It is the same people who think the government is trying to enter their home via their smart locks. As if they are important enough or interesting enough. Kooks basically.
Also., what'd you get from Popeyes?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Walmart Still Doesn't Accept Apple Pay in U.S. Despite Many Customer Requests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You don't have to be a kook to not want someone following you around making a note of everything you do. And there are certainly rational reasons to not want a company to store your credit card number in case of a data breach.
14 piece chicken tenders, 2 large red beans and rice and five bisquets.
What about your ID, driver license, etc? are you able to store those in wallet on your iphone?
I can't use my phone to carry my license to carry firearms, so that alone makes it a no-go for me.
I wouldn't want to go without a wallet anyway - as I would want backup payment source and cash with me. I don't put all my eggs in one basket.
I don't really care about my driver's license that much. I only need it if am pulled over while driving - something that has not happened in many years.
I was thinking about this issue though - I bet the rabid NFC fans would think I am totally insane for using a passcode on my phone, instead of Face-ID or whatever Apple's face recognition is. Yeah - I enter my passcode probably 50+ times/day. It takes a second or two. It's OK - I don't need to access my phone any more quickly than that and I appreciate the security of not being forced to look at my phone to grant the police access to it.
Sort of. I live in a city with excellent local traffic so rarely driving myself. And in most cases, I can identify myself with something called BankID on my phone. If the police want to identify me I guess they have to drive me home to get my ID. I've never been checked for ID ever though, so in most cases I'm just not having it with me.
Next thing I want to have is a smart lock so I don't have to cary keys anymore 😊
Passcode isn't a problem, at least for me. I keep a passcode on a few of my devices along with FaceID/TouchID. Password/passcode is part of 2FA, in the "what you know" category, so it is always worth it. For the security, however, I do keep my passcode alphanumeric.
BL.
You're asking the wrong question.
If I buy something from you, why do you feel entitled to harvest my personal information in the transaction? You CANNOT do that if I pay cash. What is it in the nature of the Universe that gives you the right to gather that information and [ab]use it in the future?
This is quite similar to questions in the browser: why doesn't incognito mode mean that Google (and others) cannot track me? Google employees have called out this failure of their company to really provide an incognito mode.
You may be complacent about the failure of big businesses to honor our privacy, but many of us are not. You're welcome.
Because it isn't YOUR personal information. It's the store's information ABOUT you. The store should be able to do what it wants with its data. You have total power to prevent the store from collecting the data by paying cash or not shopping there. Exercise your power instead of demanding anyone else do so on your behalf.
For that matter, if I want to, I can wait at someone's house, record their coming and going and publish that data on the internet. Don't like it? They can move where I can't find them, or they can pay me off to stop it. You have better options with anything Walmart is doing.
There is absolutely NOTHING I do in a public space like Walmart that I consider "private", other than using the restroom if needed and REALLY desperate.
Last edited:
I would certainly never pretend Google "respects privacy", regardless of any claims they make. Neither should you.
No. It IS MY information. I can SHOUT, too. Your opinion doesn't trump others.
It's information the store has HARVESTED about me. Would you also be complacent if the store monitored all shoppers with a facial ID system to track all purchases -- even if we paid cash?
You are not competent to be an advocate for the privacy that we need.
You are entitled to your opinion -- no matter how antiquated it is.
The tide is turning on privacy. The Walmarts of the world ARE NOT ENTITLED to harvest information about our transactions. By pioneering technology for anonymizing transactions, Apple has paved the way for far stronger consumer privacy protections.
You may not like that, but those changes will happen. There are lobbyists for pro-harvesting laws, but the number of companies (and their lobbyists) for stronger user privacy are growing. You're on the wrong side of this argument.
That's a terrible option, and you know it.
AND encouraging my legislators to adopt a pro-privacy policy. You seem to not like that, but change is happening.
This statement makes absolutely no sense. Explain it, please.
No. I'll complain about your stalking behavior and get you removed from the street.
A second mystery statement? What exactly does that mean? We have no idea.
Why are you so angry, monstermash? Do you have a bee in your bonnet?
You also failed to comment on the example of browsing privacy. Do you have similar antiquated notions about privacy there? Do you think these complaints about iCloud Private Relay are ridiculous, or do you think regulators should be able to block this privacy-enhancing feature? By your logic, ISPs should be able to harvest all the metadata from their users. That's a sad (and obsolete) attitude.
Walmart not allowing Apple Pay hurts their business. Apple not implementing rcs is strategic for their value added product.
You’re going to need a restraining order and without a credible threat or evidence you are in danger you won’t get it.
In your model of the universe, the onus is on us to realize that Google's "incognito mode" is a gross misnomer.
Why not have the onus on Google to accurately label the behavior of their browser software? Why shouldn't there be criminal and/or civil consequences for Google's obvious mis-naming of this mode? Why should consumers have to know that their words are nonsense?
Your reasoning on this topic is deeply flawed. Google should avoid deceptive privacy labels in their product; you should demand it. Don't be complacent!
