[john_minsk]

I just paid for 12 months worth of Skype subscription which I have used for just 2 calls back in January.

I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

Once I subscribed to New York times. The newspaper that was advertised to me for years in all Hollywood movies as a place where honesty and freedom are of highest priority. I had to spend an hour on a phone with their representatives to cancel it refusing to accept discount or a free subscription.

I don't trust many other companies. Especially if all my interactions with them are virtual and they are not specialized in information technology. At least big tech is quite rich to afford to think about users.

Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there: pay for utilities, for your phone etc. I want more progress here. I want to be able to see all my fees upfront in a clear format. I want to know my credit score. I want to be able to take this credit score to different organizations. etc. etc.

Big hope that fin tech will blow it up, but unfortunately start ups didn't deliver. There are some successful ones, but I think finance is too regulated for them to have a shot at a serious scale. Apple and Google have a shot at that and they will create a road for smaller companies.

The situation in Belarus is bad. And believe me I know. I was concerned as well about my device security. But to be honest at the end of the day it can't be Apple's problem. Belarussian government must be replaced by Belarussian people and Apple has nothing to do with that. And on top of that - what choice do I have. Android devices in Russia are preinstalled with Russian software while Apple's aren't. That's more important sign for me.

[webmobdev]

> I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

You do so only because you believe have no choice as you know that your democracy is so crippled that you don't expect them to protect your rights as a consumer any more!

Where as many Europeans and Asians, who also enjoy democratic rights, will tell you openly that we would prefer that our democratically elected government protect our consumer rights through regulations that bind all corporates to behave themselves.

[tshaddox]

Well, okay, it may be the case that our democracy is so crippled that it can’t protect basic consumer rights. But even so, what are we supposed to do? Quit our jobs, abandon our livelihoods, and take to the streets until our government decides we’re too much trouble and hands over power to a more consumer-friendly replacement government? Or just continue to want to use subscriptions through Apple where possible?

[rglullis]

This is a false dichotomy that both pro-government and pro-corporate people fall into. Whether Apple or "Our Government", we shouldn't be giving this much power to institutions.

> But even so, what are we supposed to do?

Vote with your wallet. Stop consuming whatever it is that comes with attached strings. Stop putting convenience above principles. Refuse to pay/subscribe/accept any terms that are clearly not in your best interest.

You don't need Big Government to do that. You don't even need to be part of a mobilized group. It's in your hands and every individual can choose for themselves. Let's take responsibility for our own actions and stop using the vices/failings of others to excuse ourselves to do the same.

[Hokusai]

> You don't need Big Government to do that.

Regulations are there tools that citizens have to reign in corporate behavior. 'Big government' is just a catch name for many anti regulation lobbying entities to remove power from citizens and acumulats it on corporations.

> Vote with your wallet.

Yes. And also vote with your ballots, one person one vote triumphs one dollar one vote if you want freedom.

[dimitrios1]

> 'Big government' is just a catch name for many anti regulation lobbying entities to remove power from citizens and acumulats it on corporations.

This is completely reductionist, and completely uninformed.

Banks, as an easy counter example to your worldview, don't have armies of third party regulators, corporate compliance staff, and auditors because they hate regulation. They love big government. It acts as a barrier to entry for them, because they already have the 10,000 person department ready to modify procedures and legal documents to comply with the next set of regulations while the little banks drown. Regulators frequently dine with top bank executives, but I can assure you they aren't dining with the citizenry or your local regional bank.

Every amount of extra regulation just increases tyranny. It makes the American dream more untenable. I want people to succeed and not rely on giant mega corporations for their well being and wealth generation. You can rightly claim that I'm an anti-regulation lobbying entity in this regard, if you wish.

[mrandish]

+1 for paying attention in Econ 101 (and posting a POV that's probably more controversial these days than it should be).

