Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile Bet Big On Mobile Payments

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the happily-looking-for-ways-to-make-us-spend-money dept.

AT&T 88

An anonymous reader writes "Bloomberg reports that AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile USA will be dumping over $100 million into developing their mobile payment system, Isis, in an effort to battle back against Google Wallet. 'Isis aims to get ahead of its rivals by relying on its carrier partners' existing distribution network and customer relationships. Phones set up for Isis service are expected to be available at carrier stores in the trial cities. ... The carriers could potentially preinstall Isis software onto their phones, making it easier to use. They also may push handset manufacturers to adopt Isis software.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I wonder if Apple will get a cut (-1, Troll)

BetaDays (2355424) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241792)

I wonder if Apple will get the usual 30% cut of anything that gets sold with the help of an iPhone.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241816)

Lame

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243254)

No.

But forget about technology making things cheaper for the consumer. Technology is now simply a way to streamline the ability of peripheral entities to extract new rents, while lowering the actual "service" they "provide".

The payment of a transaction USED to be between you, the payee, and a penny-slice for the bank.

If the service-providers are salivating enough to "Bet Big"? You will take a haircut.

With an Internet like this? Give me back USENET and a 14.4K modem. It really was that much better a way to live.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241824)

I wonder if you have a boner-nose.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (2, Insightful)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242014)

Maybe not a 30% cut, but if they develop their own system you can bet there will be some sort of cut...

Too bad all these mobile payment services can't standardize on a multi-connection protocol for their transactions. You have some using QR codes, some using NFC, some using Bluetooth and some going through the Internet, all in their own little walled garden. What a sad clusterfuck this is going to be.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242588)

Last I heard, Apple said they were planning on coming out with their own proprietary payment system. Perhaps this is why the rush to implement something by the telcos as well.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242834)

The last I heard Apple said that they are not being developing an NFC system. Of course, rampant speculation is always rife with Apple products like as soon as the iPad2 was launched, there were rumors that the iPad 3 would launch in the end of summer /early fall. Now that this time has passed I'm sure someone will attribute Apple's failure to launch it due to Steve Job's departure. Those people are ignoring that Apple's iDevices have a refresh cycle of at least a year and that Apple almost never announces a product until it is almost immediately ready for sale.

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243438)

As long as there is an option

I really do NOT want any form of payment to be available on my phone handset.

I'm trying to do less by credit, and more by cash these days.

I don't want another potential theft place either (my phone). It does plenty now...phone, txt, camera, games....but I prefer to keep my finances in my wallet. I rarely run the risk of pulling my wallet out and leaving it mistakenly on a counter somewhere....

Re:I wonder if Apple will get a cut (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244942)

They'll get a "cut" by not allowing it on any of their hardware in lieu of their own.

Figures (4, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241820)

I guess I shouldn't be surprised to see that the carriers are going to be sticking their dicks into this one. I wonder what surcharges and fees will be associated with this. I also wonder what handset and device restrictions will be imposed as a result of this.

Re:Figures (1)

vlueboy (1799360) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242154)

Back when the airline industry's faced a similar rite of passage (at the dawn of online-transaction awareness in early 2000) we WON and distributors lost economically. Commissions used to encourage individual travel agents to sell tickets, and people had to physically show up at a local agency to get accurate quotes and close an airplane ticket sale.

But that reseller industry was crushed and the mom-and-pop travel agencies all over the US either closed down, or became cellphone stores, or some tax-prep / cybercafes / pc-repair and limited-benefit airline resaler. This happened because airlines made consumers realize that ordering via their newly awakening internet PCs that involved no commissions and third parties resulted in noticeable discounts to them as travellers. The cultural result is that you now hear the then-unprecedented freedom for people from third world countries to be printing their own boarding passes and checking reservation status online.

It's eye-opening that although airlines price-gouge so much, they have nowhere near the power to milk us in the way we're mistreated by the telco-ISP monster that the USA allowed to mature this past twenty years. I once had to put a cramming block because some random guy told his ISP to charge his Vonage-like IP phone system to our number every month, with nothing more than a WHAM charge happening to us every month. The phone company reverses charges but doesn't care to initiate any fraud investigation, and giving us just an fake AOL e-mail address is useless.