Uh...ok.
Yes...it's info ABOUT you. That's what I said.
I couldn't care less if Walmart or any other retailer tracks my purchases by any means they see fit, whether via facial recognition or otherwise. I don't view what I buy as any kind of big secret. Have at it! What is the big secret about it?
Today, I bought the following:
-Dr Pepper @ Sheetz
-Bottled Water @ Sheetz
- 5 different medications at Rite Aid. Two are inhalers. One is cough "pearls". One is cough syrup, one is for blood pressure.
If Sheetz and Rite Aid get together and compare notes, they can probably figure out that between those two visits, i went to an urgent care clinic to be treated for a cough. Probably the one that is next to Sheetz. They may also conclude that I REALLY wanted that soda and water, since I didn't buy anything else.
Big deal.
Gee, thank you. How generous.
Sure they are. They do it every day.
Oh well. Clearly the world would be a lot different if I were running the show. No surprises there.
Thanks for telling me what my opinions are...I'd never know otherwise.
Yeah, I know. A great deal of unpleasantness is going on in the world.
What isn't clear? Do for yourself rather than asking others do for you. The results are generally more reliable.
You can try (;
It means you are already in total control as to whether Walmart can track your purchase or not.
No anger here.
I didn't see this comment. Please repost it and I'll reply to it.
I dunno. What are they?
Oh well.
Last edited:
Yep. Just a guy on a public street, quietly minding his own business, while sitting in his car listen to some tunes.
The onus is on you to TRUST NOBODY, unless they otherwise prove themselves to you by whatever criteria you choose to use.
It's common sense that corporations, especially Google, don't have your best interests at hand. Best to act like it.
Please demonstrate actual quantifiable facts (data) that show Walmart suffers any material harm by not having NFC terminals.
Otherwise, your assertion is just that, an assertion.
You could actually be his biggest fan…like the paparazzi.
Or dislike his politics and legally protest.
Or a blogger collecting information like a journalist.
Or a private investigator hired by someone who thinks you're boinking his wife. Happens all the time. Take photos too.
I might even pay off your neighbor across the street to let me install a camera on his house and point it at yours. Then I can automate my data collection and don't even have to go there in person.
Correct, it’s my assertion. I can’t quantify, just like you can’t quantify it’s not hurting their business.
Proof it’s hurting Walmart. Went to one today, 4 of 17 registers open. 😂😂😂
Simple lesson: don't shout. 'nuff said.
Actually, you said, "It's the store's information ABOUT you." The error is presuming that the store owns the information. Why would you presume that?
In short, you are complacent about privacy. You remind me of the ancient joke:
Q: Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
A: I don't know, and I don't care.
You're welcome to be apathetic (and maybe ignorant) about privacy concerns. You should be grateful that there are many individuals who are both knowledgable and engaged on this issue. Systems like ApplePay should be available from all sellers; the government should take enforcement actions to ensure that such systems are available.
The Walmarts of the world will just have to make do with a little less information about their customers.
I cannot explain to someone why their complacency is inappropriate. You may have to learn this lesson the hard way -- or you may never learn it. And you'll probably never ever appreciate the work of people who are not complacent about privacy.
Do you appreciate tech like iCloud Private Relay? Do you understand what that brilliant service is providing for people? Or are you also complacent about that?
More complacency. We get you're complacent -- there's no need to keep repeating yourself.
The tide is turning on privacy. The Walmarts of the world ARE NOT ENTITLED to harvest information about our transactions. Walmart would be smarter to simply adopt services like ApplePay. At some point soon, they will have no choice.
Actually, you're too complacent to be running anything.
You may not like that, but those changes will happen. There are lobbyists for pro-harvesting laws, but the number of companies (and their lobbyists) for stronger user privacy are growing. You're on the wrong side of this argument.
Paying cash IS a terrible option. Did you really not know that?
You think a pro-privacy policy—supporting ApplePay type services—would be unpleasant? That is a bizarre attitude. Can you explain?
.Talk is cheap. Nobody has any worry about your hypothetical. You are waaaaaay too complacent to ever actually perform any of the stalking behaviors you described.
That's just ignorant. Cash is a terrible option, and there is no financial reason for Walmart to block ApplePay (and similar) services. They may have to be compelled to adopt some services. Hopefully, they'll see the light on their own.
Fortunately, there are plenty of people who are not complacent about Walmart's behavior.
No. You are angry.
Do you think these complaints about iCloud Private Relay are ridiculous, or do you think regulators should be able to block this privacy-enhancing feature?
If you dunno, follow the link and educate yourself.
By your logic, ISPs should be entitled to harvest all the metadata from their users. That's a sad (and obsolete) attitude.
Is that what you think? Are you also complacent about ISPs scraping metadata? Do you think that the iCloud Private Relay service should be blocked? If so, explain why.
I previously offered a brief quantitative analysis of the very same. Feel free to scroll back and look for it.