Like sepa, this initiative can be forced by law and made open rather than tanken hostage by large cooperates, which may then exclude parts of the market.
Very European approach: the winner is chosen by law. Is Wero really a success? According to this article, in 2024 it processed over €7.5 billion.
Polish BLIK, which is not even mentioned in the article and which has joined the EuroPA Alliance, processed €83 billion in 2024, with a 30% y/y increase in H1 2025. I understand that BLIK is much older, but it invested significant effort and money in marketing and promotions while delivering a good user experience. BLIK is now trying to expand to Romania and Slovakia, yet Wero is getting all the hype on Hacker News. Maybe this is a case of East, South, and West Europe being treated differently. Is the only “European” solution one that comes from Western Europe?
If BLIK is better then it will prevail over Wero. There is no law mandating Wero.
Just looking at the banks that make up each - 16 for Wero and spread over Germany, Belgium, France and the Netherlands versus 6 Polish banks - it feels like the systemic risk is higher with the latter. But time will tell.
Last year BLIK also signed a letter of intent to join the EuroPA which has Italian, Spanish and Portuguese banks involved.
The EU consists of 27 different countries, with substantial practical barriers between their internal markets (even if it's one single market in theory). Often, only EU intervention can overcome those barriers. Otherwise, you end up with national fragmentation.
What people in Europe do very frequently is buying from online shops of another country, either because they do not find the product in a local shop or because of better prices.
What is needed is a card for online shopping that is valid in all Europe.
But it's not the card. Wero isn't doing anything new. It's just yet one more payment method to implement. Adyen, Stripe, Shopify and many other already support different local payment methods.
But authors does imply that sub will also change in place for users in step #1, without the workspace beeing recreated. And as such the sub is not usable as a general identifier for the user resource differentiation.
The sub property appearing to change for the same email address is a valid scenario. SPs failing to respect that scenario because they don't understand it, or because it's not what some of their users want, is not a valid excuse.
To me it is reasonable that orgs may want to eventually reuse an email address on a different user account. That's a feature decision made by the IdP so SPs need to respect it. I believe other IdPs like Okta and Entra have equivalent features too.
> To me it is reasonable that orgs may want to eventually reuse an email address on a different user account. That's a feature decision made by the IdP so SPs need to respect it
I think everyone, including the authors hopefully agrees with that logic and sentiment. And that would be the literal point of the sub claim after all!
But the implication in the article is still, as i read it, that it changes in place in practice, and not in the case of re-creating the user under the same workspace. But i obviously do not have the background to clarify!
So if everyone is responsible for their own actions, why are you including Ukraine in this context? After all this is in isolation Russia committing (yet another) crime.
That analogy seems more in line with the risk of gas leaks and explosions.
The subject here is more that in addition to that, every time you use the pool, you have to gobbel down a bit of posion water. But in addition to that, you depend on using that thing almost daily.
Free cgpt users and low tier API users are downgraded opaquely to lower models when demand is high.
It's irritating because I have over 4000 API chats in a DB that I like to analyze, but I cannot now know for certain which model was actually being used.
Ohh so that explains why I saw `?model=text-davinci-002` appended to my ChatGPT URL the other day. I remember it was pretty slow to load then, too, so that's probably why they rerouted me
> It's sort of like modern art. Maybe you could have done it, but you didn't.
This makes zero sense. Changing a screen in a page is not a technical challenge. It is a Product Management call. Things are the way they are because the product owner sat with one or more UX designer and determined that that's exactly how they want the screen to be and to stay like that for all users. The only input developers have is to get the product vision to become a reality, and bolt a bunch of tests.
>Another way that insider trading can occur is if non-company employees—such as those from government regulators or accounting firms, law firms, or brokerages—gain material nonpublic information from their clients and use that information for their personal gain.
