Slashdot Mirror


Google Wallet May Compete With Paypal

theskeptic writes "According to the WSJ, Google plans to offer an electronic-payment service that could help the Internet-search company diversify its revenue and may heighten competition with eBay's PayPal unit. Codenamed Google Wallet, a payment service could represent a significant expansion beyond online advertising, which generated 99% of its $3.2 billion in revenue last year. Google's move could potentially threaten eBay's successful PayPal service, which generated $233.1 million, or 23% of eBay's revenue in the first quarter."

335 comments

  1. Too late by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    www.gwallet.com is currently owned by a domain squatter.

    1. Re:Too late by athmanb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They'll go wallet.google.com anyway.

    2. Re:Too late by rbarreira · · Score: 3, Funny

      Someone buy that, quick!

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    3. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Someone buy that, quick!

      Umm... I think Google already owns the domain google.com. Unless they're planning to sell a contract for the subdomain, it's already theirs lock, stock, and barrel.

      Purchase domains much?

    4. Re:Too late by MoonBuggy · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, it'll go something like this:

      Squatter: Ha ha, I'm not selling for less than a billion dollars cash.
      Google: Is $2billion in stock OK?
      Squatter: Woohoo, I'm rich.
      *3 seconds later*
      Squatter: What do you mean Google stock just bombed? Are you telling me a company that made $3billion last year _isn't_ worth $80billion?

    5. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is fair to say that the person who reserved that domain god knows how long ago just soiled his undergarments.

    6. Re:Too late by goodcow · · Score: 3, Funny

      Someone clearly missed the funny.

    7. Re:Too late by Skim123 · · Score: 1

      Ditto www.GoogleWallet.com. Was registered just yesterday.

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    8. Re:Too late by CardiganKiller · · Score: 0

      So what happens when Google gets into the twine-related industry? Cause I think that domain is probably taken.

      I'm not talking about gtwine.com either.

    9. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hosted by Yahoo too.

      Funny funny.

    10. Re:Too late by turg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, if the stock is worth $300 a share and drops to $0.01 a share, his $2 billion would become $66,666 -- still not a bad return on a $10 investment.

      --
      <sig>Guvf vf abg n frperg zrffntr
    11. Re:Too late by legirons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      www.gwallet.com is currently owned by a domain squatter

      wallet.google.com would allow them to re-use the cookie set by the google.com domain

    12. Re:Too late by Pollardito · · Score: 1

      right, but just like with gmail.com, i'm sure they'd like to own that domain to redirect people to the real one

    13. Re:Too late by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of the time that I got flamed for not understanding floating point math.

      Of course, what I was saying in my post had nothing to do with a lack of understanding of floating point math, but, people flamed me for it anyway.

      Quite a pedantic group we have here.

    14. Re:Too late by NitsujTPU · · Score: 3, Funny

      The trade of the beast!

    15. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humour (Humor) is not your strong suit, is it?

    16. Re:Too late by cazbar · · Score: 1
      It looks like KenyaTech is the service handling the domain squatting. They probably aren't the owners though. Link to their website is here:

      Kenyatech.com

      May the slashdot effect take it's toll.

    17. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      www.gwallet.com is currently owned by a domain squatter.

      What about www.gaypal.com?

    18. Re:Too late by John+Bokma · · Score: 1

      poogle.com ?

    19. Re:Too late by bobcat7677 · · Score: 1

      Sorry... that one is already taken too. http://gaypal.com/

    20. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different service.

      Although it is also based out of San Francisco.

    21. Re:Too late by endlessoul · · Score: 1

      Would you mind advising if a link if safe for work or not? Now I have to burn our servers! Thanks, buddy!

    22. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DUDE! That is sooo funny!

      Thanks mate. That really made my day :)

    23. Re:Too late by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

      Yeah well making fun of floating point math, here at slashdot is not the most intelligent thing to do, some people over here tend to be a bit sensitive about it. ;-)

    24. Re:Too late by thue · · Score: 1

      www.gmoney.com and www.gcash.com are taken too.

    25. Re:Too late by cpghost · · Score: 1

      If the domain name contains the (sub)string "Google", it will not be a problem to yank it away from the squatter following regular UDRP dispute.

      It will be more difficult to "recover" domain names just starting with 'g' though like 'gwallet'...

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    26. Re:Too late by pmc · · Score: 1

      But he has to pay tax on the original price of the share option - about $1 billion.

      So his $2 billion would become -$1 billion.

