×

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!

Apple Wins Patent For "iWallet"

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the pay-different dept.

Iphone 176

redletterdave writes "Apple won a major patent for its 'iWallet' technology, which is a digital system that uses near-field communication (NFC) technology to complete credit card transactions and manage subsidiary financial accounts directly on your iPhone. On the home screen for iWallet, users can see their entire credit card profiles, statements, messages from their banks, and even adjust preferences or add additional cards. Within preferences, users can schedule credit card payments and set parental controls on their children, which allows kids to use their iPhones as wallets but limits the extent to which they can use it. Users can track their payments and statements within the iTunes billing system, which keeps the credit card information safe and secure."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

176 comments

lame (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282365)

Once again, another lame patent blocking innovation

Re:lame (4, Insightful)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282707)

Doesn't sound like it. They just patented "a way" of using NFC. Should be simple enough to find another way.

Re:lame (4, Funny)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282781)

They just patented "a way" of using NFC.

To extract more money from everybody's wallets.

It's the Apple way.

Re:lame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283487)

Using a phone to make a purchase is easier than using a credit card with a chip in it? I don't see the benefit.

Re:lame (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282789)

Unfortunately, it seems the way the patent system works, you build a different kind of mousetrap, then sue anyone that attempts to build any superficially similar device, mousetrap or not.

Re:lame (0)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283053)

It's a lot simpler to just copy whatever Apple does, which is probably a) what will happen, and b) why this patent exists.

And Apple is just copying Nokia (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283463)

Or have we forgotten that Nokia has been doing NFC payments for a decade, even if it didn't have success in that market?

Jeez, the US patent office is such a joke.

Great..... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282377)

Now I can lose my phone, camera, AND my wallet in one fell swoop?!?!?!?!?!

Whats next... iPhone car keys?

Re:Great..... (2)

MosX (773406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282389)

Losing this would generally be safer than using your wallet (when it comes to someone less than honorable finding it) if you have a decent pin/passcode on your phone.

Re:Great..... (2)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282597)

I think the point is the double-edged-sword of integrating everything in to a single device. Even if your accounts are safe, leaving your wallet on the counter would also mean losing things that you would never normally have removed from your pocket/bag in the first place.

Re:Great..... (2)

evilRhino (638506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282633)

I would imagine that the iWallet could be remotely revoked.

Re:Great..... (5, Funny)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282847)

I would imagine that the iWallet could be remotely revoked.

Sure. Say you reach for your iWallet to buy a coffee and realize that you left it at the news stand 10 minutes earlier. Fortunately, you have the ability to remotely disable access to your accounts. So, you just pull out your smart phone and. . .ruh-roh!

Meanwhile, the clerk at the news stand sees that your iWallet has been left behind. Being an honest sort, he decides to try to reunite the device with its owner by calling. . .ruh-roh!

Don't load real credit card number into iWallet (2)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283177)

OK, there is an issue that has to be overcome, I'll get to that in a moment.

Rather than load a real credit card number into an "iWallet" use a temporary generated by your bank's online banking service. These temporaries, alias for the real card number, often have a user defined limit and expiration date so you can limit the risk as you deem appropriate.

The issue to overcome: these temporary numbers were designed to be used for online purchases. They tend to lock to the first vendor to use the number. Obviously this locking to the first vendor would have to become a user defined option at number generation time.

A more practical short term solution may be to use the debit card number for your checking account. Just be sure to only use iWallet for things you would normally pay for in cash and not for things you want the buyer protection, warranty and dispute options you would normally get with a credit card.

Re:Don't load real credit card number into iWallet (2)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283559)

"A more practical short term solution may be to use the debit card number for your checking account."

That's a fantastically terrible idea. There's a lot of fewer protections if you debit card info gets swiped than for credit cards. You might as well use a prepaid cash card so that the only money you lose is whatever was on the card, and that's assuming you aren't able to revoke it.

More like iExtortion (3, Insightful)

bit trollent (824666) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282385)

Google has had an electronic NFC based wallet in the market for almost a year now.

