Bugs happen man. Software and technology is not perfect. Sometimes it requires human intervention like customer support. I understand. It’s frustrating that they have business hours. But would you rather deal with some random dude who can’t actually do anything for you because they’re so limited? Cuz that’s what a lot of 24-hour customer service lines are. It Is just some person who is just there to placate you and escalate your problem to someone who can actually do something about it. Or would you rather just wait? I mean you actually said

I guess it’ll work after a while.

Which seems pretty obvious Indication that you don’t have a problem waiting to resolve this even though you want it resolved now.

I mean yeah I guess a bug is clearly mildly infuriating. But it’s also a bug. And the way your title is phrased, it’s like PayPal is intentionally preventing you from removing your card. Which it doesn’t seem to be pointing to here. Like I could imagine if they don’t want to let you have no cards on your account without completely closing the account. But the message would say something like that. Like "you’re required to have at least one valid card on your account. " The message isn’t just going to say something like “please try again later” unless its a bug. That’s just telling you that a bug happened and you may need to contact customer support to resolve it.

Don’t worry bout it bud. Some ppl know what they wanna do and some ppl gotta find it. You’ll find it eventually.

Beans are legumes. Nutritionally they could be seen as a vegetable due to the way we view vegetables but that doesn’t mean they are a vegetable. Still a legume.

Ashton Kutcher wants to prevent and stop human trafficking so much so he mostly retired from acting to make a bigger impact against it. Yet he is okay with a rapist cause it’s his “friend”. Talk about a fuckin hypocrite. More proof that the famous and wealthy live by a different standard. No matter how good they seem.

What gives me real power is sudo.

The card system would probably be best where just buy a card and load it up at a kiosk. There would still be potential security vulnerabilities if you were allow someone to "anonymously "view that transaction. Or allow someone to view the card trips. Which would just be logged with its number.

And I’m just more so talking about the current system they have in place. I’m not sure what else they could do utilizing their current system except for forcing some kind of account

I mean sure they could probably display less information when you punch in that card number. But the biggest sticking point for this is I don’t see how they could create a secure system without forcing you to create an account? Which personally I think would be ridiculous.

The article and quiz talk specifically about these types of vectors for scams. If i assume they are all scams there is a zero % chance i get scanned in this way. Even on the two not a scams they talked about better alternatives to ensure their authenticity which i would have done as soon as i saw any of these “scams” its just a poorly written article that just assumes any wrong answers mean you are more likely to be scammed. I understand there is no way to 100% avoid being scams especially if you just out in the world but the answer from the article is dumb.

Edit: also the censored info made it impossible to tell if it was real.

That doesn’t make sense. Don’t trust Washington post either? Got it.

This quiz is dumb af. The two that weren’t scams didn’t give you enough info to identify if they aren’t and they both just as likely to be scams? And at the end they said it was still possible for me to get scammed even though I called every single item a scam. How am i gonna get scammed if i assume they are all scams?

The difference is these days are negligible. And Firefox is even beaten Chrome in a few tests