iDEAL | Wero was just a rebrand of iDEAL to make people get used to the new name Wero. The actual Wero roll-out has only just started. ASN and Bunq seem to be the first Dutch banks to actually roll out Wero (and not just renaming iDEAL to iDEAL | Wero).
ABN Amro also seems to be rolling out changes. I can't tell if it is just front end, but they did break some stuff. Including, annoyingly, making online payments without a phone.
The situation changes every couple of months, can't figure out if they unbroke it already.
Exactly. We are currently in a transition phase (of about a year iirc) where, for example, the fee will stay fixed. After that it will be a percentage of the total amount. Which is why Mollie announced[1] they would be launching a Wero alternative.
In the end this whole "buyer protection with percentage fee" is about the banks thinking: "We don't want to be a dumb digital sock for people's money. We have to provide value to them". But I want my bank to be a dumb digital sock to put my money in, nothing more. I'm really getting fat-up with all these MBA-types's thinking their company "needs to have a relation with me and add value". I mean I get emails from my utilities trying to get to know me. Seriously? I don't give a wooden nickle about my drinking water supplier. I just want to pay them and use their services and other than that I want to think about them as little as possible.
From the write-up, it looks like mollie will be using PSD2 Payment Initiation Service (PIS). Which is exactly what PSD2 PIS was meant for. Kudos to them.
It's a bit outdated. The big green one isn't in the government majority ownership for a year and some now, so we installed back those glass shelves and cocaine dispensers in all restrooms by now.
Yes, the state is divesting from ABN AMRO (and apparently making a profit on it) but ASN is still 100% owned. I think Rabobank was the only one of the big banks that did not need state sponsorship. Probably due to the fact they are a cooperation and don't have shareholders to please.
I'm not sure what you mean. If I have an app that sends emails (Sendgrid), maybe an SMS (Twilio), connects to a database (Planetscale), talks to some AI vendor (OpenAI) in the background and has a Stripe integration, I have no other option than to store the credentials for those services with my app at the cloud hoster of choice.
If there is no choice than exposing private keys that needs to be rotated in case of compromise then perhaps that is an incompetent design choice, isn't it? Co-locating services where available or limit from what location a key is accepted, why that is not an option? I still think that if there is 'no other choice than exposing secrets' then there is some seriously fundamental wrongdoing is involved there and there is no-one else to blame for the lots of fuck ups happening than those forming those services - who else, basically, right? the weather or some imaginary father-figure? - the way they do. Regardless if this is a widespread practice. Many wrong will not make something good. There is always a choice, like not doing what cannot be done right. Right?
We reached a state where whatever is on the web that cannot be trusted. Users worry, privacy and secrets are compromised on a huuuge scale, while the creators who did this way are saying 'this is normal business'. That's not right! Privacy is sacrificed for developer's convenience.
Genuine question: what do you recommend as an alternative?
The only alternative I can think of is "own and operate all of your site's hardware on physical premises to which you have sole access", and even that's not perfect.
Are you arguing against hosting/cloud/datacenter services in general? Or is there a specific technique you would prefer people use to secure their keys in a non-owned environment?
Had a new kitchen and bathroom installed last year. Most surfaces (kitchen counter, shower and general bath room) all Dekton or one of Cosentino’s other lines.
I was apprehensive: it is expensive and “not real stone”.
Super happy with it. Spilling red wine, putting sizzling hot pans on it, accidentally dropping big pans on it. Dekton brushes it off.
"Go into debt" seems like a terrible idea compared to just making due what's already there. My kid puts rocks on the counter. The old laminate doesn't shrug it off, but I sure do.
If it's not an investment, don't go into debt. And a premium finish is not an investment, unfortunately. If you sell soon, you won't recover the cost. And if you sell down the line, it will be out of fashion regardless of how well it physically held up.
By all means splurge on yourself if that's what you want! Just don't justify it by framing it as an investment that you should be taking on debt for.
"Dropping big pans on it" is actually the weak point of Dekton. If you hit it hard it can chip away. Otherwise, the material is more or less indestructible.
Exactly why we changed it to natural stone at the last minute. Otherwise Dekton seemed pretty awesome. But we needed something literally indestructible, even if its thicker than Dekton ;)
Our Dekton countertops are great, although we have managed to put a tiny chip in it - I think it was dropping a small glass jar from about 3-4 feet up?
The reason we went for it because it appears to be the only way to get a light-colored stone countertop that won't stain when you spill red wine or tomato sauce on it. It has been excellent, hasn't picked up any stains at all.
Considering how much she paid for it, my jaw dropped when my mom first scolded me for putting a hot pan directly on her brand new quartz counter top. I'll take my cheap (probably fake) granite any day over such a useless counter. Like your Dekton, it just brushes everything off.
I wouldn't go in debt but I'd pay the premium again, we're really happy with our countertops, especially considering that it allowed us to make them thinner which my wife wanted seemed to be a big no-no with other materials.
Not really, we did consider one of those fancy new induction systems that goes through the countertop but there were too many limitations (ie. there had to be a cut in the countertop which was a deal breaker for my wife).
The reason for the thinner countertop was merely preference, she wanted it that way and I wanted her to be happy.
Fortunately when I had to have my kitchen redone after a fire my brother already had it in his kitchen(s?). Which gave both me and my designer confidence that I would like it at scale that she was a bit nervous about.
For web UI tests this is mainly solved, at least when using Playwright. It allows setting thresholds, percentages and some other config items to allow some small differences in pixels. https://playwright.dev/docs/test-snapshots#options
That's an attempt at mitigation, but most definitely not solved.
It still causes both false positives and false negatives through that. The only true "solution" is to make sure generation always happens on the same platform as your ci... And various mitigation strategies around that (eg fall back to structure tests on other platforms vs actual visual diffs in ci
Also not unique to playwright. Been available basically everywhere since the start
Why would it be a typo? Miro was doing $600M ARR, some of their customers were paying them $100k+ a year. That is totally normal. It would be weird if they did not have such customers.
reply