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!

Paying Through Facebook May Become a Reality

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the every-human-will-have-seventeen-digital-wallets dept.

Facebook 122

SmartAboutThings writes "A recent story at the NY Times talks about a possible partnership between Facebook and mobile billing company Bango. 'You might want to buy a game or concert tickets or an astrological forecast. Careful where your fingers go. One tap, and a charge will show up on your phone bill. "Frictionless" payment is how Bango puts it. Bango will get a cut of each click; it declined to say how much.' Assuming this doesn't remain a rumor, then quite soon we might be able to pay for goods using our Facebook accounts. Could this help Facebook regain the lost trust for their investors?"

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

Lost trust? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108401)

Lost trust? Shirley you jest!
Never had any...

Re:Lost trust? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108707)

Don't call me Shirley!

Re:Lost trust? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109039)

Lost trust? Shirley you jest!
Never had any...

A surprising number of (dumbasses) lined up to put $38/share worth of trust into facebook... (and look where it got them).

First? (4, Insightful)

Cutting_Crew (708624) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108403)

note to self - never ever ever download the facebook app for my phone.

Re:First? (3, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108667)

note to self - never ever ever download the facebook app for my phone.

Anyone who hasn't learned that lesson after the FB app had helpfully "updated" all of their contacts wiping out original emails... will not learn it now.

Re:First? (4, Insightful)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109117)

Learned that the hard way. Not even twitter makes it to my phone. Only use crap web sites versions for most things now.
So many things want to know your location, contacts, ect.. When they don't need to. Sad time for computing.

Re:First? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109419)

Even when they try to guesstimate my location, they often fail anyway, I live about 60 miles away from where they think I live..

I'm talking about websites like Facebook that think they know what city you live in based on your IP address, but actually they couldn't be more wrong!

Re:First? (1)

tek0 (1049454) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109731)

but if he hadn't used it until now, he couldn't have learnt that lesson!

Re:First? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41110797)

note to self - never ever ever download the facebook app for my phone.

Well on the bright side, these services will profile you and your friends so well, an app could go ahead and make purchases for you as you sleep. Have faith that technology can know what you want before you know that you want it. You purchases can have the added surprise thrill one might get from birthday or holiday gifts, except for the shrinking bank balance part. And don't worry if you don't have enough cash, the app can automatically get credit for you and show the world what a great person you are by enrolling you in the company organ-donor program. A bit overweight? Maybe getting rid of that redundant kidney is just what you need.

Re:First? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41111081)

Ever since I realized that apps you install can collect and send personal information from your mobile device I've been a lot more careful about what apps I install and about what data I store on my device.

I don't login to Facebook often, but when I do, it's not through their mobile app.

Do people really want this? (5, Insightful)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108421)

Great. Then FB will broadcast to all your friends what it is you just bought. Glad I left over a year ago.

Re:Do people really want this? (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108909)

So get your porn the way the rest of us do: bittorrent.

Re:Do people really want this? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109169)

Oh, don't you worry your pretty little consumer head about that...

If you are purchasing a luxury item that will provide status and prestige, you can take advantage of 'facebook sponsored purchases' in order to insert news of your purchase more prominently into your friend's facebook pages for just a small additional fee.

If you are buying an embarrassing sex toy, our Founder's Favorite 'They "trust me"; Dumb fucks.', option will keep your little secret just between you and Zuck, 100% guaranteed*!

Mining possibilities (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110483)

And meanwhile, Facebook's marketing/datamining/advertising department just had a massive orgasm at the though of the new possibilities.

Then, all the writers-of-crappy-apps/scammers/clickjacker/hacker/exploiters started a big circle jerk while thinking of *their* expanded possibilities.

After which all the lawyers (with specialities as diverse as divorce, etc.) all quickly ran buying more lube (and bigger strap-ons) just to be ready.

And I see scareware/let-me-help-you-scrub-your-profile/heal-your-online-reputation people approaching on the horizon.

Re:Do people really want this? (2)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110931)

The sex toy thing is kind of obvious, but embarrassment is not the only problem. What if you are buying a gift for a friend or relative and you don't want to spoil the surprise? There are many perfectly innocent reasons why a person would want to keep their purchases secret.

Right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108427)

Yeah, like I REALLY want Facebook to have access to my buying habits too.
Oh well, I am just an old fart who tried Facebook for a year and then left because there's a limit to how much I will bend over and deliver all my personal life to some company.

Re:Right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108719)

Yeah, like I REALLY want Facebook to have access to my buying habits too.

But most people won't see it this way. Most people will see it as a simpler way to spend what little money they have (at this stage in the game, is an EASIER way to spend money what young people need?)

