billfold suggested a size about half that of a dollar-bill if you
didn’t want it to get creased when you put your wallet in your back pocket and
sat on it. The earliest card provided its trust conveyance through its printed
body. It provided a token that established the financial integrity of the
bearer to the vendor, at least to the extent that local restaurants would let
you charge dinner if you had a card. The card worked in a relatively small
locale where everyone knew everyone or, at least most everyone that needed to
know knew of the card and what it meant.
Of course, where
there’s money there are people that want it, without necessarily deserving it.
Less obvious than the appearance of the first credit card was the appearance of
the first counterfeit credit card. But, it did occur, and thus began the attack
and countermeasures cycle of the use of the card. The early cards migrated from
a generically printed card to one that had a name and perhaps an account number
of some type on it. This initial usage was followed by the desire to employ the
card as a means of commerce beyond the local neighborhood. That required
greater infrastructure: a citywide, statewide, nation-wide and then worldwide
infrastructure. In order to both level the playing field, and make it something
of a trustworthy playing field at that, standards had to be established. This
is the way of technology.
Lest you think
we’re moving rather far a field from our starting point, bear in mind that
standardization in the world of computing infrastructures is something of an
amalgam of Mecca connected to Jerusalem via the Ganges and protected by the fortress of Machu Picchu. It is a nexus of divine guidance within a world of chaos.
Today, one can,
while waiting for a plane at the Austin, Texas airport, pay for lunch with a credit
card. Then, boarding the plane, leave the confines of Austin, fly to Hong Kong, walk into a hotel, and pay for a room
with the same credit card. That’s something of a tour de force of standardization. This was the goal as the earliest
credit cards began their journey through the standards making maze.
First, the size
of the card was fixed; then some of the numbers and words; account numbers, not
just the numbers, but also their internal structure. Who issued them, who stood
behind them and were they accurately represented on the card. Notice that we’re
now getting into the realm of conveying information; and, not just any
information, but information that we, as the card bearer, really do want the
hotel clerk in Hong Kong to believe and accept as payment for our room. So,
more and more information content was affixed onto the surface of the card.
The issuer’s
logo conveyed an idea of who stood behind the financial transactions involved.
In Hong Kong, they don’t know us from Cain and Abel
(to lapse back into the whirlpool of the metaphoric build-up of religious
expression) but they do seem to understand Visa, MasterCard or American
Express. Unfortunately, the people that all this information needed to be
conveyed to, the people that really needed to trust it, are the short-order
cook at the Austin airport and the night-clerk at the hotel
in Hong Kong. Today, a listing of all of the
identity-type cards issued by trust
authorities in the United States alone comes to about one hundred
small-print pages. A listing to include all the passport documents in the
world, with details of how to tell that each one is valid, adds two or three
hundred more pages. If one is really going to trust a card presented by a
stranger, then one needs to be able to apply the rules of authentication for
the specific card. This is a very complex transaction to be performed and we’re
still just at the point of wanting to understand and believe the information on
the face of the card. The world we’ve evolved into in just a half-century is
already too complex for the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security,
let alone the hotel night-clerk to individually apply all the necessary rules;
and rest assured, to show understanding, we could just as correctly reverse the
order of that comparison.
|