I got an SMS like this many years ago from Capital One on the same basis, and it said to call a specific number if I had questions... I couldn't find that number anywhere online or on their site. It took forever to find their fraud hotline on the website, too. Different number to the one in the SMS, naturally.
Turned out to be legit, and they were calling about a transaction at a gas station that I had actually been to. But the fact that I had nothing to go on except a text message from an unknown number was super suspicious.
These banks need to realise that there is a difference between customers trusting their brand, and those same customers trusting some random message claiming to represent their brand.
I have a handful of very close friends who are gay, but I've never heard of this bottom-face emoji thing before today.
And I'm a little concerned why not knowing about something that seems like an esoteric piece of fetish-related in-group communication implies that I don't hang out with queer people? Is there an expectation that in order to hang out with people belonging to some group, I need to learn specific lingo regarding that group's sexual power dynamics?
That's comes off as kind of unfair and misplaced, when a person is not of nor participates in activities common to a particular group. We may only see or know of a particular side of a person. We can see people, in certain settings for many years, yet not know various things about them or they don't show aspects or share various details about themselves.
It's one thing to ask or expect others to be open-minded or have empathy for things outside of their regular circles, it's another to presume they must know details about cultures and subcultures they aren't apart of or even condemn them for genuinely not knowing about something or asking.
It's alright to not know about everything, as nobody does, and ask questions as they come up. For those concerned, they can explain the history, details, or their views. It's a normal process of learning.
Trouble is, you can do this once just fine. But it means the next time you want to get investors or sell a company, potential payers will also weigh your past performance. If you say "yeah we have no idea what's going to happen, good luck" and the company tanks after being sold, who would trust that it wasn't your actions at fault?
As much as it sucks for consumers, the self-interested thing to do is sing the praises of your buyer -- because your reputation is at stake otherwise.
They are similar in that they are all job frameworks and you can run background jobs through them. Runly tries to be more prescriptive than Hangfire/Quartz in that jobs should process lists of items. We think this captures a lot of problems that developers deal with everyday. It also allows us to build goodies on top of jobs like multi-threading, retries, scaling, and UI status/progress. Check us out at https://www.runly.io
Progress reporting is something my company's in-house offline processing system has been lacklustre at (we overloaded it with a ton of uses like chained processes, without considering the usability penalty when managing this without an appropriate UI).
Does Runly have some way to set up something like a dependency graph, such as
/--B--\
A---+ +---D
\--C--/
---->time---->
such that it can show you "hey, part B failed and this is blocking part D"?
Turned out to be legit, and they were calling about a transaction at a gas station that I had actually been to. But the fact that I had nothing to go on except a text message from an unknown number was super suspicious.
These banks need to realise that there is a difference between customers trusting their brand, and those same customers trusting some random message claiming to represent their brand.