[webmobdev]

Strong banking regulations is necessary to ensure that people trust the banks, and the banks don't misuse the fund you deposit with them. The collapse of some banks in US and India due to lax oversight, greed and corruption, in the last 2 decades is strong proof of this.

[rglullis]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25330764

[the_other]

"Stop consuming... " isn't enough. You also have to do some of the work needed for the other side of "vote with your wallet". "Vote" for the system/product/method you wish to see. This might include building it yourself, using crowdfunding/micropayments for journalists/politicians/artists you trust/follow.

[rglullis]

Agreed. "Vote with your wallet" does not exclude the idea of being an investor or sponsor of better alternatives.

[jerf]

I would also add that nobody saying "vote with your wallet" necessarily means it to be the only action you take.

It's more a bare minimum. If you're inclined to moan about how awful something is, but you're still paying $5/month for it, it kinda bounds how awful it must be in practice. If it's that bad, stop paying them, as a bare minimum, not as an exclusive remedy.

(Exceptions for monopolies like local internet or other situation where there are considerations strongly forcing you into a particular contract. Some exception for oligarchic situations where everyone has the bad terms... but only some. If it didn't even exist 20 years ago, you don't "need" it.)

[AlexandrB]

> Vote with your wallet. Stop consuming whatever it is that comes with attached strings.

This is... impossible. Ignoring the amount of time I would sink into researching every eventuality for a given service (how do you find out what the unsubscribe flow is for a site before you subscribe to it?). Some "services" have their hooks in just about everything. Good luck avoiding the likes of Google Analytics or ReCaptcha if you want to use the internet.

[shrimp_emoji]

>Good luck avoiding the likes of Google Analytics or ReCaptcha if you want to use the internet.

I avoid Google Analytics all the time. It's called NoScript. c: It actually has no effect on site functionality, either.

ReCaptcha's a different story though. :c

[rglullis]

This is quite a strawman.

It might be "impossible" to do everything at once, but there is nothing stopping you from taking steps in that direction, and the more people taking those steps with you the stronger the market forces will force the companies to provide the things that you do want.

Not signing up to the NYT is a choice. Not buying from Apple and all their locked down systems is a choice. Not signing up for any subscription service that has DRM is a choice. Having an ad-blocker to fight surveillance capitalism is a choice. Adopting and promoting alternatives to every "free" offering from Google is a choice, even if they are of inferior quality. Putting your money where your mouth is and supporting the development of better alternatives for whatever comes from FAANG is also a choice. If you are doing all of that, then maybe you will be entitled to complain. But I am sure you have a lot of veggies to eat before that.

[varispeed]

You stand no chance against multi billion big corporation that can own you. It's the level of influence needed that only government can attain. The trouble is our corruption laws are so weak, you can just call it lobbying and be on your way to money town. It must be a combination of voting with your wallet and making your local politicians aware of the issues you are facing. More people put pressure the more will get done. You know if people are not doing anything, then in their mind problem is not serious.

[webmobdev]

> we shouldn't be giving this much power to institutions.

In a democracy, the government derives power from us, the people. In a good and functioning democracy there exists other democratic institutions to ensure that the government cannot abuse the powers granted to them.

"Vote with your wallet" is a disingenuous argument were all the corporates work together like a cartel towards a particular business model that maximises profit for them to the detriment of us consumers. Regulations that bind all business to certain rules and standard also benefit the businesses as it creates a level playing field for them too. (But obviously large corporates at the top don't want a level playing field).

[int_19h]

> In a good and functioning democracy there exists other democratic institutions to ensure that the government cannot abuse the powers granted to them.

This is kinda recursive - a "good and functioning" democracy is the one in which such institutions exist, so one where they don't is not a "good" one - but they are no less real for that. Worse yet, a "good" one can turn into other kinds - and the more centralized its governance, the more powerful it is, the faster that can happen.

[rglullis]

> In a good and functioning democracy (...) institutions to ensure that the government cannot abuse the powers granted to them.