Oh well, I am just an old fart who tried Facebook for a year and then left because there's a limit to how much I will bend over and deliver all my personal life to some company.

Then you must have something to hide, right? Remember, facebook isn't selling itself to old farts. Facebook isn't really selling itself at all. Companies that rely on consumers as a product don't want to sell. They want you to genuinely, deep-deep-deep down believe that giving a company your personal information isn't a problem. They want you to believe at your very core that posting every minute detail of your life on-line is not only not a bad decision, but is the best way to keep people informed about your life.

In my opinion, at this point mega-companies that rely on sales of consumer information and advertising are content (momentarily) with how the system works. I believe that the culture shift of NO anonymity and NO privacy will keep pressing harder and harder.

Re:Right (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109047)

But most people won't see it this way.

If you haven't noticed then I hate to break it to you. But most people are effectively stupid. Oh, they can think and can even pay attention if they really, really feel like they have to. But most of the time they don't. They're normally too self-absorbed and therefore oblivious. And they don't view actual thought and decision-making as privileges to be enjoyed - they see them as horrible burdens to be neglected whenever possible. It's why we have the kind of gov't we have (increasingly out of control). It's why there is Facebook.

Most people will see it as a simpler way to spend what little money they have (at this stage in the game, is an EASIER way to spend money what young people need?)

Consider this next move a sort of IQ (or EQ) test. If you never made a Facebook account, congratulations. You are beyond the test. If you made one sometime ago but stopped using it, again congratulations, everyone makes a mistake once in a while, it's part of being human. If you still have an active Facebook account, that's strike one. If you use that active account to purchase items, knowing everything we know about this company's founder and its business practices, well that's strike two.

If you see us questioning them and you disagree, and your first response is anger/irritation/taking it personally/resentment, instead of explaining why you think we in this thread are wrong, well that's strike three. That's FAIL. You fail the IQ test. Your conversion is now complete: you are now defending and making apology for the parasite that is feeding off your life. You see the same pattern with most extreme forms of religions and fanboyisms and pretty much anything that makes no rational sense.

Re:Right (3, Interesting)

YttriumOxide (837412) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109513)

If you never made a Facebook account, congratulations. You are beyond the test. If you made one sometime ago but stopped using it, again congratulations, everyone makes a mistake once in a while, it's part of being human. If you still have an active Facebook account, that's strike one.

I understand the dislike, distrust and sometimes even hatred of things like facebook, but assuming that anyone with an active facebook account isn't aware of the issues seems to be a common mistake around here.

I have a facebook account. I actively use it. I also understand that anything I put there (or others put there about me) (whether marked as private or not) is potentially as public as me scrawling it in 50 metre high letters on the side of a public building in the middle of town (however significantly more socially acceptable).

I still choose to use it, because it's a good way to keep in touch with my many friends around the world; post pictures of my daughter growing up for anyone who cares to see that; organise events with friends in an easy to manage interface; and so on. I do block pretty much every game, "application" and so on and it's almost beyond the pale to imagine I would ever consider using such a payment system as the one described; however that doesn't mean I have to get rid of using facebook altogether - just don't use what you don't want (and remember the thing about scrawling your information in public, as already mentioned).

I do NOT fear things like potential employers/future business partners/whatever seeing that I was out at a party drunk one day. Anyone who refuses to hire me for that, isn't someone I want to work for/do business with/etc.

Re:Right (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109863)

I understand the dislike, distrust and sometimes even hatred of things like facebook, but assuming that anyone with an active facebook account isn't aware of the issues seems to be a common mistake around here.

Thinking that you can play footsies with the Devil and never ever get burned is another very common mistake.

Or saying that you have a set of principles by which you recognize certain companies' behavior as evil, exploitative, maladaptive, undesirable, etc ... and then participating in those companies' offerings anyway, well that's another all-too-common mistake. It always seems like your own individual contribution is a tiny drop in a big bucket, but then masses of people make this mistake and it really matters.

I still choose to use it, because it's a good way to keep in touch with my many friends around the world; post pictures of my daughter growing up for anyone who cares to see that; organise events with friends in an easy to manage interface; and so on. I do block pretty much every game, "application" and so on and it's almost beyond the pale to imagine I would ever consider using such a payment system as the one described; however that doesn't mean I have to get rid of using facebook altogether - just don't use what you don't want (and remember the thing about scrawling your information in public, as already mentioned).

What "I don't want" is to ever make more successful a company that does business this way. What "I don't want" is to ever feel like no one ever had any way to keep in touch before the advent of Facebook. What I especially "don't want" is to promote the kind of culture surrounding Facebook. Joining them would be the same as giving my silent consent. In most relationships of abuse and exploitation, what you describe above is called being an enabler. You see, it's not a matter of features.