I assume now that Apple has patented a technology that Google developed, they will extort Google to pay them for them for writing software hadn't even developed yet.

At least now that Steve Jobs is dead, Apple is willing to license patents to Google instead of just trying to sue them into extinction.

Somebody should congratulate Apple on becoming more evil than Microsoft.

Re:More like iExtortion (2)

Goose In Orbit (199293) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282421)

Add Barclaycard (and thus Visa) into the mix... who have had payment by contactless cards far years... ...I wonder how Apple would manage if Visa threatened to stop taking their transactions?

(Won't happen... but an interesting side thought...)

Re:More like iExtortion (2)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282579)

No, they'll just attack all the Android handset vendors if they dare offer anything in terms of configuration options that are obvious given the problem set.

Re:More like iExtortion (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283045)

If your Barclaycard has an exploit and someone uses it to steal your money, Visa will give it all back in a heart beat. Someone hacks your iPhone.. good luck...

Re:More like iExtortion (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282425)

The ridiculous part here is that Japan has been using the same technology for HOW MANY years now?

Re:More like iExtortion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283095)

The ridiculous part here is that Japan has been using the same technology for HOW MANY years now?

Nearly eight years - Jul. 2004 "Osaifu-Keitai" (mobile phones with wallet functions) service launched

Re:More like iExtortion (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282429)

Barely any of the functionality described in this post exists in Google Wallet. This is the classic Google vs Apple situation; Google has functionality first (see voice commands vs Siri) but with limited or poorly implemented user experience or functionality. Apple just improves upon it much to the fury of Google aficionados everywhere.

Re:More like iExtortion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282991)

I use Google wallet, it works great for it's intended purpose, POS swiping to pay for something. What else do you need?
I don't need or want a separate app, world, or portal just to maintain track of things I've bought with my phone. That's what my bank/card statements are for. Why have the transaction recorded and tracked at multiple places?

Re:More like iExtortion (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283383)

Barely any of the functionality described in this post exists in Google Wallet. This is the classic Google vs Apple situation; Google has functionality first (see voice commands vs Siri) but with limited or poorly implemented user experience or functionality. Apple just improves upon it much to the fury of Google aficionados everywhere.

So what's the innovation here? Transactions, statements, scheduled payments, etc... are all available in the bank app and NFC payments are available in the Google Wallet app so is the 'innovation' putting them in one app?

Re:More like iExtortion (1)

Nixoloco (675549) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282563)


Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Re:More like iExtortion (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282785)

Oh fuck that noise. Just because a game is flawed doesn't mean everyone has to exploit it.

Re:More like iExtortion (3, Insightful)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283005)

Why would you even play a game you hate?

Re:More like iExtortion (3, Insightful)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283433)

Why would you even play a game you hate?

Because it's the only game in town.

Re:More like iExtortion (1)

murphtall (1979734) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283793)

Why would you even play a game you hate?

Because of many reasons.... money, profit, power, sex, drugs, I could think of more, but you get the general point.

Re:More like iExtortion (0)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282571)

Google has had an electronic NFC based wallet in the market for almost a year now.

Google does a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that someone didn't already have a patent or a copyright on that said "thing".

Re:More like iExtortion (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282829)

Google has had an electronic NFC based wallet in the market for almost a year now.

Google does a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that someone didn't already have a patent or a copyright on that said "thing".

Doesn't the article say that Apple just now got the patent? This sounds like prior art unless Apple applied for this patent years ago and it didn't get approved until today.

Re:More like iExtortion (0)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283367)

Google has had an electronic NFC based wallet in the market for almost a year now.

Google does a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that someone didn't already have a patent or a copyright on that said "thing".

Doesn't the article say that Apple just now got the patent? This sounds like prior art unless Apple applied for this patent years ago and it didn't get approved until today.

Is that a rhetoric question, or do you actually believe that patents get granted over night? I'll grant you that the submitter linked to a speculative "business oriented" IBTimes article instead of the original article [patentlyapple.com] they link to right at the start. Of course that only covers uninteresting stuff like what is actually patented, the fact that it was was originally filed in Q1 2009, and that the first related patents by Apple appeared in 2010.