This is the idealistic view. In the real world we have people in power, with their own personal interests, with institutions that are ever more distant from the people and with ever less consequences to face when they do wrong.

The one exception is perhaps Switzerland, and this would be more due to how local governments and cantons prevail over national leaders. The institutions are small and limited in reach. Aside from them, every model (US, the EU, China, Russian) relies on over-centralization and ever-expanding reach of the institutions and the consequential subversion of said institutions to the favor of interest groups.

So, unless you are Swiss I really don't have any reason to believe you actually have any power over the government, and I really don't believe you should be defending to give them even more power and attributions.

> maximises profit to the detriment of consumers

Last I checked, no one forced me to buy anything from Apple. I don't think closed systems are beneficial for me, so I don't buy them. No one forced me to buy anything from Google, either. No one forced me to buy a car or to live in an expensive metro area or even check any trendy bar with overpriced drinks. No one forced me to buy home appliances that can I not repair.

"Well, where I live there is only one internet provider, so I am forced to use it". No, you are not. It's just that the inconvenience of not having internet at home outweighs your willingness to get your community and put together an alternative. Also, more likely than not, the reason that there is no alternative is due to REGULATIONS that lobbyists from big telco managed to pass so that they have an advantage.

To truly believe that "regulations creates a level-playing field" is beyond naive. It's borderline harmful to you and for society at large.

[webmobdev]

> This is the idealistic view.

You work with the reality you live in, but you do strive for idealism. If you don't, you stagnate as the society rots.

The reality today is that in some democracies the balance of power has shifted from the people to the corporates. And that's unacceptable. Thinking that this is what's the best achievable in your democracy is just nihilistic and pessimistic attitude. Sitting silent is not an option. Regulation is one of the tools through which the government restores the balance between the corporates and the people. And it is possible to strike the right balance between the greed of the corporates and the need of the people.

[int_19h]

Switzerland is a country that banned minarets nation-wide in a federal referendum. It's all very democratic, but still an abuse of power.

[webmobdev]

> But even so, what are we supposed to do? Quit our jobs, abandon our livelihoods, and take to the streets

If necessary yes. Your forefathers fought hard to earn you your democratic and associated rights that you have all taken for granted. And that's why its slow erosion has only now made you start to feel a bit uncomfortable. So yes, you too need to start asserting for your rights.

And no, to begin with you don't need to quit your job and take to the streets.

Start by writing letters to the political parties of your country. Start by making your local politicians aware that you feel the government isn't concerned about your rights as a consumer. Escalate and urge others in your network to do the same. And move on from there. Democracy is designed to slow down political changes because abrupt political changes also has a lot of chaos. Initially you will only have to spend maybe an hour or two a week to do the above. As more and more people support you, and you all work together, this may increase to 5-10 hours a week depending on how much you are willing to commit yourself. Once a political party latches on to your issue, it then becomes a lot easier - join it or offer issue-based support to them. (Yes, often it is all quite boring and just takes patience and dedication. That's democracy - it is often boring participating in it, but still worth it).

[microtonal]

I don't know, perhaps vote for politicians that do have your rights and not corporation's rights at heart? Convince people that protecting their rights and livelihoods is not socialism or unamerican? I know that this is difficult in the US, both because there is so little choice in elections and it is difficult to convince other people to vote differently.

But you can be sure that if everyone puts all their eggs in Apple's (or more generally FAANG's) basket, their only interest is and will be their corporate profit, not your or content creators' rights.

[Siira]

“Voting” for pre-selected candidates in rigged elections without a way to hold the elected accountable to their promises, basically means the citizens have zero means but strikes/violent protests. (This is true in most non-Western “democracies”.)

[ummonk]

Dude you're responding to someone in Belarus. Americans voting for nonsocialist candidates is not the issue there.