Re:Figures (1)

PTBarnum (233319) | more than 3 years ago | (#37248034)

Ah yes. I remember the bad old days when an actual human agent was digging through databases on my behalf. Obviously it is much better to dig around in a bunch of databases myself. If nothing else, my old travel agent never figured out how to play advertisements over the phone when I was talking with her, so I'm sure I missed out on many exciting opportunities to discover new things I needed to buy.

FWIW, my transactions were almost always by phone and US mail, with no visit to an office necessary.

Egyptian God ISIS (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242690)

Isis is said to listen to the prayers of the wealthy power brokers, while acting like a friend to the working people and poor. Sounds like a very apropos name.

Re:Figures (1)

wintercolby (1117427) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243660)

At first it will be "UNLIMITED TRANSACTIONS" that are included with your plan. As it starts to take off, your next contract will have a 25 cent per transaction fee, but you'll be able to buy blocks of transactions at $5/300, $10/700, $20/unlimited. There will be a disclaimer at the bottom of your bill that although you may have transactions remaining does not guarantee that you will have funds available.

Of course I'm just making this up.

Re:Figures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37244614)

Doesn't much matter to me... Either way I won't be using it. I can't trust Verizon or AT&T to bill me correctly just for my phone, I won't be letting them anywhere near the rest of my purchases.

Two words: Bitcoin (2, Funny)

DriedClexler (814907) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241846)

Please don't laugh, but that is one hope for being able to cut down on transaction fees, lower the barriers to starting escrow services, and get rid of unnecessary middlemen.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241952)

hahahahaha.

no, seriously. hahahaha.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (2, Insightful)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242158)

Dream on.
No, seriously. Dream on, and stop trying to convince the world how great B**coin is. It's not and we're tired of hearing about.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37243010)

Really? Please explain what's not great about it for the rest of us. I tend to agree with the OP, even though I'm a latecomer to Bitcoin. I think it's absolutely brilliant.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37303634)

It's simple, really. Bitcoin currency represents nothing of intrinsic value, or more precisely, represents only something of constantly decreasing value (processing "work"). Add to that the esoteric nature of that "value" and it is abundantly clear that such a currency is unsuitable as "coin of the realm". Dream on.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243844)

I think he highlights the important part - not bitcoin specific, but that alternate payment methods are going to be needed because this stuff done by the carriers is just retarded.

What solution exists? Nothing great at the moment.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242216)

I'm trying not to laugh but it's starting to hurt.

Like that high school friend I had that made a hilarious joke about breast cancer, for months I had to work hard to hold it every time somebody brought up breast cancer...damn him...

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242324)

Please don't laugh, but that is one hope for being able to cut down on transaction fees, lower the barriers to starting escrow services, and get rid of unnecessary middlemen.

Hahahahahaha.....

Oh, sorry...

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (2)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242754)

Oh Bitcoin Kenobi, you are my only hope.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

davidbrit2 (775091) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243050)

Hang on, is "guffaw" a subset of "laugh"? Need an answer soonish so I can determine my options.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37243720)

Hahahahahaha. Congratulations, you're a retard.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244982)

Please don't laugh

That does seem to be the strategy driving bitcoin. You hear about it one time: you laugh hysterically. You hear about it more, you stop laughing and start pointing out what's wrong with it. You hear about it even more and you just ignore it, and then hopefully the rubes will invest in it, and the people pushing it can cash out right before the thing collapses.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (3, Insightful)

Dagger2 (1177377) | more than 3 years ago | (#37245890)

and then hopefully the rubes will invest in it, and the people pushing it can cash out right before the thing collapses.

And this is where the entire of Slashdot fails.

Bitcoin is not something to "invest" in. It's a payment system. You use it to get money from A to B, without the involvement of such trusted middle-men as Paypal [wikimedia.org] .

When you say "collapses", I presume you refer to the exchange rate between BTC and USD. This is completely irrelevant to anybody using it as a payment system. All it means is that, in order to send $10 to someone, you'll have to send 100 BTC instead of 1 BTC. The actual number of BTC involved is utterly unimportant.