There is no convenience Facebook could ever offer me that would convince me to overlook their attitude towards their users. It is definitely not an attitude of respect and appreciation. It's more like the attitude a farmer has towards his livestock. That's simply unacceptable to me under any terms. I don't care to make a game of being the cow or chicken and seeing how much feed I can get out of the farmer while trying to avoid the privacy slaughterhouse. I probably could win such a game, like you are doing, but then I can definitely get my own feed. I'd rather simply have nothing to do with Facebook, have never once had an account, never visited the site, block their "Like buttons" etc, and I have never once regretted that decision.

Imagine if every user who felt the way you do decided not to use Facebook. It would create demand for a more reasonable social network. Right now starting one would fail because everyone is already on Facebook, and much of the utility of such a site is the number of people you can reach with it. Even a giant like Google is having grave difficulty getting an alternative off the ground, and most startups wouldn't have Google's deep pockets and name recognition.

Re:Right (0)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110191)

FFS. "Privacy slaughterhouse", seriously? What exactly are you worried about here? I hope you also don't use banks or credit cards. Also you should never ever use an image sharing site, or post on a public messageboard like Slashdot, because you might be lulled into telling uploading pictures of that time you had sex with a goat on camera, without realising how badly that might come across.

Re:Right (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110677)

Slashdot doesn't demand you use your real name.

Re:Right (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110989)

I have a friend on Facebook called Pin Gu. His profile picture is Pingu. I have another friend who is a guitar called Matilda Hohner..

Re:Right (1)

KhabaLox (1906148) | more than 2 years ago | (#41111579)

And Facebook doesn't either. Not really. There is a guy posting as God on FB. According to reddit, he was banned for 3 days for posting an illustration of female reproductive organs and notes about what Sen. candidate Akin calls them. So obviously they are aware of the account, but haven't forced him to quit entirely.

Huzza! (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108445)

I confidently predict that a blissful union of the non-sleaziness of mobile billing, the upstanding nature of Facebook, and the excellent security of consumer client devices will lead to excellent customer satisfaction and only the most minimal of fraud and billing disputes.

Re:Huzza! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108531)

Are you a lawyer?

Re:Huzza! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109137)

No, but I think he might be a wizard.

Re:Huzza! (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109263)

No, but I think he might be a wizard.

Of course, he attended Hogwarts.

The next product will be FacePal.

Re:Huzza! (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110019)

Or a lawyer wizard! O.O

Pornograph (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108785)

It looks like Facebook will turn itself into the premier porn payment provider for the, er, networking executive on the move.

Yeah right (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109935)

And everybody is going to embrace "Facebook as a porn payment", because there's no way FB will ever mine the data they gathered through your sales for marketing and advertising purpose~ They've always respected users privacy~ </sarcasm>

Seriously? I think you're right. Idiots will flock to it to buy lots of stupid stuff where privacy and anonymity would have been preferred.
FB's marketing department will mine this data like hell.
Cue in embarrassing target advertising and suggestions.
(Ob Penny Arcade [penny-arcade.com] ref)

Or even malicious apps:
- we've currently reached the point where "click jacking" on FB is now considered by lambda users as "just happening" and part of the background noise. Its accepted to be just part of the landscape, the way SPAM is for e-mails (before massive efforts in filtering and bot-net shutdowns managed to curb it a little bit).
(Am I the last human being on FB who doesn't fall for the "click on the moving 'play' button to prove you're not a bot in order to see teh lezboz video?!?)
- it's pretty much easy to get people to friend a page or add an application through click jacking.
- a malicious application could then exploit the gained privilege to access user info (Through advanced access with regular FB API granted during the click jacking, or through exploits. That has already happened before).
- mine and infer porn habits from the data.
- blackmail/scam/shame the poor victim.

Next step for Facebook:
Now they just need to buy a few websites like "Adult Finder", cross reference their databases, and they'll become the newest biggest pimping infrastructure on the net since Craiglist had to close its adult section.

And the blackmailer/scammer need to start collaborating with divorce-specialised lawyers.

Trust of the users first? (1)

Atomus (2500840) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108455)

They should gain the trust of their users first if they really want to see things like this pick up steam IMO

Re:Trust of the users first? (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108499)

They should gain the trust of their users first if they really want to see things like this pick up steam IMO

Why bother? How much do the users pay them?

Re:Trust of the users first? (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109091)

Sadly, this isn't true. Do you see a drop in amount of facebook users with all the privacy issues they constantly have? Nope. Average Joe doesn't care about "trust" or "security", because he doesn't even know what those things are.

That's why they click yes on "Run free-chicks.exe as root?".