[microtonal]

Wait what? Googling the user name that I am replying to leads to:

https://github.com/baddox

San Francisco, CA

[ummonk]

Sorry my bad you're correct.

[d1amonds]

> But even so, what are we supposed to do?

You are to ask precicely this question and think up variations of it.

I was just pondering how easy we dedicate our lives to a thing in contrast with how unpopular dying for it is. It doesn't seem both can be right at the same time?

[Closi]

How about just enforce a standard which all companies have to follow through legislation?

(See: Open Banking)

[rglullis]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

[Closi]

"We shouldn't do something, because someone might use it as an opportunity to make it worse"

Great.

[rglullis]

More like "we should only try to implement large-scale systems after we test a smaller-scale of it and that we are sure that no side-effect is worse than the problems we are trying to solve in the first place"

[gigatexal]

Not to speak for the op but for me it’s not that I’m lacking choice it’s that I want to use the first party solution because it works better. For me, it’s like a programming language with one canonical way to do something. It makes things so much easier. Easier to read. Easier to reason about. I just use the Apple version for things because 9/10 times it works flawlessly.

[jevgeni]

First of all, as a European, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Try cancelling your mobile contract in Germany early.

Secondly, I might want to buy/subscribe to things that come from companies outside of EU.

[mrweasel]

I thought it was an EU regulation, but perhaps not. In Denmark you can't bind customers to a mobile contract for more than six month. You can sell them a phone and have them pay that off for 24 months, but that different, you can pay that off at anytime, for a fee.

That's also why you're not getting a new phone from your carrier every two years like most Americans seems to do.

[selectodude]

Phone subsidies have completely disappeared in the United States. Phone companies will finance your phone over 24-30 months but you can cancel the contract (and the interest free financing) at any time.

[ghaff]

It's sort of interesting that, if you had told people 5+ years ago that phone subsidies were going away, a lot of them would have predicted a lot of doom and gloom for Apple and other smartphone makers. In fact, I bet if you looked around, you could probably find articles and reports to that effect.

[pjmlp]

Depends if you are willing to have some support from Verbraucherschutzzentrale or not.

I can tell you that my almost impossible to resign contract from Vodafone got quickly sorted out with their help.

[pdimitar]

Most people aren't aware of these extra entities that can help protect their interests. So to them the system has failed and I can see their point.

Navigating your rights as a citizen and/or consumer shouldn't be a thing. It should be an automatic action.

[pjmlp]

That I fully agree, most aren't even aware of their work rights, having had a quite good works council on my first employer really opened my eyes to care about the German legal system.

[rglullis]

Still, it's not some universal right given by the wonderful democratic utopia that GP claims to live on, is it?

[pjmlp]

Last time I checked everyone is free to ask for their help.

Now if we are discussing that their support should be gratis, ok that is another matter.

[rglullis]

The point is that - if we were to take seriously the claim that consumer rights are well protected by the governments outside of the US - their help shouldn't even be needed.

My feeling living in Germany is that consumer protection rights goes as far as the "right" for some bureaucrat to keep their job. It's a constant feeling they create the problem so that they can sell the solution and get people to be oh-so-thankful for it.

[logifail]

> Try cancelling your mobile contract in Germany early

Don't many operators offer mobile phone contracts that are effectively a subsidy for the low up-front cost of the device[0] ?

"Apple iPhone 12 for £49.99 upfront cost" plus you pay the rest of the cost of the phone over the life of the contract.

[0] https://www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobiles/pay-monthly.html

[cannabis_sam]

Democracy is crippled by corporate power and economic ideology, there’s no belief involved (except on the part of the economists).

[rglullis]

This idea is one of my favorite tells to find out the level of alienation of people regarding their own governments.

The top 10 conglomerates from South Korea amount to more than half their GDP. This level of centralization alone should tell you how the regulations are enacted to protect the corporations, not the people.

