mac_128

jbdragon said:

insync88 said:

I don’t know if it’s just me....But I’ve never been this excited for a credit card before 

It's just you!

But really, if the Credit Card number is always changing, how do you use it to pay some of your bills like Garbage, or Water, etc. How do you have automatic payments without going back to the site every month and enter a new token number?

My understanding of how this works on other cards that have offered random numbers, is that they are active until revoked. I believe the idea is that every merchant has a different card number, so in the event of a breach of their data and your card number is stolen, it’s tied to that transaction and not authorized for use anywhere else. The way it is now, is your master number is held by dozens of merchants, stealing it from any one of them gives an active card access to anyone who posses it.

sflocal said:

jbdragon said:

insync88 said:

I don’t know if it’s just me....But I’ve never been this excited for a credit card before 

It's just you!

But really, if the Credit Card number is always changing, how do you use it to pay some of your bills like Garbage, or Water, etc. How do you have automatic payments without going back to the site every month and enter a new token number?

The credit card number, along with expiration date and CV code is viewable within the wallet app in one's iPhone.  So one can still use that CC# to pay off utilities, etc...  nothing changes, but everything is much more secure.

Did you read the article? That’s not what it says:

the physical card does have a number encoded into its magnetic stripe, but users will not have access to that information. Instead, the corresponding virtual card in the Wallet app only displays the last four digits of a user's personal account number.  

When making purchases that require recitation of a card number, the app generates a virtual number and CVV. This process can be repeated manually if a user so chooses. 

It just had to be Goldman Sachs ...

georgie01 said:

Metriacanthosaurus said:

Nope. No thanks. No one wants it. No one asked for it. 

But it that doesn’t seem to matter to Apple these days, so we’ll probably see these gimmicks from them too. 

Apple periodically does silly things (for instance the volume control in the early QuickTime players for macOS was ridiculous!), but overall I see little change in how they do things ‘these days’.

It is extremely unlikely Apple will come out with a foldable device without having a good and elegant use for it. I can’t imagine what that use would be, but I expect Apple has been thinking about it for years (and we can be thankful they haven’t jumped on the plastic screen bandwagon just to get something out!).

Maybe watch some more science fiction?

WESTWORLD in particular demonstrates a good, elegant, practical use for such technology.

i really don’t get all these comments about how nobody understands how this could be used, or “nobody wants it”, “nobody needs it”. It’s really self-evident.

MplsP said:

mac_128 said:

wood1208 said:

Good part is physical connector still USB Type-C and protocol backward compatibility to Thunderbolt 3, USB 3.x

Yes, but sounds like a potential cable nightmare ... 

Actually, I think it would be an improvement. Or a potential one anyway. 

The nightmare is what we have now - USB C connector but no standard on what the cables are capable of in terms of power, speed, etc, nor any standard as to whether a given USB port is straight USB or thunderbolt. And then there's the whole USB 3 naming cluster...

Yes, but this won’t make that go away... doesn’t it just add yet another type of cable connection that won’t be supported by lesser cables, making confirming you have the right one necessary? 

Im not using USB-C cables at the moment, but there seem to be a lot of complaints about this. It reminds me of the HDMI problem, where even cables rated to support high speed connections don’t actually do that on some sets, something I have had first hand experience with.