Yes, I realize that a lot of people are speculating on the value of Bitcoins. Ignore them; they're irrelevant to Bitcoin's use as a payment system.

Re:Two words: Bitcoin (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#37246032)

When you say "collapses", I presume you refer to the exchange rate between BTC and USD. This is completely irrelevant to anybody using it as a payment system. All it means is that, in order to send $10 to someone, you'll have to send 100 BTC instead of 1 BTC. The actual number of BTC involved is utterly unimportant.

That makes more sense than I gave it credit. Good form, my apologies for jumping on the bash wagon.

Enough money for this.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241850)

so they have enough money to dump into this, but yet they were so cash strapped they had to seek bailouts and bandwidth caps???

Re:Enough money for this.... (1)

s4ndm4n (1361751) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242494)

LMAO. So true.. (dunno why I'm laughing, now that I think about it...)

No Thanks (2)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241856)

What happens if you lose your phone? - If I lose my visa card, it's hard to use with the chip+pin in UK these days.

Re:No Thanks (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242070)

I assume they would also have PIN codes for the mobile payments. However, the reference to Visa is interesting to me. As evil as Visa and Mastercard are, if any companies can make them look good, it's AT&T and Verizon. ugh.

Re:No Thanks (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242072)

what happens if you lose your wallet? Is there a pin protecting your cash?

Re:No Thanks (4, Interesting)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242220)

I can only lose the cash I carry which is usually not much unlike the potential dangers with this mobile payment system - would you even have to lose your phone - it could possibly be hacked via bluetooth etc without even leaving your pocket!! Visa is covered against theft - are mobile payments?

Re:No Thanks (2)

cultiv8 (1660093) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242106)

Right there with you. All this will lead to is higher CC transaction fees, which businesses will pay and will eventually be passed down to the consumer.

Re:No Thanks (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242200)

Not really true anymore I fear. I have at least one card with "swipe to pay" via a RFID chip in the plastic. Now I wont be on the hook for any unauthorized transactions, but someone could just wave the card over the reader at checkout and be done with it. No signature or pin needed.

Re:No Thanks (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242264)

I have at least one card with "swipe to pay" via a RFID chip in the plastic.

I'd break & bin that straight away, you're just asking to be robbed if you carry that.

Re:No Thanks (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242584)

I have at least one card with "swipe to pay" via a RFID chip in the plastic.

I'd break & bin that straight away, you're just asking to be robbed if you carry that.

That's a little extreme... I have a card like that. Once I realized the danger, I leave it at home and use it exclusively for online transactions...

Its hilarious, how they invested billions in infrastructure to make it easier to spend in person, which made it so dangerous to use, that I now exclusively use that card for online purchases... maybe not so hilarious, knowing that I'm paying those billions out of my fee and interest payments...

Re:No Thanks (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243692)

You need to understand that getting your credit card number "borrowed" has virtually zero risk associated with it. If you use it at all, you are going to get it copied down by someone sooner or later. You can sell them in bunches if you have enough - something like $50 for 100 good, fresh numbers with expiration date, CVV2 and sometimes the billing zip code.

I get a credit card borrowed in this fashion at least once a year and it has never cost me a dime. Most people I know either do not use credit cards at all (mostly religious reasons) or have had some sort of fraudulent transaction. It is extremely common, it is not prosecuted to any extent and all of the liability ends up on the merchant, or more commonly, the merchant's insurance.

Re:No Thanks (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243608)

I don't go out of my way to protect the bank. All of my cards have a Visa/Mastercard/Amex logo on them, which means all the liability is on the issuing banks, not on me. If someone robs the bank (via my credit/debit card) it's no skin off my back and a phone call + signature is all it takes to get it off my statements.

Re:No Thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242436)

I don't know the answers and candidly I don't care, but it's a pretty safe bet that:

  1. Of ALL the people working on this, surely SOMEONE would think about this as a question; and
  2. It's not like there are no models to look at. This has been commonplace in Japan for quite literally years now.

Rant - it never ceases to amaze me how Slashdotters are so arrogant as to think nobody else is clever enough to dream up this sort of question.

Re:No Thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242602)

If I lose my credit card, I use my phone to call to cancel the card.

If I lose my payment-enabled phone, I ??? Profit?