If Germany (and more generally Brussels) was actually serious about environmental regulations, VW and all the German car makers would be exterminated after Dieselgate. Instead they got one or two scapegoats for VW (and no, the CEO being ousted and still receiving a generous retirement package does not count) and made it clear that the regulations are there just to give the people the illusion of control.

"For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law" -- this is what your democratically elected government is giving you.

[sveme]

why do the workers of VW have to pay with a loss of their jobs for the wrongdoings of their managers? Several of those responsible have already spent time in prison, others will follow.

[hengheng]

Companies with rotten culture are ripe for their own kind of disruption. Above a certain level of decadence, it is more promising to build a parallel company on the other side of the street rather than trying to remove the rotten apples. Countless examples in history. One of the few ways to keep a megacorp alive at this stage is government subsidies, corruption or contracts, with the goal of exploiting its scale advantages.

[rglullis]

Because it wasn't just the manager, but also the engineers that implemented the fraudulent system and the people doing QC that turned a blind eye and did not speak up.

The manager is the one with most skin in the game and should go to jail, does not mean that anyone else is free from fault. By working for a company that kept an unfair advantage they also benefited from the fraud, they should also face some of the consequences.

[WanderPanda]

Yep, otherwise the feedback loop does not work. It works best if people at every stage question if their company is doing something wrong instead of selecting some high income people to blame and take all the liability. After all every worker should be incentivised to have skin in the game through stock compensation

[Hokusai]

> I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store

What about defining a standard subscription protocol that allows any company to offer subscription management, and allow consumers to change their subscription manager if they are not happy?

Putting all your eggs in one nest because you currently like it is a very risky gamble.

Banking has worked with standards for decades that allow interoperability and competition.

> But to be honest at the end of the day it can't be Apple's problem.

That's why the trust in one company should be very limited. As a non USA consumer, I will prefer some one else managing my data.

[chaostheory]

You have a point, but that standard protocol doesn’t exist yet to even be implemented. Even then, is it a strict standard that everyone will follow to a T, or is it one where every company will have their own special interpretation?

Unfortunately, people need something that works right now.

[Closi]

It has to start at some point!

See Open Banking, that's taken many years to implement but we are starting to reap the rewards.

[corobo]

What are the rewards with open banking? I'm not opposed to it by any means but so far all I've seen is my Monzo account showing my Nationwide balance

Is there a "ahhhh this is what it's for" moment out there yet?

[Gravityloss]

I understand similar fragmentation exists in payments for electric car charging. You need lots of cards, accounts, qr codes, sms and calls. This makes all the technological progress with billions poured into it not very useful, if you can't trust that you can charge on a road trip.

Someone could make a single app that would handle all that for you.

[zamalek]

It's called Plugshare and it works with most networks, and probably only works on Android (due to Apple's payment restrictions).

[theshrike79]

YMMV.

I can't pay on any of the charging points I use, not on iOS or Android.

Even if I could, it'd most likely use the roaming price of $FUCKTON, so no thanks.

[zamalek]

Yeah, I typically use Electrify America (range anxiety has been replaced by "is the charger broken anxiety" and EA is hella reliable), and they don't support Plugshare. Apparently they are working on account identification through the charging cable, if that catches on this mess could really be a thing of the past. I'm going off-topic, though.

[joosters]

...and now we have one more incompatible standard (insert obligatory XKCD link here)

[pfranz]

A similar thing happened to me years ago. I was a monthly contributor to This American Life. I switched credit cards and wanted to update my payment, but they had changed their website or something and there was, as far as I could tell, no way to change or cancel or any "account" page or "login" system. I couldn't even find support or a phone number. I think I sent email to a generic account and waited a week. After not hearing back I canceled the credit card.

I tried to stick to PayPal to manage subscriptions for a few years since it was centralized and I could change payments or cancel. Patreon seems to have taken over a lot of this--but it's even more niche.

> Big hope that fin tech will blow it up, but unfortunately start ups didn't deliver.

