (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Simon Perreault (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Peter Kristolaitis (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Gabriel Blanchard (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Stephen Sprunk (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, valdis . kletnieks (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Brett Frankenberger (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Owen DeLong (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Brett Frankenberger (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Barry Shein (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Jay Ashworth (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Jay Ashworth (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Ameen Pishdadi (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Barry Shein (Jun 10)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, Alexander Harrowell (Jun 11)
- Re: Dear Linkedin, JC Dill (Jun 12)