Click-jacking (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110023)

Average Joe doesn't care about "trust" or "security", because he doesn't even know what those things are.

Until the very last moment when it comes back into his face. But then it's already to late.

That's why they click yes on "Run free-chicks.exe as admin?".

(NB: FTFY)

Yup. Just have a look at how much click jacking has become rampant lately.
And the joe-six-pack reaction when he notice that the pseudo-'video player' has auto-liked itself and auto-plublished itself on the wall, is just "LOL". Doesn't even bother do delete the post, and unfriend/unlike the page or block the app.

Why I don't let facebook have my number (4, Insightful)

PSVMOrnot (885854) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108459)

Yet another reason why I don't trust Facebook, Google, or any other of these sorts of company with my mobile number.

If I want to buy something I'll take out my credit card tap in all the numbers and buy it. At least that way I *know* that I'm buying something, and I'm not nastily surprised when my mobile bill is huge after hitting the wrong button when my touchscreen plays up.

Re:Why I don't let facebook have my number (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109139)

As it turns out, pre-paid phones are really good for this sort of thing. I pay maybe $8 a month for my phone, and I get all the connectivity I need. TRWTF is paying an arm and a leg every month for a fancy schmancy phone plan.

Captcha: Dollar.

To err is human, and that's the problem... (1)

PerlPunk (548551) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108479)

Humans make mistakes all the time. That's why making it really, really easy to pay for things online is a bad idea. What to speak of the problems a malicious takeover of ones system produces, very easy online payments will make many, many people pine for doing things the hard way.

Re:To err is human, and that's the problem... (4, Funny)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108693)

Yes, humans are fallible. But to REALLY fuck things up takes a computer.

I wanna pay for shit I buy through FB about as much as I want hemmeroid surgery without anesthesia on Pay-Per-View. So why am I thinking of mebbe building my own social media site that harvests demographic data only instead of doing a massive cavity search like Google/FB/etc? Cause mebbe its time has come.

Re:To err is human, and that's the problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109107)

Yes, humans are fallible. But to REALLY fuck things up takes a computer. I wanna pay for shit I buy through FB about as much as I want hemmeroid surgery without anesthesia on Pay-Per-View. So why am I thinking of mebbe building my own social media site that harvests demographic data only instead of doing a massive cavity search like Google/FB/etc? Cause mebbe its time has come.

Maybe that's not how you spell "maybe".

Re:To err is human, and that's the problem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109323)

Don't you mean "with a chainsaw" on top of that?

No No No Fuck No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108489)

No no no... oooh - I look forward to taking to your to Facebook-Google-TacoBell

Re:Taco Bell (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108607)

Pick ANY other fast food joint! Taco Bell is tasty!

Re:Taco Bell (1)

Twanfox (185252) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109171)

But.... Taco Bell was the only restaurant to survive the Franchise Wars. Now all restaurants are Taco Bell.

Astrological Forcast? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108507)

If you want one, chances are you aren't very good at dealing with finances or life in general.

The death of Facebook? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108599)

I give it 3 months. Between click fraud, deceptive ads that trick you into accidentally buying stuff and hackers, people will soon be scared to even log into their facebook accounts.

Investors? How about users? (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108613)

Could this help Facebook regain the lost trust for their investors?

Only if they can gain the trust of a fair amount of users.

I use Facebook, but under a fake name with as little personal information as I can give them. There's no way I'd trust Facebook with financial information.

I've no doubt that at least some users will think this is grand, but there's no way I'd ever use this. Their level of trust from me is arms length and suspicious.

Re:Investors? How about users? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108849)

Users? Fuck users!

Re:Investors? How about users? (1)

Hillgiant (916436) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109189)

I believe that they have ably demonstrated that they do not need the trust of their users.

Re:Investors? How about users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109229)

Could this help Facebook regain the lost trust for their investors?

Only if they can gain the trust of a fair amount of users.

I use Facebook, but under a fake name with as little personal information as I can give them. There's no way I'd trust Facebook with financial information.

I've no doubt that at least some users will think this is grand, but there's no way I'd ever use this. Their level of trust from me is arms length and suspicious.

I feel the same way that you do. That's why I have never once used Facebook.

To me trust is more important than any convenience they could offer. So for me this is pretty clear-cut, no cloak&dagger shit necessary.

Methinks you are not really so principled at all, so you're trying to have it both ways. Especially for a trust issue?! Why would you tolerate any interaction from an entity you rightly distrust? A competency issue would be easier to understand...

I would n't worry.. (2)

PCK (4192) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109273)

This is just part of FB' continous mutations. Remember what FB was like before twitter became popular? Then they "twitterised" it, added news feeds, timeline and other nonsense. However now post IPO the pressure is on and people are realising that FBs model for making money does n't make any sense, so you get crazyness like buying instagram, constant talk about making money from mobile and now payments.