What it fails to mention is that the patent is actually simply called Parental controls [freepatentsonline.com] - yes start to panic, Apple patented controlling children!

Re:More like iExtortion (1)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282661)

Is it just me, or has Apple become as bad as, if not worse than, the Microsoft of the 1990s?

Re:More like iExtortion (-1, Troll)

MikeMo (521697) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282871)

At least Apple is not operating illegally (monopoly abuse), perjuring themselves in federal court (Bill Gates lying under oath), blatantly stealing other's technology after pretending to want to implement it (Stacker), threatening others with death unless they fall in line (killing Word on Mac unless Apple kills Quicktime...) and so on. I attended a SPA meeting where Mr. Ballmer stood up and told all of the major software publishers in the world that Microsoft would take over any business worth more than $4 Million/year, and that all future software would be just plug-ins for Office. All while shipping shit for software.

Apple isn't there yet.

All Apple *really* does that pisses off the /. crowd is the "walled garden" thing. If it weren't for that, all this hate would not exist. This site was full of Apple love up until that point.

Re:More like iExtortion (2)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283299)

Before the "walled garden" thing they were always about proprietary and expensive computers. Apple love/hate has gone through cycles on Slashdot.

These days Apple is the poster child for abusive [nytimes.com] Chinese labor practices.

Re:More like iExtortion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283087)

They've been actively in use in Japan for several years now.

Re:More like iExtortion (2)

cjcela (1539859) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283159)

Why has the parent been downvoted? He is right. Using the cell phone to pay has been something commonplace in many Asian countries for the last 10-15 years... I do not know what Apple patent is about, but they certainly did not come up with the original idea.

Another one bites the dust (4, Insightful)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282393)

Great. Here's another technology that nobody will be allowed to use for the next 20 years.

Re:Another one bites the dust (-1, Troll)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282477)

just like their iPod made it so son one else can have a music players..oh, wait.

Re:Another one bites the dust (4, Funny)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282671)

Nice grammar. Also, there were literally dozens of different music players before the iPod, so nice analogy fail.

Re:Another one bites the dust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283185)

It was a typo. There are other NFC wallets. Nice fail fail.

Re:Another one bites the dust (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282703)

There were dozens, if not, hundreds of other MP3 players out there prior to Apple. I still have and use my AAA battery powered 1GB MP3 player (even plays ogg files), long after others are on their 3rd or 4th iPod because the battery dies within 1-2yr of usage. And that is how Apple made $500+ per customer while the company that I bought the MP3 player only made $10.

It is all about marketing and fanboism!

Re:Another one bites the dust (1)

Kagato (116051) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283439)

Except in Japan where they have had the technology for 10 years. There might be a cross-license situation for Japanese brands.

Apple, anti-competition master. (5, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282419)

And if you've ever wondered why Japan and Europe have had things like this for ages but we're just now seeing a glimmer of it here, it's because of stuff like this. No one ever gets ahead without someone tossing a landmine in your path and asking for their pound of flesh.

I see that the site actually useful for linking, Patently Apple, is getting their monopoly fetish on. From the sounds of things, they've managed to patent the entire concept out from under everyone else. They've managed to claim ownership over the concept of configuring accounts and placing various transaction rules on them.

So no one else can do that without Apple attacking them. I can't wait to have the entirety of NFC payments reserved exclusively to Apple devices, or Apple demanding exorbitant per-device fees for the ability to do so.

Re:Apple, anti-competition master. (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282437)

Hmm, so all you need to do is go to Japan, copy everything they do (afterall, there's working systems you can use as a template), go back to the US, and patent everything?
Something seems broken (again) here!

Re:Apple, anti-competition master. (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282467)

Americans are slow to pick up this kind of technology. It's been a problem for decades and it has nothing to do with patents.

I would also like to point out that "things like this" is not this thing. So it's irrelevant to the NFC wallet in general.

