Sure, if you are ok walking around with a card.
I've been "walletless" for the past 6 years or so, and I don't want to go back.
Leaving and coming back home and only have to mentally track one object that I can't forget is great. If it breaks, I'll temporarily use cards or physical money until I get a new phone and install everything again.
"Use a card" is not really a good alternative for those that prefer not to use them. Sure it works for you, but not everyone has your preferences of walking around with a wallet.
Strange comparison. If you just call, text and check on bank apps, then the market is not for you. Just buy a used phone from 10 years ago.
It's like saying why should you get a new gaming laptop to replace your 6 year old current gaming laptop, when all you do is office work. If all you do is office work, why buy a gaming laptop at all? Just use a standard okish smartphone or tablet.
Who are these phones even for? I see people out in public and all they do with their phone is scroll instagram reels or ticktock. They need all this horsepower for that? I don't think so either. This is why I brought up fortnight because gaming is one example where there probably is a marked difference in frames per second between models. But 99% of people are probably just looking at images and videos and text on their smartphone, pretty low stakes stuff.
Strange attack on a very valid point. An extremely small segment goes outside the regular phone/social media/video space that actually uses these faster chips. For others the experience haven't gotten better relative to the faster hardware. Where are those cycles going?
If this was the US, yeah I'd agree with you, but it's not. EU values the spirit of the law, which changes things drastically. Before anyone comments otherwise, please search online what spirit of the law is and how it's different from the US (I want to avoid fast answers here, enable your "thinking" functionality before answering).
K2.5 said I should walk, then I asked it where my car was:
Ha! Good catch — you definitely got me there.
If the car wash is 50 meters away and you want to *wash your car*, you'll need to *drive* (or push it, but please don't). You can't wash the car if you walk there without it!
So to correct my previous advice: *Drive the 50 meters.* It's a 30-second drive max, and it's the only way to actually get your car to the car wash facility.
Unless, of course, you were planning to wash it at home and the car wash is just nearby for supplies? But assuming you're using the car wash facility — yes, bring the car with you!
Why would anyone use wero when the digital euro gets released?
The article briefly touches this point but dismisses it saying wero and the digital euro complement each other, but doesn't go into detail on how. I see no point in a privately run digital currency when we can have a public one. I guess whichever has good privacy, reliability, ease of use and speed will win.
A digital euro is intended to the the digital equivalent of cash. It is issued directly by the central bank. Currently, consumers cannot have an account at the central bank. They have a balance at a commercial bank, and the commercial bank has an account at the central bank. Right now, you must have a private middleman to do any banking. The digital euro should offer a public alternative to that.
(but it probably won't ever happen, because banks are lobbying against it with FUD campaigns, they feel like it threatens their existence)
Wero is something completely different. It allows consumers to easily pay merchants, mostly online. The digital euro is not a payment network in the same sense as Visa, Mastercard, iDEAL and others.
It says they'll have offline transactions, if they have that, then you can probably make those "offline" transactions from Kms away from the receiver. We'll see how things evolve, I'm still not convinced that wero will have any use once the digital euro arrives.
reply