Re:No Thanks (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243564)

well if it's anything like the other nfc systems, like the one in use in uk.. first you open your lock-code protected phone, then you fire up an application on the phone, type in your pin and let it sit on the reader. it's much more of a hassle than just sticking your visa into the reader. yeehaw for progress! and before that you've used your internet banking to load up cash on the account tied to it, easy huh?

Remote Wipe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37244950)

You find a PC/another phone, log into MS Exchange or MobileMe Find My iPhone, and Remote Wipe your phone.

Also, in the USA, your liability is limited to $50 (bank debit) or $0 (credit card) for charges you did not authorize. Though in the bank debit case, it may take some time for your money to be returned (minus the $50.) That's why the US doesn't have chip and pin: customers aren't liable, so there is zero demand for fraud prevention technology.

Re:Remote Wipe (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | more than 3 years ago | (#37245126)

The limited liabilities that you point out are in some cases irrelevant because the money is not taken from your card it is billed to your phone bill - the contract is then written by the phone companie(s) who don't have to give the same protections that the banks have to give, there could be all sorts of nasty small print - do you trust the telcos? do you always read the T's and C's?

Re:No Thanks (1)

sitkill (893183) | more than 3 years ago | (#37249928)

disclosure: I work in this industry. There are two major ways that are there to mitigate the risk when you lose your phone. 1. You (in most NFC platforms) have to sign in, or enter a pin before you can buy anything with your mobile wallet/card. 2. If you do lose your phone, many of the platforms will have binary encrypted sms's that they can send to your phone to remotely erase your cards. Now when you compare that with your credit card, this offers a much more secure way to disable any type of transactions. Also, there really is no difference between Google's wallet and the carriers wallet. 1. if you lose your phone, you are losing your sim based NFC enabled secure element. 2. If you lose your phone, you are losing your phone based NFC enabled secure element. This is all about control. The carriers want to control this market because of the future growth (possibly the last bastion of profit for carriers), while Google (and Apple, and RIM, etc etc) want it phone based so they can hold all the keys.

Sprint (1)

cos(0) (455098) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241904)

No mention of Sprint in the article... I wonder who'll end up winning from this.

Re:Sprint (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242248)

That's because Sprint is a mom & pop provider compared to The Big Two.

Well, all they have to do is have a little ethics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241964)

A bit more than the banks, who being told "No, you can't charge transaction fees this high" decided to make up the "lost" revenue by sticking it to their customers instead with charges to use your debit cards.

See, that'd look bad on their books to take a dive in revenues, so they just had to make it up somehow. You know they're really hurting for cash, and not from their own mistakes, no, no. They didn't overbet on risky mortgage bundles or anything. It's just the government intruding on their Adam Smith (AKA GOD of Capitalism) given right to charge whatever the market will bear, especially if they collude to make the market do what they want.

ODIN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37241970)

Google will promptly change the name of their Wallet service to ODIN.

Re:ODIN (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | more than 3 years ago | (#37243928)

Google will promptly change the name of their Wallet service to ODIN.

I wish I had mod points for you today...

I LOL'd (3, Insightful)

itchythebear (2198688) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241974)

Isis aims to get ahead of its rivals by relying on its ... customer relationships.

Yup, because most people have a great relationship with their mobile providers right?

Additionally I'm not so sure I want these people [blogspot.com] responsible for my "virtual wallet".

Re:I LOL'd (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242168)

My first though was one word: "cramming."

Re:I LOL'd (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242344)

Additionally I'm not so sure I want these people [blogspot.com] responsible for my "virtual wallet"

At least Sony isn't involved... yet.

Re:I LOL'd (1)

Old97 (1341297) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242358)

Spot on. I hate my carrier. I don't like the carrier I'll be moving to in October, but their reception is much better. There is no way in hell I'd want them providing me this service. I want something portable across devices and carriers and run by a regulated financial services company.

Re:I LOL'd (2)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244720)

If i was going to be shoved headfirst into a single payment system, I would rather have it be Amazon.com. They already have my credit card number anyway, and I trust them more than Google or a phone company. They could just pass the payment on to whatever store I was buying from.