    27. Re:Too late by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Funny

      What did you think it would be...
      A network for happy friends?

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    28. Re:Too late by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      its like good news bad news Bad news: loose the gwallet.com domain good news: get the first public account with a load of Google cash in it!

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    29. Re:Too late by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Well, you can get to him directly - on the kenyatyech page, you can make an offer for the domain . offer him $1 for it (from a spamgourmet account, of course) :)

    30. Re:Too late by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Oh, don't be silly; it's not remotely as bad as it could have been; it's a domain-spam containing the word "sex" once or twice. Anyway, what on earth were you expecting?

      --
      Me (Blog)
    31. Re:Too late by bobcat7677 · · Score: 1

      I'll try to be more careful about stating the obvious in the future;)

      P.S. - Your welcome!

  2. good, paypal needs competition by marcybots · · Score: 5, Informative

    Having used paypal and ebay when selling, I know well that the fees and such add up quickly when using these services. I didnt even use all the special junk they try to push on you like bold headings, gallery etc and I still wound up paying 11 dollars to sell a 75 dollar item...thats robbery. Hopefully this google wallet will make paypal's credit card use fees come back down to earth.

    1. Re:good, paypal needs competition by arodland · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most of that was eBay listing fees. Paypal fees are usually only a few percent, and only on certain transactions (others are free).

    2. Re:good, paypal needs competition by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not to mention that they force things on you that you don't want and blame YOU when they fuck up. They offered a "Pay with your bank account" service(mostly so they could get away from the high credit card fees but still charge the recipient), I didn't want to use it though, so I chose to pay with my credit card. However, they chose to use a bank account in which I had the minimum balance in(I kept it around in case I needed a loan from the bank as they have cheap rates for members). So then I got a message from paypal saying that there were insufficient funds and used my Discover card to cover it. Furthermore, they were going to retry in 2 days(I don't know why, I paid the god damn money). I was away from my email for a few days and didn't notice it, by the time I did I had over $80 in fees from the bank. Fortunately my bank forgave the fees but I closed down my paypal account right away.

      The worst part about it was that when I called up customer service to complain, they blamed me. I tried to tell them that in fact I am not a moron and made sure to pay with my card(since I never wanted the bank account service in the first place) but they continued to blame me. Not to mention the manager was a real ass......I hope they die a quick death

    3. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Mold · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, the fees shocked me the first couple of times. They sound okay in thoery, but when they actually hit, you realize how bad they are.

      I hope this works out, but I'm wondering how long it will take to become widespread. I'm not really sure how much I would use it. I mean, I use it for a couple of small sites, and donations, but other than that it's pretty much just for eBay. Oh well, I'm sure someone will find a good use for it.

      I'm amazed Google is going with something that can't be in Beta.

    4. Re:good, paypal needs competition by JanneM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree about the competition, but I would have hoped for a competitor that wasn't based in the same country. This means that both options are still subject to the whims of one country and its political and economic prticulars.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    5. Re:good, paypal needs competition by nametaken · · Score: 4, Interesting


      PayPal does indeed blow. This is coming from someone who has used it as a small merchant and as a buyer.

      As a merchant, I was more than a little peeved when I used the method of buying from myself and immediately refunding payments, as their manual suggested, and they processed the payments anyways (days later) against a checking account. Ok, so the manual didn't mention that they will still process cancelled transactions... fine. I called them to get it straightened out (really to let them know they should say that in the manual) and I was actually yelled at, and then hung up on. I couldn't believe this. I said screw em, and had my bank reverse the charges as fraudulent withdrawls and filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau who has regular meetings with the fucks at PayPal.

      As a buyer I have had all kinds of problems as well. I personally can't wait for Google to become the standard... even if I DO normally worry about Google branching out. We're in desperate need of an alternative.

    6. Re:good, paypal needs competition by turg · · Score: 1

      PayPal's fees are less than you'd pay if you signed up for your own merchant account to accept credit cards.

      I don't think that an individual is going to find any way to accept credit cards that costs less than PayPal -- unless Visa/MasterCard/AmEx/etc. radically change the way they do business (or the payment service is willing to take a loss on the fees).

      --
      <sig>Guvf vf abg n frperg zrffntr
    7. Re:good, paypal needs competition by 0101000001001010 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's probably a little late to post this. But I just wanted to add that the exact same thing happened to me. Perversely, I knew that I had chosen to use my credit card, since after selecting it they tried to push some additional "credit card insurance" or some nonsense like that on me.

