Tapping my phone on an NFC terminal seems much easier and more straightforward than having to scan a QR or install a third party app and having to figure out how to link it with my bank account. There is just probably not a lot of demand for a system like this in much of the west (in cases where you can’t use a card there is always SEPA instant payments)
The QR code has been a far more robust system for the Indian ecosystem which is predominantly filled with low-cost phones of widely different operating systems. A QR code also behaves as a readily identifiable logo of payment and further works from a distance. If anything I prefer the deliberateness of scanning a QR code, clearly similar to half a billion people at the least.
I’ve used both and I prefer NFC over UPI. I just need credit card and phone that supports NFC. No need of phone number, deal with entering pin, scanning QR code, linking account during setup, etc. Biggest plus point with linking credit card is fraud protection.
In US NFC is best and seamless since most people have high end phones. In India maybe UPI with QR code is better solution since you only need phone with a camera.
I think there is a standard, so as long your bank’s app supports it and more importantly the merchant actually provides a QR code to scan (which is unlikely).
Then again, I don’t see much need for that when I can just NFC pretty much everywhere (of course the merchant still ends up paying up to 1% on every transaction)
It probably is order of magnitude less in reality since I was looking at worst case - chargers are actually 70-sh percent efficient not 50 which almost halves it. Also far from everyone on the planet has a mobile phone, let alone high end flagship.
What I mean is that there are much easier fruits to pick without sacrificing even tiny bit quality of life.
I’m not that sure that a higher proportion of profits going to the shareholders would be a better outcome. Sure the money saved by paying the CEO less might result in lower prices or go to lower ranked employees but it’s not obvious to me that that’s necessarily what would happen.
Depends how you measure “earning”. If we look at Google’s stock price and growth in relation to its competitors he possibly cost significantly more money to the company than he was paid.