Do you think Europe and Japan don't have patents? or that they are irrelevant?

Re:Apple, anti-competition master. (4, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282567)

Americans are slow to pick up this kind of technology. It's been a problem for decades and it has nothing to do with patents.

Except that no NFC hardware has been on the market here for the better part of a decade, while it's been steadily rolled out and available elsewhere. The technology has, quite simply, not been available.

Do you think Europe and Japan don't have patents? or that they are irrelevant?

At least in Europe, software patents aren't valid. And in Japan, they seem to not have nearly the problems we do in the US with building and rolling out systems that are widely compatible between companies and regions. Here in the US a purely software pile of BS will block other vendors from distributing anything useful and open up everyone to legal assault, and deliberate incompatibilities and everyone demanding their own transaction fee and associated charge and alliance or it fails to work readily inhibits the adoption of new technologies and other customer-beneficial options.

Re:Apple, anti-competition master. (4, Insightful)

Kagetsuki (1620613) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282583)

Posting because I tried to mod you "informative" but accidentally hit "redundant". Sorry.

But yes, THIS. The origin of the technology is "FeliCa" which started development in 1988 and was released in 1994. At this point here in Japan I have my train pass and cash on my phone and IC based systems are used in so many places now I could basically get by with nothing but my phone and drivers license.

New disorder (3, Insightful)

WillyWanker (1502057) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282479)

iDisgust

A severe form of dyspepsia triggered by any mention of the tech company Apple, particularly in regard to their wanton abuse of the patent and legal systems.

Re:New disorder (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282725)

Thankfully, you are in the ridiculously small, literally unimportant category. Keep that in mind when you feel the need to hate simply for the sake of hating.

Re:New disorder (4, Insightful)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282933)

I normally wouldn't reply to an AC, but this pissed me off.

This is exactly the type of thing Apple would brainwash you into believing: that people aren't sick of their shit.

Welcome to reality. Step outside the distortion field for one second and you'll see how truly asinine and annoying it is when Apple, Google, MS, or any of those tech giants squash advancement for another, purely out of greed. Lately, Apple has been by far the worst. They reach out and patent technologies that other companies are well into developing, which they probably would have already had patents for - except they are normal, rational people who don't think someone is going to patent such a broad-sweeping commonplace item.

Nobody in their right mind would go after a 'slide to unlock' patent, the words 'AppStore', or patenting RFID(basically) all over again. There has been a slide-lock device somewhere on my house since I was born 30 years ago. I have no doubt there is a patent somewhere for the hardware version, and it has been around for at least a hundred years. How's that for prior art? RFID has been around since at least the late 1980s.

I'm surprised it is allowed to continue as it is completely anticompetitive to patent such vague concepts without any actual R&D and with (literally) tons of prior art.

Re:New disorder (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283089)

But thats the "in thing" to do when a new technology becomes viable. Take existing idea and add "...on a computer" or "...on a handheld computing device" or "...on the internet" or "... via a wireless network" then file a new patent.

Re:New disorder (3, Informative)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283363)

The problem is that you don't understand the US patent system. It's perfectly valid to patent the same idea, as long as it's a new implementation. That you have a physical sliding lock on your door is completely irrelevant to the ability to patent a software version. Once you accept the idea of software patents, it's trivial to see that slide-to-unlock on the iphone can not possibly have the same implementation as the lock on your door.

Re:New disorder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283819)

No, he understands it perfectly. It is obviously allowed, but that it's allowed is also obviously stupid.

The iWallet has rounded edges! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282511)

Prepare to be sued!

No, they patented a system of NFC spending rules (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282531)

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2012/03/apple-wins-patent-for-iwallet-the-one-that-will-rule-the-world.html

"Apple has received a major Granted Patent that generally relates to establishing financial transaction rules for controlling a subsidiary financial account and, more particularly, to various systems, methods, and electronic devices configured to provide for the establishment of such rules."

The rules basically come down to setting one account as a subsidiary of another, and the parent account then setting a system of spending rules and limits that apply to the subsidiary account. Optionally that these rules are transmitted to the bank as well, and applied generally outside of using the NFC as well.