In the end FB will probably get into a feedback loop where they have to become more and more obnoixious chasing revenue from users whilst turning off those users at the same time.

I dont think FB will die because ultimately they will always have their core users but in the same way that Myspace does.

Re:Investors? How about users? (1)

Leejjon (2342476) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109509)

I use a fake name too, but they know who my friends are, they know what my friends like and they know how I look like if my friends tag me on their pictures. Pretty sure that it's not hard to find my identity online.

On your wall..... (3, Funny)

P-niiice (1703362) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108625)

Hey! p-niiice just bought a FLESHLIGHT from FLASHLIGHT.COM! p-niiice recommends you buy a FLESHLIGHT from FLESHLIGHT.com too!

Re:On your wall..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109069)

Hey! p-niiice just bought a FLESHLIGHT from FLASHLIGHT.COM! p-niiice recommends you buy a FLESHLIGHT from FLESHLIGHT.com too!

and I payed with Banjo.Com, and my sister does it too.

What for ? (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110125)

I'm genuinely interested in what your sister needs a fleshlight for? From an anatomic point of view...

Or to you imply that the FB "me too"-ers are going to keep their habit of following any trend and/or installing/buying the same apps as everyone else, even if doesn't make any anatomical sense.

Privacy (2)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108643)

This is one of the reasons I have never acquired any of the bonus cards of the supermarkets.

Re:Privacy (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108853)

Thing about those bonus cards is, they're for harvesting demographic data primarily. The store will give you a discount to get an edge on what to put on the shelves. Remember that cinnamon-flavored Mountain Dew they had a few years back? I liked it. I also got severely hooked on vanilla diet Pepsi, of all things. Neither of which you can find in the stores around here. They were serious niche market items that my local supermarket doesn't stock anymore. Neither does Walmart, for that matter, at least around here. Shelf space is valuable, especially these days. If it ain't gonna sell, it needs to go. That's Marketting 101. The bonus card I use only asked me for my name, my birthday, and what city & state I currently live in. Nothing more. They didn't ask for my credit card, my social security number, nothing else. Pure marketting demographics research, for which they were willing to 'pay' me in discounts on food and gas purchases at the supermarket-owned gas station at the end of their parking lot. That's what those bonus cards are for

Re:Privacy (1)

Geeky (90998) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109183)

If a company needs to know what to put on the shelves, surely it can just track what actually sells. They know the quantity purchased from any given store, why on earth would they care who's buying it?

Bonus cards are to make you think twice before shopping elsewhere - go past the CrappyMart because you have a card for ShittyMart down the road. That's all.

Re:Privacy (3, Interesting)

Rei (128717) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109549)

Ah, good 'ol loyalty cards. I prefer disloyalty cards [thestar.com] . ;)

Anyway, it's a mix. Yes, they want to motivate you to keep coming back. But these stores also like to know crazy amounts of information about you. Aka, not just what's disappearing in a particular store, but what's being consumed by what demographics, what's bought at the same time, etc, to help determine product positioning, marketing campaigns, and so forth. Here's a crazy article on the lengths some companies go [nytimes.com] . The first paragraph, as a teaser:

Andrew Pole had just started working as a statistician for Target in 2002, when two colleagues from the marketing department stopped by his desk to ask an odd question: “If we wanted to figure out if a customer is pregnant, even if she didn’t want us to know, can you do that? ”

Re:Privacy (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110439)

Or go to SnootyMart like me. :-) It's not the cheapest, but they have a deli, bakery and butcher in store that are the best for miles around, and the loyalty card along with cash register generated coupons generally brings the prices in line with other, scruffier stores.

They redid the store last year to replace most of the harsh lighting with moodier indirect stuff, and at Christmas they bring in a grand piano and someone to play holiday tune. Last year's dude took requests. He knew the freaking Claymation Christmas version of We Three Kings. That was epic.

It's not all about numbers.

Re:Privacy (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110875)

No, they're also for targeted advertising, by doing statistical analysis of the purchases:

About a year after Pole created his pregnancy-prediction model, a man walked into a Target outside Minneapolis and demanded to see the manager. He was clutching coupons that had been sent to his daughter, and he was angry, according to an employee who participated in the conversation.

âoeMy daughter got this in the mail!â he said. âoeSheâ(TM)s still in high school, and youâ(TM)re sending her coupons for baby clothes and cribs? Are you trying to encourage her to get pregnant?â

The manager didnâ(TM)t have any idea what the man was talking about. He looked at the mailer. Sure enough, it was addressed to the manâ(TM)s daughter and contained advertisements for maternity clothing, nursery furniture and pictures of smiling infants. The manager apologized and then called a few days later to apologize again.