      I called their customer service within 1 minute after the transaction, since the confirmation email mentioned my bank account. Now this was a long distance call, my friends, no 1-800 number here. After waiting in line for over 20-minutes (long-distance) I spoke to the most singularily unpleasent, unfriendly, and unresponsive customer service I have ever had to talk to. All to no avail of course. Fortunately I managed to drive to my bank and put the cash into the account before the transaction went through.

      So if Google is bringing some competition, than I hope that PayPal dies a quick and painful death and that their customer service department STARVES TO DEATH!...

      I feel better now.

    8. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worst part about it was that when I called up customer service to complain, they blamed me.

      I had a similar story with PayPal, but from a buyer perspective. I was cheated to buy iPod (yes, I know that is the classic trap) and waited 30 days for the international shipment. After these 30 days my money was way gone (appearantly the seller bought his "good" identity from someone) along with the seller (and my wife's birthday present). I couldn't get my money from PayPal because I didn't complain in 30 days. Nothing helped to change it, so I had to close my account in PayPal and never to buy in EBay again.

    9. Re:good, paypal needs competition by TykeClone · · Score: 1
      I don't think that an individual is going to find any way to accept credit cards that costs less than PayPal

      That's probably true. A big reason for so much complaining about PayPal fees is that, for the most part, consumers are insulated from them. But when they try to sell something on eBay and PayPal takes a couple of percent of the price of the item, they think it's a ripoff.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    10. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Michael+Spencer+Jr. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      11 dollars seems pretty steep, but then again I've never used eBay or PayPal. Can you break that down for us? How much was payment-processing-related, and how much was listing-and-selling related?

      I could understand maybe $1.50 or $2.00 for transferring $75.00. Pure interchange and assessments on a card-not-present Visa or Mastercard sale will cost most of that amount, and the processing company needs a little overhead to cover the small fraction of transactions the processor ends up paying for.

      In general, payment processing has to have a cost, because there has to be oversight and oversight costs money. The only free way to transfer money is the buyer placing cash in the hand of the seller. Everything else has people in the loop somewhere. Some kinds of payment processing even have accountability -- fraud management, chargeback rights, stop-payment rights, etc. Those investigations cost money also, and that adds to the price of a transaction.

    11. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ur a fool
      you kept an account which can charge you $80 in fees in 2 days?
      ur a fool

    12. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Phos · · Score: 1

      You, nametaken, said it. I have been looking for an alternative to paypal for about 5 years, and while it's not up and running yet, this is very promising. Go Google. Down with Paypal :)

      Jason

    13. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Mike570 · · Score: 1

      Even if Google somehow puts Paypal out of business, they'll just become abusive to their customers. Once the competition is gone, that's when rates go up and customer service decreases. It's kind of like how Walmart operates. When they move into a new area, they are fine with that store taking a loss for the first year (sometimes more) until the local small businesses go under. Once that happens, they raise prices.

    14. Re:good, paypal needs competition by fbjon · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm amazed that this is such a problem. In Finland, when I buy something on an auction, online, or anywhere, I can just log in to my bank (with good security), and send the money to the other person's bank account. I send the exact sum of money required, to any bank in Finland, and that same amount arrives in the other person's bank about the next banking day, or immediately if it's the same bank. Transfer fees do not exist.

      And there's some talk of sending checks around in the comments here. Are we talking about real, physical checks made of paper here? Is there anyone else here who realises how utterly oldsk00l this is?

      What about COD? I can put stuff in a package, fill out a small form with my account number and a pickup charge amount, and give it to the post office. The other person receives it, pays the charge I wrote in any way he sees fit to the Post, and the Post deposits the same sum into my account. It's like magic!

      No seriously, why are there such problems? Are there fees for transferring between states? Is paypal really the only alternative?

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    15. Re:good, paypal needs competition by Tadu · · Score: 1
      I still wound up paying 11 dollars to sell a 75 dollar item
      In Germany, you just transfer your money to the seller's bank account. Which costs you just 0.00€.

      Of course, if the seller then just disappears with the money, you can only go to the police - but then, there's not much else you can do as a buyer on eBay anyway - eBay only protects the seller. But trustworthy sellers let eBay verify their account (then it's called "Überweisung+"), which is as good as it can get to allow the police to catch the seller if necessary.

    16. Re:good, paypal needs competition by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

      I used to think that the C in COD stood for `Cash` but I'm told it's actually `cheque`.