Re:No, they patented a system of NFC spending rule (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282919)

Wow; parental controls for NFC spending. How revolutionary.

Re:No, they patented a system of NFC spending rule (1)

JimboFBX (1097277) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283043)

see, why weren't you stooping over the patent examiner's shoulder when he was reading it?

They should require that patents be written in minimal english rather than obfuscated english.

In apple's defense though, they probably had to re-develop their software over and over again when they found design holes. In contrast, a copy-cat only needs to design it once.

I suppose the alternative to this is that your phone must provide unbridled access to you wallet app if you manage to unlock it. Or an perhaps having user acccounts for your phone to restrict which apps are accessible (one for your kids).

Personally, I'd like to have an "at-ease" app which restricts the interface on phones such that a toddler can touch anything and you don't have to worry about them leaving the app then calling someone.

Re:No, they patented a system of NFC spending rule (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283497)

Parental controls for all sorts of other computerized monetary systems already exist. Really, fuck this "everything is new when it's on a new platform!" bullshit.

Re:No, they patented a system of NFC spending rule (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283015)

Good to know. I was about to comment on prior art with regards to the Visa PayWave system. Which BTW I've only been able to use in two places. All others that supposedly supported PayWave were either not setup properly, or were at one point and then disabled for whatever reason according to the clerk.

Re:No, they patented a system of NFC spending rule (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283213)

Ah, got it. So, Apple invented the V-chip then?

Prior Art? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282569)

Yes, hello? Patent office? I would like to patent the Google Wal-... Wait, no. The iWallet. *evil laugh*.. what? Yes yes, I'll give you a free iPad.

That is complete BS! (3, Funny)

warp_kez (711090) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282681)

The iWallet has been around for some time, long before NFE was even thought of.

I have an iWallet, and I have had it for 20 years - I hold it out, and the wife, kid, and merchants take what they need/want.

Anyone read the patent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282683)

In b4 didn't read the article but it must be bad because Apple... Damn, too late.

A win for privacy at least (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282709)

With NFC payment now limited to Apple devices, most people won't have their spending history spread far and wide due to their own ignorance.

The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282767)

.. is the cost of replacing the physical apparatus that you need to access it if the device should somehow be stolen or rendered inoperable.

A physical wallet costs $6. While a nuisance to replace any of the identification lost, in practice, even this might run a person no more than about $40 or so.

An iphone 4s starts at about $200.

Guess which one I'm keeping my credit cards in?

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (5, Insightful)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282825)

*loses wallet*
"Hello [$Bank]? Yes, I lost my wallet, can you cancel my card and send me a new one? A few days and it will arrive in the mail? Excellent!"

*loses phone*
*logs into Apple ID from any computer*
*cancels card link to lost/stolen phone*
*connects card to new phone*
*continues life as normal, with minimum disruption to card access*

This doesn't even need to be about Apple - NFC payments and "electronic wallets" are the future

Just one thing. . . (1)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282963)

*loses wallet*
"Hello [$Bank]? Yes, I lost my wallet, can you cancel my card and send me a new one? A few days and it will arrive in the mail? Excellent!"

*loses phone*
*logs into Apple ID from any computer*
*cancels card link to lost/stolen phone*
*connects card to new phone*
*continues life as normal, with minimum disruption to card access*

Emphasis added.

How do you buy the new phone if your lost phone was also your wallet?

Re:Just one thing. . . (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283149)

By calling your insurance company and having them pay for it and send you a bill for the excess. Although last time I used insurance to replace a phone the whole thing took nearly a week before I had my new one

Re:Just one thing. . . (1)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283229)

How do you call your insurance company if your lost wallet was also your phone?

Okay, granted, there are various solutions to all of these problems. The point is that the existence of the problems at all undermines the supposed logic of these schemes.

At the end of the day, phones cost much more than cards. Insuring a phone likely costs more than a card. Heck, I let my physical credit card insurance lapse years ago!