On the phone, though, the father was somewhat abashed. âoeI had a talk with my daughter,â he said. âoeIt turns out thereâ(TM)s been some activities in my house I havenâ(TM)t been completely aware of. Sheâ(TM)s due in August. I owe you an apology.â

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]

Re:Privacy (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109233)

Why ask for a credit card number when you can rest assured that most customers who actually have and use one will pay with it and present their 'loyalty card' in the same transaction within the fairly near future?

Re:Privacy (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110269)

I always know it's over for something I like when it starts to get stocked on lower and lower shelves. :-(

Or that's you what you think (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110327)

Pure marketting demographics research, for which they were willing to 'pay' me in discounts on food and gas purchases at the supermarket-owned gas station at the end of their parking lot. That's what those bonus cards are for

That's what you think. But the amount of data and how they can mine it is scary.
See the embarrassing anecdote [forbes.com] about Target, and the 'statistically pregnant daughter' as an example. (And remember: all this was done with completely legally acquired data. No snooping involved. Just the power of statistics).

And what did Target learn from this story? That they should stop mining data in such a way that provide embarrassing insight in the private life of individuals? No.
They learned that next time they have to hide the relevant targeted add among innocuous looking ads. So that the "victim" doesn't freak out, realising that their private life doesn't have any secret for them.

And as said, this was done by a company which completely abides to the various privacy law. No violation in data gathering laws, only maths tricks.
Now imagine what could a company like Facebook do, which was caught red handed changing the default privacy settings without user consent, just because they updated their policies.

Re:Privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41111501)

If that was all they wanted, they could make them anonymous. But they don't. They want all sorts of information so they can target and track you. Just like everybody else. Bah!

Re:Privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41111663)

The bonus card I use only asked me for my name, my birthday, and what city & state I currently live in. Nothing more. They didn't ask for my credit card, my social security number, nothing else. Pure marketting demographics research, for which they were willing to 'pay' me in discounts on food and gas purchases at the supermarket-owned gas station at the end of their parking lot. That's what those bonus cards are for

That was the original purpose for the loyalty cards. However, some enterprising marketers discovered that they can cross-reference the different pieces of information and create "reverse demographics" where they can target individuals. This information is shared with law enforcement (and is required to be shared in some locations when individuals purchase certain combinations of items) and is even used for targeted marketing and loyalty tracking.

If you use a loyalty card, some sort of third party flight points card and a credit card when making purchases, these three are cross-referenced to create a profile. If you then stop using your credit card and points card, the profile can still often make a probable guess as to whether the purchase was made by you, based on time, location, amount spent and items purchased.

Re:Privacy (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110209)

I have one.

The experience has been uneventful other than the occasional 2 for 1 on the french bread rolls from their awesome bakery. Sweet Feathery Jesus, they make sourdough French bread that can cause spontaneous orgasms like in the Matrix. Wish I had some right now. ...

WTF was the topic again?

This is what they mean by "frictionless" (5, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108645)

The goal here is to make payment so easy that you don't have the time to reconsider the purchase decision while, for instance, you're pulling out your wallet to get out your credit card. These are people that firmly believe that the way to make the world a better place is to make it easier for them to buy stuff whether or not it is of any use to them whatsoever. I know, because I've attended one of the major conferences in the industry and met some of these folks and listened to their talks about this sort of technology.

And of course, what makes it easy for a legitimate business to take your money also makes it easy for a not-so-legitimate business or a thief to take your money.

Re:This is what they mean by "frictionless" (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109205)

same concept as the supermarket check out line magazines and other trinkets. that stuff is high margin.

newegg and amazon do the same thing with suggested add ons. geeks fall for it as well just different products

Re:This is what they mean by "frictionless" (0)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109313)

Agreed. I had such a "frictionless" experience recently with Groupon.

I wanted two coupons of something, select the number, click , expect to first see a total that they're going to charge me, but no, directly charged. Irritating. I really should try and wipe my credit card number from my acount with them. They really should give me the actual amount they're going to charge and let me agree on that. Even after processing the purchase they didn't show me iirc.

Also I wonder if they unsubscribed me from their newsletter: for some strange reason it takes 1-2 weeks for them to process an unsubscribe (request via the website)... that purchase got me subscribed, and I really didn't notice this happening or I would have unticked the box.

My wife had a recent similar issue with Amazon on her kindle; our little one had been playing with her Kindle and accidentally bought a random book. Dunno if she managed to return it. The "buy" and "preview" links on the screen are also scarily close, very easy to slip.