I just can't imagine the ROI needed to satisfy VC funding...especially without it becoming shady or predatory itself. Or, like you said, the regulations involved for a self-funded startup. I think the other aspect is that big companies aren't motivated to play ball. Yodlee is probably the biggest player and has had spottier integration as companies have added 2fa and other security measures. Very few have gone as far as adding tokens to support 3rd parties like Yodlee.

> Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there

I suspect if something does happen (I'm not particularly confident) it will be a spinoff from a bank like how Allstate and Discover Card were spinoffs of Sears or Kingsford Charcoal from Ford Motor. Do companies do this anymore?

[Razengan]

> I want ALL my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay and App store.

This.

I just got screwed out of money by Couchsurfing when they started throwing a full-screen extortion prompt that prevents you from using the app or website at all so you can’t even delete your account until you cough up the dough.

They are using their own payment processing system. If they used the standard In-App Purchases, Apple could have given me a refund on the spot and hopefully booted them off the store for this bait and switch tactic.

Apple has always refunded me without question and I am willing to bet that most complaints about the App Store are from those entities that Apple protects users from.

[qz2]

Spot on. Managing subscriptions is a shit show generally. Doing it in one place is the right thing for the end user.

[pmontra]

I agree but I don't want that place to be tightly tied with the maker of my phone. I want to be able to change phone and not loose anything. Phones are commodities to me. Who makes them is as important as the brand of gas I put in my car. Browser, mail client, WhatsApp, camera, maps, banking apps are about all I need. The subscription management service should be a third party.

[oblio]

It should actually be a banking service and it should be portable between banks. There should be a banking standard for this.

[pmontra]

Some of them are portable between banks, at least where I live (Italy). Anything I authorize to be paid for automatically (usually periodically) from my bank account can be ported to another bank (utilities, etc.). I give the authorization to the new bank and they do the work because it's in their best interest. I expect this to work in most of the EU and/or the SEPA area because the regulations and the tools are the same.

Handling periodical billings on my credit cards is probably a pain, I'd have to go through all those services and update them. It would be nice if VISA or MasterCard would do that for me. Luckily all those services send me mail when my credit card expires and I get the new one.

[qz2]

This is an excellent point and perhaps the right answer.

Most of these problems exist because the one place we trust to manage our resources never pivoted on these things. In fact most banks are barely crawling out of the dark ages.

[bilbo0s]

But you can have a third party if you want. (Though my personal preference would be NO party. I want total control over it myself with zero privacy leaks. But that likely won't happen.) In any case, the point is that you could buy something other than an Apple phone if that's important to you. I mean why buy a horridly overpriced phone that can't do what you want it to do? I wouldn't buy a Ferrari to haul farming implements around the back roads of Wisconsin.

[theshrike79]

Paypal can be used as a third party, but they're not a bank so it comes with risks.

The other option is to use a different virtual credit card for each subscription and just cancel the number when needed.

[tommilukkarinen]

Right, this is the network effect behind it. There is never before experienced convenience as you buy your apps, movies, books and songs from one place, which is in your pocket. Then there's the other store for all tangible things (Amazon). The list goes on, MS for business apps, Facebook for social media. Google for information?

[__jf__]

The NYT experience is indeed the fastest way for a company to lose trust. It took me 3 tries to cancel. First rep said: yep cancelled all done. Except it wasnt: renewed at a discount. The 2nd rep: said sorry sorry and produced a chat transcript where I supposedly said thanks for the new discount, k thx bye (I didn’t). Said it was cancelled now. Surprise: it wasnt. Third rep got it done. For real this time. Still disappointed at how this played out.

[m-p-3]

Personally I don't want all my subscriptions to go through Apple Pay, I want a system that all banks supports where I can manage my recurring payments/subscriptions, in which I can generate virtual, revocable credit cards to which I can set custom limits and track my expenses.

I can do it for my emails, why not for my payment systems?