Also, there are plenty of ways to commit credit card fraud without access to either a card or a phone. iWallet likely adds to those vectors.

Re:Just one thing. . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283829)

This is like asking how you access gmail if the Gmail App on your phone doesn't work. You just use gmail.com, it isn't fraking rocket science. Do you honestly think the only way to access your wallet will be through your phone? If you're somehow right and the system is designed by a massive moron, then by all means don't use that system and use one that has some way to recover your -electronic- wallet (something you cannot do with a real wallet).

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283079)

Electronic currency is the future. Period.

Lets review the 'pros' to this from the perspective of the Feds.

1. Do not have to print, maintain, or transport physical currency.
2. Easy to track along with a transaction log.
3. Thwarts petty street crime. Anything bought or sold can be traced by police.
4. Thwarts counterfeiters.
5. Potential to thwart tax evasion by paying under the table. It also allows the Feds to confiscate funds electronically. All of it!
6. Did I mention confiscation? I tool used to force behavior change or extract information.
7. Provides many extra data points in how people spend now that it's completely transparent should the need arise for a full financial investigation.
and...
8. Anti-terrorism. Don't bother asking. That reason is all you need to know for the express purpose of an all electronic form of currency to exist.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283107)

Cost to replace a stolen iPhone - $200.

Cost to replace a stolen credit card: $0.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283253)

Playing devil's advocate here. It could be argued that replacing a stolen credit card costs consumers more overall in hidden banking fees. Assuming for a moment an iWallet scheme is almost 100% secure with a stolen iPhone, the costs banks incur with an entire fraud division is more expensive.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283337)

3. Thwarts petty street crime. Anything bought or sold can be traced by police.

I'm sure petty street criminals (and organized crime, drug cartels, oil rich nations, enterprising handyman) won't be able to find an alternative currency to work in... Nope never. I realize you were playing the devil's advocate but still.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

farble1670 (803356) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283399)

*connects card to new phone*

where did this magical new phone come from?

it's more than a little hassle to have to purchase a new phone. if i order it online, i have to wait for it to be delivered same as waiting for a new credit card to be delivered. i could possibly drive to a store, but honestly, i'd rather wait a few days than have to spend an evening at the mall or whatever getting a new phone.

that, and unless you are an apple zombie you will probably need to spend some time researching what phone to get before you plunk down $600.

more than a little hassle.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283729)

You can leave the "apple zombie" stuff at the door. It adds nothing to your argument and simply weakens whatever you have to say.

You seem to be inventing reasons that make it difficult - why research what phone to get. If it's stolen, the insurance company gets you a new one of the same type, and you're equating "an evening" at the mall to buy a new phone as more hassle than waiting for a new card or phone to arrive by mail?

The phone doesn't have to be the sole method of account access - in the same way that you could have spare cards for your account right now, and break out the spare in the event of losing the primary one. The NFC and digital wallet stuff just makes it easier to associate and un-associate payment methods with the thing you carry around with you. No more requirement to actually carry your credit card with you - it can stay at home for emergencies.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39282947)

The difference is that if I lose my phone, no one can use what's in it. If I lose my Wallet, I have to spend a week calling various organizations and proving that I in fact exist. I also lose the cash I carry with me, and one of my house keys. You'd have to be pretty stupid to keep your credit cards in your wallet. So easy to steal and so easy to lose compared to a phone, and it has literally no security.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (2)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283099)

Spending a week proving you exist is often a whole lot easier than coming up with an additional two-hundred or more dollars that it will cost you to buy a new iPhone while you are still trying to accomplish said feat.

If you lose your CC, you call up the CC company and they cancel the card and mail you a new one. If your phone *IS* your CC, then this becomes something of a catch 22... not to mention it's unlikely that your CC company will send you a new iPhone at no cost, unlike how cheaply they will send you a replacement CC in the mail.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283209)

Sorry but your arguments aren't making much sense to me.

If my wallet gets stolen from me, I lose cash, all of my ID cards, as well as my debit and credit cards (the latter of which can be used online)
If my phone gets stolen from me, I lose contact with the outside world for a day. That's it. I pay for a new phone.

