[drnick1]

> we don’t want to have to force smartphone choices but the number of users without one these devices is so vanishingly small

You are missing the point. The issue is that once the "vanishingly small" number of alternatives disappears, users will be completely trapped, and Google and Apple will then free to abuse that position of power (they already do). Worse, since power is centralized, it is very easy for government interference to take place, and we already see that with things such as identity and age verification requirements. It is the possibility of competition that matters more than actual competition.

[cyberpunk]

Aren’t your problems solved by carrying a bit of plastic issues by your bank? Why isn’t that enough?

[drnick1]

This "digital wallet" is precisely touted as an alternative to carrying plastic.

[lyu07282]

We really should try to understand your mentality, if only to understand why after 27 years the EU still doesn't have a PayPal alternative.

[joris]

Because we don’t need it. The US banking system for example is fairly archaic. Where I live, paper checks went extinct about 30 years ago. Now with SEPA, bank transfers are cheap (cents), fast (seconds) and easy (IBAN). If our banking system would not be as convenient, I’m pretty sure something like PayPal would have been very popular.

[lyu07282]

So is it really just that simple? A lack of understanding what Paypal even is?

[hulitu]

> A lack of understanding what Paypal even is?

Your account is from 2021. There were a lot of "Paypal locked my account and all my money is in there" stories at least 10 years before that year.

So YMMV.

[hulitu]

Oh, you will underestand. When, besides your bank, half of the planet will know about your shopping habits.

The device called "Smartphone" is only used to collect every possible detail about your life. The smart thing on a "Smartphone" is that, besides your bank, a lot of other "vendors" have access (not only) to your financial information.