Re:I LOL'd (1)

xero314 (722674) | more than 3 years ago | (#37248908)

I have a good relationship with my mobile provider. Been with them for over ten years and never had a problem that was not resolved to my satisfaction. I have had them wipe out hundreds of dollars in legitimate charges simply because I have asked and since I have been a customer for so long. Mind you that will all be for naught if the FTC decides to let my carrier be absorbed into the monstrosity that is AT&T.

Mmmmm abuse of power, it;s what's for breakfast. (1)

korean.ian (1264578) | more than 3 years ago | (#37241982)

So basically it sounds like the phone cartel is using every bit of their power derived from the oligopoly to exclude Google. Go free market!

Re:Mmmmm abuse of power, it;s what's for breakfast (1)

sitkill (893183) | more than 3 years ago | (#37249970)

Well,

It's not just the phone market. This is actually a good example of a free market. Google is doing it's thing. The carriers are desperately doing it's own. Apple will come out swinging with their own NFC platform. RIM as well. And then there are big big hitters from card processors that basically have full blown out platforms already in production. There are so many players, it's actually nice to see such a huge possible market being fought by every single company.

Message From AT&T&T(Mo) (2)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242090)

Hello Customer, we've noticed that you've gone over your allotted five (5) mobile payments for this month. As such, you have been charged an overage fee that very nearly approaches the amount of your monthly bill. In order to continue using this services without being raped by overage charges, you'll have to purchase the $armAndALeg mobile plan, which allows you another 20 purchases. Remember, we appreciate your business. Now, bend over.

-- AT&T&T(Mo) Customer Service

Re:Message From AT&T&T(Mo) (1)

Vegeta99 (219501) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242342)

Actually, on the payments page, AT&T says you may be limited in the number of payments that can be made in a 24-hour period, so the legalese is already there!

Fix the RSS feed! Amp amp amp amp... (1)

bolt_the_dhampir (1545719) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242118)

$ wget --quiet -O - http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot [slashdot.org] | grep title | grep "Bet Big On Mobile Payments" AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile Bet Big On Mobile Payments What's with the & ? Stop doing that, please!

Too bad to see rapid corporations (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242210)

fuck the name of 'Isis', which was quite a benign goddess and a cult back from late egyptian into roman times. to boot, they used the name for a payment system. the most rabid corporations that are out there to boot.

Customer service (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242262)

Ever get a strange charge on your phone bill? Ever try to get it reversed? Yeah, good luck with that. For all their problems, I'll stick with bank credit / debit cards for payments.

Re:Customer service (1)

xero314 (722674) | more than 3 years ago | (#37248952)

Ever get a strange charge on your phone bill? Ever try to get it reversed?

Yes on both accounts, and never had an issue getting them reversed. Even after admitting that they were legitimate charges but I just didn't feel it was reasonable. My banks have also been fairly decent about this, until recently. I the last year I would say I would much rather dispute a charge with a cell phone provider than a bank.

One more way of reducing your privacy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242268)

Folks, the rush towards mobile payments is a gold mine for marketers and other creepy advertising types. Bank cards may be electronic but they aren't the equivalent of a primary key. Bank cards might be tied to a name and unique number but the information is quite fragmented across multiple systems in tables which can't be joined.

A mobile payments system tied to a phone number which follows somebody for decades does have a suitable primary key. Everything you buy will be part of a giant telco database, sold to the highest bidder.

What's more, large retailers will also have your phone number or device ID as the primary key for you in their own databases.

Nerds should have the understanding to realize that this push towards anti-privacy has been engineered by megacorporations and plutocrats for their benefit, not ours. We should be able to understand the pitfalls. Why do we embrace something designed in their favor, not ours?

Mobile payments were designed to make their sales pitches to you more convenient. Your shopping experience is a secondary concern. They're counting on herd-like neophiles to sign up for even more intrusive marketing.

The same understanding which drives us to run AdBlock Plus and Noscript should lead us to avoid this intrusive garbage, lest we end up like tagged cattle.

So many of the world's sustainability problems are the result of 150dB of advertising noise blaring orders at us to spend money we don't have on things we don't need. I love technology as much as the next Slashdotter, but more is not always better. I'd argue that a society free of advertising and mindless consumerism is more advanced than one with the spiffiest gadgets.