The part about having to prove my identity after I lost my phone makes no sense. I don't have that problem if I lose my phone. I do if I lose my wallet.

So the only valid point is that losing a phone is more expensive than losing a wallet (and everything other than that becomes MUCH, MUCH easier) To help with that, I suggest not being a moron and keeping track of whatever you use. I keep my phone in my front left pocket.

Also, what wallet has GPS? What wallet can be called? What wallet can be emailed, or can have a lock screen with your personal information on it (that cannot be changed or thrown away without wiping the device). Those are three advantages over a wallet if the party who has it wants you to recover it.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283287)

So the only valid point is that losing a phone is more expensive than losing a wallet

That *WAS* my entire point.

If you can drop $200+ on a replacement phone just as easily as replacing a $6 wallet, that's great for you... but not so great for people who would have to work for an entire week just to make that $200 back.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283659)

If you consider the initial cost rather than the entire thing, then yes. But if I include the $50 liability I have for every card that I lose, plus the pocket money, plus the cost of replacing ID, plus the time taken to do all that? The wallet is so fucking expensive compared to the phone it's not even funny.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283157)

Do you keep your credit cards loose in your pocket? Or duct tape them to your body? I'm pretty sure those credit card sized slots in most wallets are specifically designed to keep credit cards.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283263)

No. No. Indeed.

Re:The core problem with the digital wallet... (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283847)

A physical wallet costs $6. While a nuisance to replace any of the identification lost, in practice, even this might run a person no more than about $40 or so.

An iphone 4s starts at about $200.

Guess which one I'm keeping my credit cards in?

What difference does it make? If you lose your phone you need a new phone, regardless of whether it contains your credit card details. Putting your credit card info in your phone doesn't make it more likely you'll lose it.

Yeah, sure. (3, Informative)

Cosgrach (1737088) | more than 2 years ago | (#39282995)

"Users can track their payments and statements within the iTunes billing system, which keeps the credit card information safe and secure."

Are you stupid enough to believe that statement about it being 'safe and secure"? If so, I have a bridge that I'd like to sell you.

The only sure fire way to keep such information safe and secure is to not have a credit card to begin with.

Re:Yeah, sure. (2)

Billlagr (931034) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283201)

Handing over credit card details to a 3rd party simply for convenience sake seems like lunacy - but multiple account details? While iTunes hasn't been hacked, it doesn't mean it won't or can't happen. Having so much financial information stored there just seems like it makes it an even more appealing target. And I would think that various hacker groups would be salivating over the chance to find an exploit in the iPhone side of things - again, it may not have happened yet, but this seems like a big incentive for it to be worked on.

Re:Yeah, sure. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283395)

"While iTunes hasn't been hacked"
to overuse the overused...
[CITATION NEEDED]
There are no admitted breaches of iTunes, but the hundreds of peoples who find their balances blanked and purchases they didn't make on their accounts seems to point to something not being completely "safe" about iTunes. Given Apple's response of silence towards those customer concerns and removal of posts from the irate, one might suspect they are aware and don't care, aware and can't fix it, or the lower levels are keeping something hidden.

Its not like they ever ignored issues with iTunes before....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itunes#The_FinFisher_exploit

iDontBelieveIt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283127)

Not at all.

Fuck it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283221)

I give up on leading an honest life. Anyone stupid enough (fanbois?) to use these deserves to have them stolen. I'm taking up pick-pocketing... like, now.

Name Drop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39283507)

To casually drop the name of a famous person who you, a friend or relative know, so as to appear cool vicariously because you know a famous person. (Urban Dictionary)

patents are a hunting license (1)

markhahn (122033) | more than 2 years ago | (#39283547)

the public is being ripped off by the incompetence and corruption of the PTO. instead of _promoting_ progress, patents are now just hunting licenses for bloodthirsty lawyers. (which is why you don't "win" a patent - it's merely something you use for extortion until someone calls your bluff and you have to defend it in court.)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...