[mrweasel]

Not exactly what you're looking for, but I talked to a developer of a solution that integrates with online banking and recognizes subscriptions and allow you to cancel them directly from your online banking thingy.

Only downside is that it's the banks that has to do the integration. I can't really figure out how they deal with the actual unsubscribing bit. The subscriptions people are most likely to want to cancel has to be those who with the worst unsubscribe process.

[simonh]

Indeed, I'm fed up with people criticising Apple because it refuses to instruct it's employees to criminalise themselves. Nobody expects any other companies to do this. It's bizzare to me how distorted a moral framework can be that people blame a company for obeying bad laws, as if breaking laws and criminalising employees was an acceptable and moral way to run a business.

Sure a company can fight governments in court, if that option is available, but if it isn't or if that approach runs out, that's the end of the line. At the end of the day it's the governments and laws that need to change.

[vetinari]

> people criticising Apple because it refuses to instruct it's employees to criminalise themselves.

That's not what they criticize.

They criticize Apple because Apple positioned itself to be the sole actor capable of enforcing such a bad laws. That they do it, surprised nobody.

In this case, if they were not capable of destroying Telegram on iOS platform, their request would have no teeth and even the governments would not ask Apple to do it in the first place.

[simonh]

This really hasn't got anything to do with App Store exclusivity. They have a business model that's widely used and has been perfectly legal and established for many decades before they adopted it. This happens to make them vulnerable to certain forms of regulatory control. That's a government and regulatory issue, not a business issue.

[brink]

This.

After Belarus, I thought Apple would have learned it's lesson and might loosen it's so-called "security" a bit and allow 3rd party apps/app stores on their phones, but nope; they went full steam ahead into their M1 chips with forced code signing in ARM, demonstrating that they learned nothing.

Apple positioning itself as the sole proprietor of what can and cannot run on their machines will only get worse as censorship becomes normalized.

[totalZero]

> I want to know my credit score.

Several banks and credit cards offer FICO score information. The information is likely there for you, but you may have to accept some data sharing terms and conditions in order to access it.

https://www.chase.com/personal/credit-cards/chase-credit-jou...

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/credit-cards/features-ben...

https://www.wellsfargo.com/goals-credit/smarter-credit/credi...

https://www.bankofamerica.com/credit-cards/free-fico-credit-...

[ignoramous]

> Each bank got their app and added some obvious features there: pay for utilities, for your phone etc. I want more progress here. I want to be able to see all my fees upfront in a clear format. I want to know my credit score. I want to be able to take this credit score to different organizations. etc. etc.

Brace for impact: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ronshevlin/2020/11/30/google-pl...

[Closi]

Most of this we have had in the UK for years (e.g. Monzo).

[yoz-y]

Isn't there some sort of hack with subscriptions in the US where you can change your address to California and they have to offer you an electronic solution for cancelling?

[sjs382]

> Once I subscribed to New York times. The newspaper that was advertised to me for years in all Hollywood movies as a place where honesty and freedom are of highest priority. I had to spend an hour on a phone with their representatives to cancel it refusing to accept discount or a free subscription.

SAME. Somewhere deep in my comment history here, I tell the story of trying to cancel NYT, and needing to do it three times, because I kept getting charged. Ughhhhh.

[lern_too_spel]

I had the same problem and contacted my state representative and my congressperson. This has since been fixed by regulation in California, and by having to follow California's laws, most companies' subscription services have been fixed for everybody.

[sjs382]

How has it been fixed? Are you able to easily cancel online, now?

[lern_too_spel]

Yes.

[kochthesecond]

> At least big tech is quite rich to afford to think about users.

Sadly, this is reality. It is very hard to prioritize in most places living on thin margins.

[gigatexal]

Same. Apple makes killing a subscription super easy.

[scrozart]

Not sure how long ago you cancelled your NYT sub, but it took me 5 minutes yesterday.