With checks, you write a check and can write down the check number with a note about what the payment was for. When the payment posts, the check number is part of the transaction. With a card payment, they charge your card and, sometimes days later, there's a pre-authorization with some obscure transaction description. So many scary transaction descriptions that make me think "wait is this fraud".

With this method, the approval flow would also allow people to add a blurb for what the transaction is for.

Not even practically, but that's beside the point. The point is that with regulation E, I am potentially put in a position where I have to work to get my money back; I have to file a lawsuit against the bank if I think their determination is wrong (and that's assuming there isn't an arbitration provision, but many people don't realize they agreed to binding arbitration).

With regulation Z, the bank has to work to get their money back. They have to file the lawsuit against me if they really want the money. And it's $0 liability under many circumstances mandated through the regulation, not just a revocable promise from the bank.

> will

Which is why the credit card is still the better option. Especially given that the max liability on a credit card is always $50 if caught within the first 60 days, while the max liability on a debit card is $50 only if caught within the first two days, then up to $500 if reported after up to 60 days.

They may post a provisional credit when I report the fraud on the debit card or they can wait up to 10 days to do so. With a credit card, no money has left my account and I get the final say on whether I want to part ways with my real money. If the bank really wants to fuck me over by saying it's not fraud, I get to make it as unprofitable as possible for them, which includes forcing them to sue me if they really want the money.

I will take the ding to my credit report and a lawsuit over actual money taken directly out of my account any day.

I'm also not reading pumpkin spice murder mysteries for a similar reason. I'm also not reading stories where everybody clapped. Actually, I'm already familiar with petrichor, so unless someone has surrounded the word "petrichor" with non-cliché prose, I'm also not going to read all that.

What you do is send Google your own correspondence, certified mail, giving them a heads up that you've contacted the attorney general. That usually gets an even quicker response than from a personal lawyer :)

It also gives the attorney general office a heads up if they need to be scrutinizing a company like Google more carefully if they're getting a lot of complaints.

Situations like this are exactly what they're here for.

https://www.naag.org/find-my-ag/

It would likewise earn goodwill from a lot of people.

What new technologies are they excited about?

And maximize how they're fed in the last months of their lives in feedlots.

They were certainly not killing 30 million bison each year.

The only answer here is less meat production, especially feedlot-finished, no matter how people try to twist it.

At the time, they had a real person handling their support. The real person told me this was just a glitch and that my correct address was on file and everything is fine.

That wasn't actually true. A new debit card to replace my expiring one ended up being sent to the old address a couple of months ago.

So I go back to the website to try to edit it one last time. Same problem.

I call them and get their fucking stupid AI slopbot.

Still, I explain the whole situation:

> I'm trying to update my address on the website. When I click the edit link next to the old address, it shows my new address instead. I need to remove the old address.

What did the slopbot decide to say? Oh well, I should go on the website and edit my address of course! I gave it two more chances by trying to explain it a different way and how this didn't work.

Did it accept that and escalate the issue to a human? No. It kept telling me to go to the website.

I had to say

> Hey you fucking bitch, how many times do I have to tell you that doesn't fucking work? Escalate this to a fucking human before I get the attorney general involved.

to finally get a live person to fix it (I actually had to do this twice, the first set of fucks, the slopbot forgot what problem I was having and needed a refresher!). Suffice it to say, I will never trust any large amount of money with this bank again. I'm highly skeptical of any company using AI CS now, because this is one of my many experiences where the slopbot is incapable of recognizing a complex situation outside of its capabilities.

I mean look at this situation: their AI slopbot turned this one mistake into 5 mistakes instead of just allowing it to be one that another human corrects.

It's gotten to the point where whenever I see someone lauding AI customer support, I just assume they have an investment/job that hinges on people liking it and/or their only experiences are using it as a glorified refund button.

Which isn't really a negative to me, but I think people should be honest about what is actually necessary to get the benefits of this form of beef production.

I'm skeptical that they're actually surrounded by American prairie. What are the addresses of some of the data centers you're talking about?

Edit: I just see traditional American landscaping surrounding the CyrusOne data center in Aurora. I don't really see any native forbs or native grasses and it has a bunch of trees... where's the prairie?

The most recent one is detention-unit.com, which probably does trick a lot of the people getting these phishing emails since the targets don't seem to speak English as a first language.

As an aside, an alarming number of server admins don't check SPF so these emails are actually getting into people's inboxes.