The kid playing with my phone sometimes is also a major reason not to have my credit card number stored in the Play Store. It's just too risky.

This whole "one-click purchase", well sometimes I would hope Amazon could enforce that patent so no-one else could do it... nice maybe for the seller, not so much for the buyer. Too easy to accidentally buy stuff you don't really want.

Re:This is what they mean by "frictionless" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109391)

These are people that firmly believe that the way to make the world a better place for themselves is to make it easier for consumers to buy stuff whether or not it is of any use to them whatsoever.

FTFY. Basically, they view yourself, myself, and everyone else not themselves as "consumers"- you're to blindly consume whatever they're peddling. This is an optimization and an "increase in profitiability" to them. Honestly, they're wasting my precious oxygen, water, etc. by being on this Earth in my not so humble opinion.

Re:This is what they mean by "frictionless" (1)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109399)

The goal here is to make payment so easy that you don't have the time to reconsider the purchase decision while, for instance, you're pulling out your wallet to get out your credit card.

Sure. They are encouraging impulsiveness and giving impulsive (undisciplined) people what they want.

These are people that firmly believe that the way to make the world a better place is to make it easier for them to buy stuff whether or not it is of any use to them whatsoever.

Then their relationship to the world is that of a parasite. They are feeding off a character weakness. Of course they think that's good. Ticks and fleas think sucking your blood is good, too.

It's just that the mainstream is not terribly thoughtful or insightful. So when it's something physical and obvious, like a tick sucking blood, they recoil and see that it's a nasty parasite. When it's something nonphysical requiring a bit of perspective, like encouraging a character weakness for profit, they mostly excuse and defend it, talking about how convenient it is. That is the only potential upside, so they have to play it up as much as possible.

I know, because I've attended one of the major conferences in the industry and met some of these folks and listened to their talks about this sort of technology.

To be among that many marketdroids... Did it resemble a robotics class?

And of course, what makes it easy for a legitimate business to take your money also makes it easy for a not-so-legitimate business or a thief to take your money.

Yes, those who are dumb/shallow enough to think this is a great idea, are likely dumb enough not to see that it represents extra risk. You're not surprised by that, are you? Seems like water seeking its own level to me. I see no injustice here. I notice people who flock to the latest bandwagon with great urgency tend to have more problems than the rest of us. I again see no injustice to it. They are merely making a value judgment, just as I do when I elect not to join them.

Re:This is what they mean by "frictionless" (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109981)

To be among that many marketdroids... Did it resemble a robotics class?

No, it resembled a remedial course in comparative literature: Anyone with half a brain could tell that most of what was being said was nonsense, but most of the attendees were eating it up.

what currencies will they support? (1, Funny)

molecular (311632) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108697)

bitcoin?

*ducks*

Re:what currencies will they support? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109733)

A currency based on ducks would probably be the more popular of the two.

Re:what currencies will they support? (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110007)

*ducks*

You know what? Given the current economy, I might be willing to accept ducks as currency.

Seriosuly... (4, Insightful)

ericloewe (2129490) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108701)

The last thing we need is for Facebook to trick people into making it powerful in a whole new way.

Why the fuck are gas-engine lawn mowers so loud? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108713)

It's like they don't know how to make a working muffler, or what is it with those things?

No, it won't. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108715)

I said so.

And in unreleated news... (0)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108741)

facebook loses even more users.

IMHO, that is just one evil, evil, empire. I hate to sound like a conspirator, but I wouldn't put it past a greater power, rather than Zergabuger, being responsible for knowing the intimate details of your life.

frictionless my ass (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108825)

The only friction they are removing is by greasing the path from my pocket to their pocket.

And I'd rather there BE friction there, since it's my pocketbook on the line.

Worth 1000 captchas. (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 2 years ago | (#41108991)

From the threads on 4chan, it's apparent lots of people are paying through Facebook already.

Maybe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41108995)

Gaining trust of investors on the long run will also require keeping their customers trust. We have payments through facebook, and several other channels too. Facebook does not bring a lot of money, has a very high rate of fraud, is difficult to predict and causes a lot of complaints.

currently if a parent buys something via facebook and pays by creditcard, it will store the card details, and use it without further authorization in the future. We get a lot of complaints on services targetted at teenagers, and have no way to control it. I would not be surprised if a lot of services that don't really need to be on fb canvas to prosper will start dropping out in the future...

Good Luck Bango! (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109019)

Because I have had a "3rd party billing" block on my AT&T account for years. and I suggest everyone do the same. it keeps scumbag companies like bango from being able to charge your Mobile phone number for anything.

Re:Good Luck Bango! (1)

glodime (1015179) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110667)

I have had a "3rd party billing" block on my AT&T account for years.