Mobile payments are like a superglobal loyalty card.

One loyalty card to rule them all.

Re:One more way of reducing your privacy (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242426)

Mobile payments are like a superglobal loyalty card.

One loyalty card to rule them all.

Aw come on, you can choose between US Alliance and Team Advantage! :-P

I don't use any of this crap. Not curated computing devices, not social networking, and I don't see myself using this either.

But, not even all geeks avoid these things, and geeks are a small minority.

Re:One more way of reducing your privacy (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244004)

A mobile payments system tied to a phone number which follows somebody for decades does have a suitable primary key. Everything you buy will be part of a giant telco database, sold to the highest bidder.

Use a google voice number for calls/texts, and change carriers/phones/real phone numbers as often as you choose.

Re:One more way of reducing your privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37249896)

And you've substituted your cellphone number primary key with a google account primary key. It doesn't make it any more invasive, and I hate to say this but if you think Google WON'T use/sell your info (maybe not now, but no company is immune to this type of behaviour), well, I have a bridge to sell you too.

zero balance (1)

Cartman's Mom (1956666) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242392)

....anyone who trusts this type of "technology" enough to open up their banking and CC spaces deserves the account cleansing they will ultimately receive. This is facebook for your bank accounts. Good luck with all that there.....

DO NOT WANT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242416)

Do you really want the phone carriers to fee you to death some more?

They've had this ability since the 2G phones in 2002. It's not popular, it results in very high customer service complaints for mystery fees. All those SMS scams for free ipods, yeah no end to this fraud in sight.

The correct way to move forward is to cut the mobile phone carrier (and when possible, the credit card company) out of the transaction stream.

NFC promises this will be doable, as all you have to do is make the phones able to authorize each other that they are making payments, or can use NFC enabled credit cards, meanwhile services like Google's Wallet and PayPal cut all the middlemen out. Just need NFC to come standard on laptop and desktop computers and this will work. Or just a 50$ add-on reader for older systems that want to do transactions with the equipment they have.

Squareup ( https://squareup.com/ ) has an early lead on non-NFC usage of credit cards, but this only works in the US where Chip&Pin hasn't taken off, so it's a dead-end until they come out with a Magstripe+NFC+Chip&pin sleeve for the rest of the world. PayPal should have done it first, but probably won't now. If Google want's to eat their lunch, they need to get all phones equipped with NFC. Apple I expect to do it first.

Sign up now for 50% off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37242642)

Save 50% on your next purchase of extra bigass fries.

Just click OK to install our Privacy Slurper 4.0 mobile app.

It's all about the cost. (1)

jtgreg (786548) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242796)

I like new technology as much as anyone, but I can carry a drivers license, a credit/ATM card, and some cash in a small card holder. This package is thin, light, requires no batteries, can be dropped, can be immersed in water, and can perform almost any financial transaction short of buying a house. I had a credit card with blink (lets you tap the card reader to pay), but hardly used it. It is just as easy to swipe a card, now that many transactions do not require a signature. I choose my payment method based on rebates/rewards and lack of fees. I wonder how ATT/Verizon/Tmobile will compete on costs.

What's wrong with cash? (1)

DigiTechGuy (1747636) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242880)

I pay for all in person transactions in cash, credit card for online purchases. I don't see how there can be any advantage to replacing my current method of payment in either scenario with anything else. Even if phone companies weren't evil, I don't see any advantage.

Awesome! (4, Insightful)

Orgasmatron (8103) | more than 3 years ago | (#37242892)

Anyone remember how badly the phone companies fucked pretty much everyone back in the days when they were willing to act as billing agents for anyone and everyone that was willing to claim that callers intended to pay for things via their phone bill?

Remember how much fun it was when the phone company automatically took the vendor's side because they only got paid for successful payments? They threatened to cut off your phone service and send your bill to collections, unless you could prove that you didn't authorize the payment.

Remember the delight of the offshore scammers when they realized that the phone companies were essentially acting as willing accomplices, and they started making "mistakes" knowing full well that many people would just pay up rather than try to fight the phone company?

