I understand the evils of banking but back then the whole PIN deal was a step forth not backwards

While I agree with everything else you’ve said, I dont quite agree with this.

A 4 digit PIN is reasonable secure as numbers go. It is, however, easier to shoulder-surf a persons PIN than it is to accurately copy their signature. The problem with signatures was the lack of staff training (and minimum wage) making sure that most till assistants either didn’t know how, or couldn’t be bothered, to properly verify the signature. There are 10,000 combinations of number to use as a PIN compared to an infinite variety of signatures.

What I don’t understand is why do we still see cards when key fobs are incredibly superior?

For on-line transactions there are many better strategies, all of them very easy to imagine and set up.

One-time password lists.
Single recipient password lists, where once someone uses that password nobody else can.
Passwords should necessarily be machine generated and good.

It’s not that hard, it almost makes me think that banks benefit from card frauds somehow. The banks should hire military cryptographers from the cold war era, I’m sure anyone of them can come up with system a million times more secure and cheaper that doesn’t require the use of a crystal ball.

Conversely, there has been a huge upsurge in shop-run machines, which normally charge in the region of £1.50 – £2.00 per transaction. These are often found in petrol stations, or similar shops, where the shop owner wants to make some profit from the machine.

The problem is banks seem to think of these machines as being a substitute for a bank branch. For example, where I live it is not possible to get to a free cashpoint without a car. Its ok for me – I can drive and afford to run a car. Everyone else is taxed for accessing their own money.