Is this for your cell phone, a "landline", or both?

How does one go about this and confirm that the block is in place. Is this legally required of phone companies (cell, landline, VOIP, cable phone providers)?

3rd party billing is clearly something that should be required by law to be explicitly opt-in.

sure i can see this (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109075)

as long as this means that i can get PAID this way. Heck i have a prepaid Amex i could link to this.

Huh? (1)

fishthegeek (943099) | more than 2 years ago | (#41109121)

Paying Through Facebook May Become a Reality

should read

Paying Through Facebook May Become Possible

FTFY... it will never be my reality.

Phone? What's that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109389)

Sorry past-people, but here in the future we communicate through pure thought alone. We have no need for primitive little plastic communication devices.

Get off my floating lawn.

Fuck no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109569)

Just Fuck No.

No Facebook you are not getting any payment information from me.

Facebook is toast. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109883)

Facebook is stealing our data, often secretly from unrelated websites running the API in the background, and selling it to who knows whom. People should not trust facebook at all, especially not with any kind of financial detail. These guys are unethical and borderline illegal!

And well, Once people catch on to open source things like Diasporia, facebook is toast.

Why (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41109891)

Why the fuck do I need to pay through Facebook? What benefit do I get from using them over my existing Visa or, heaven forbid, actual cash? At least there are established laws in place for liability and credit card fraud.

Bango? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41110035)

Isn't that why your wive(s) are on FB? Gettin' Bangoed by other men...

Eh? (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110103)

I have perfectly good credit card that gives me perfectly good rewards to the point that I run my whole life through it and get nearly a thousand dollars a year in free stuff. It's also with a bank that is S.H.I.E.L.D.-like when it comes to detecting and snuffing out unauthorized shit. So why do I want some other middle man to get in the way again?

Check out IEEE Spectrum (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41110317)

A recent edition of IEEE Spectrum (front page title was "The last days of cash") has several articles about stuff like this. The article above is sortof useless, but the ones in the magazine were pretty good and highly recommended.

'Bango' 'Frictionless' (1)

trudyscousin (258684) | more than 2 years ago | (#41110325)

Sounds like the potential for a good fucking, all right, but not necessarily the kind you want.

Payment using Facebook? I don't think so. Why not be done with it and make barcode tattoos on foreheads mandatory?

So how long until Amazon sues them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41110791)

Didn't amazon patent the 1-touch buying system?

Frictionless (1)

OldSport (2677879) | more than 2 years ago | (#41111025)

So silky smooth, you don't even notice you're being financially raped.

Regarding Bango ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41111455)

Bango (AIM: BGO), announced on 21 May 2012 that Peter Saxton, Bango’s CFO, had notified the Board of Bango of his wish to retire, on a schedule to be agreed with the Board that will ensure an orderly hand-over to a new CFO. This process is ongoing and is expected to be completed by November 2012.

(later)

Peter Saxton, Chief Financial Officer at mobile web payments firm Bango, has sold 386,701 shares on 23 August 2012 at a price of 179.50p per share.

Friction is Your Friend, No Mobile Clicks (1)

guttentag (313541) | more than 2 years ago | (#41111609)

"Frictionless" payment is how Bango puts it.

Can we all agree that whenever a corporation uses the term "frictionless payment," we simply replace it with "greasing the consumer's wallet." People tend to think of friction as a negative term, but do you really find that you're having trouble getting your card or the linen out of your wallet because there's simply too much friction? If someone offered a "frictionless wallet" from which money slips out effortlessly, would you buy it? Some things, like brakes and wallets, are useless without friction.

I once worked with several of the megabanks, and I remember a marketing guy trying to communicate what the banks wanted out of the software I was working on, telling me that consumers don't want to enter their credit card information, or even authorize its use, to make purchases online. I told him consumers need a measure of control over their money... they need to be sure that nothing is being charged to their cards unless they authorize it. He explained that the banks don't like it when consumers nitpick their spending like that... they want consumers to spend money without paying attention to the details, because they won't notice when the bank slips in a small, unexplained service charge, or when they've gotten themselves into debt that the bank can profit off of (the bank's task is to figure out how far to let them go before they're unable to pay). Whenever a bank/financial institution talks about making it easier to get money out of your wallet, you need to be on guard.

Bango will get a cut of each click; it declined to say how much.'

I see Facebook has a loophole here. "Technically, none of our mobile customers clicked anything, as they all use touchscreen devices which lack the capacity to emit a clicking sound or click-like action. They used the tapping method, but since the contract says Bango only gets paid for 'clicks,' Bango get nothing."

plus 3, Tr0ll) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41111805)

than make a since8e they want 7ou to
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?