If the only food in the world was being sold by someone that only took payments through this system, I would rather starve to death than give that power back to the phone companies.

Re:Awesome! (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244752)

Wait. Don't they still do this? A few months ago I got a charge on my land line from a place called "CompuFix" for fake telephone computer support services. It was not just for $12.95, it was for $12.95 per month. So I called Frontier and had the charge removed. The next bill came and I was charged $2.95 for the privilege of not being robbed. So I called again and received a complex explanation of p-lists and 3rd party charges, but they removed the charge. Do I really have to go over the bill every month with a microscope? Bah! And Verizon is even worse!

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37245464)

Tell them to disallow all 3rd party charges.

Re:Awesome! (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 3 years ago | (#37245678)

I think that's what the $2.95 was for...

this made my day ........so freaking funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37243240)

the way(s) telco's have been screwing me over over the year (i'm in Canada) , there is no way in hell , i will let them manage electronic payment on my behalf , hell i'm not even paying my cell bills electronically

Won't end well for the consumer (1)

mccrew (62494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37244092)

Sketchy merchants backed up by the full force of collection of super sized phone companies: What could possibly go wrong?
  • "What's that charge on the bill? I don't know, you'll have to take that up with the merchant. We are just required to perform the billing function. Oh by the way, you'd better pay or else we'll have to send it to our collections department with negative credit implications. Have a nice day. Thank you for calling SuperCo Wireless."

I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37244768)

I find it funny when people write articles that still consider T-Mobile a company as if the AT&T deal isn't going to go through.

Face the facts, the deal is bad for consumers but great for big business which pretty much Congress and the US Government love the deal already through campaign contributions, bribing, kickbacks etc. The few who oppose it will throw a fit and put on a show but it isn't going to stop the approval.

Oh great (1)

ajyasgar (2449448) | more than 3 years ago | (#37246368)

Now I get to pay for the privilege of using their platform to give them my money.

I know I'm the exception here, but... (1)

VoiceOfSanity (716713) | more than 3 years ago | (#37247804)

To be totally honest, I don't really care that much about mobile payment, or buying anything with my cellphone. I don't plan to do so, and would object if they suddenly decide to try and force such a service on me.

But then again, when I purchased my cellphone and my service, I was purchasing a phone. Which is what I own. I do not have a smartphone, an iPhone, an Android, or any of the recent offerings. I have no interest in being able to read my email wherever I am, could care less about texting, already have an MP3 player, don't want or need a web browser, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook or any other applet on my phone. I want a cellPHONE, to place and receive calls, and that's it.

Just because I work in the computer industry doesn't mean I automatically want every shiny! new toy that comes out. I need a good reason for having anything like that, and since I already have a computer for things I do at home, a netbook for travel, and that's it. If I go out to dinner, I want to enjoy dinner, not respond to people as I see far too many doing today. The same for going to a movie, spending time with friends, or just enjoying myself... I don't want an electronic tether that folks can yank on. If you can't bother to call me voice, then you're not worth responding to at that moment and that's all there is to it.

This (the ability to buy with your cellphone) is just another "feature" that isn't necessary, but the phone companies are going to push it on us whether we want it or not.

Mobile processing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37263494)

The strides made in mobile processing are pretty cool, usb card swipers for your computer, and now anyone can use mobile credit card processing [buyerzone.com] for their iphone, Android, or other smartphones. I used this guide as a resource about how small businesses go about getting credit card processing. I can see these mobile processors not only changing the way small businesses operate, but new businesses being created because these mobile processing option exists. I'm thinking of a lot more street vendors having this option, food and services. Can anyone else think of the possibilities from this?

Why not instead of spend more money, earn more $? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37269500)

There are two sides to mobile payments: 1. Use your phone to pay just like you would use your credit card, and 2. Use your phone to accept payments.
Using your phone as your credit card could mean spending more money so while we wait on AT&T, Verizon and T-mobile’s take on google’s wallet, why not start earning more money using an app to accept payments on your phone?
At SalesVu we recently launched a new app that not only allows you to accept payments on your iPhone or iPad, it also lets you manage your business from anywhere at anytime. You can download it from www.salesvu.com or from the apple app store. Let us know how it works for you.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?