      If it's cheque then there are the usual problems of bouncing, funds go in, then not enough money to pay it so withdrawn, cancalling the cheque (upto a year) for £15... etc

      Is it cheque and if so is the postman your guarantee fall guy?

    17. Re:good, paypal needs competition by hobbit · · Score: 1

      You chose to pay with your credit card. They chose to use a bank account in which you had the minimum balance?

      How did they get details of your bank account, permission to withdraw funds from it, etc.?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    18. Re:good, paypal needs competition by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      I had used the bank account previously when I lived in the area. I never bothered to get rid of the information on PayPal because I didn't see any real harm in it being there. Now I am much more vigilant and don't let paypal have any more information than it absolutely needs.

    19. Re:good, paypal needs competition by LetterJ · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the "try again in 2 days" happened to me. The big problem was that the transactions were fraudulent as someone apparently got into my account. I woke up one morning to emails saying that they "tried" to take the $12,000 in transactions that "I" tried to send overnight. But, since the accounts and cards didn't go through, they assured me that they'd try again.

      I was in the middle of reading those emails when the phone rang from both my bank and my credit cards asking me about the fraud.

      Compare the 2 reactions and you'll see why treating Paypal as any sort of real "financial company" is a complete joke. All of the real financial institutions flagged every single one of those transactions pretty much immediately and Paypal was going to try to run the fraud through again. Then, 2 days later, AFTER I HAD CALLED PAYPAL, they did try again. At that point, everyone in the situation knew it was fraud and they still hadn't stopped the automatic followups.

      They then locked my Paypal account because it was "involved in fraud" and I had to fight for almost a year to get the remaining real money out of the account.

    20. Re:good, paypal needs competition by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Noo, it's Cash On Delivery, at lest that's what it is now. I've never heard of ChequeOD. To explain: I've received maybe two checks in my life, both as gifts. This is only because it's less crude than giving cash outright. One of my friends says he has never seen a cheque in his life, and neither have I for the last 7 years now. I asked my dad what he knew about it, and he said some "common people" used cheques, but mostly top-class businessmen. They were still in use in the 70's, but then came the plastic cards, and cheques dissapeared instantly. No-one wanted to use such an insecure and problematic system anymore. Now it's only gifts or travellers' cheques.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    21. Re:good, paypal needs competition by life+Acolyte · · Score: 1

      I am looking forward to this a lot.

      Paypal stopped their service in South Africa. Sending them a query asking if and when they will start operating in South Africa again, you get a canned response.

      I hope gwallet comes to South Africa!

      --
      Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix
  3. Woohoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they do and it's a reliable service. This is where the 'do no evil' thing _has_ to kick in.

    Paypal suck and I don't think there's anyone who'll say they do no evil. A reliable, and inexpensive, means of micropayments is long overdue.

  4. What lays ahead by simulacrum25 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This could lay the foundation for Google to introduce paid services. It would certainly ease them into it if people already use Google Cash.

    It's also nice to see some competition to Paypal. Ebay has done a pretty good job with it IMO, but too much of a monopoly for me to be comfortable with.

    1. Re:What lays ahead by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Google Answers is already a paid service, FWIW.

    2. Re:What lays ahead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about you, but I have serious ethical concerns about a company which has the potential to control upto 100% of the worlds cashflow (if all transactions are eventually done online) and information.

      -Sj53

  5. Wallet? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 4, Funny

    How about Goopay? Goopal? Paygoo? Palgoo? Paygle? Paygle?

    1. Re:Wallet? by ikkonoishi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Google + Money = Moogle

    2. Re:Wallet? by slavemowgli · · Score: 1

      How about Poogle? It would probably lead to a lawsuit by Neopets, but it actually sounds nice enough (which, incidentally may be one of the reasons the word is used on Neopets).

      If that doesn't work, it could always be varied a bit - Poodle comes to mind, for example. Or how about Bagel? :)

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    3. Re:Wallet? by N3Roaster · · Score: 3, Funny
      Google + Money = Moogle
      Kupo?
      --
      Remember RFC 873!
    4. Re:Wallet? by arose · · Score: 4, Funny

      Rooble.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    5. Re:Wallet? by Squareball · · Score: 1

      Missed one "GayPal"

    6. Re:Wallet? by MonoNexo · · Score: 1

      Google Wallet = Waggle?

    7. Re:Wallet? by benchbri · · Score: 1

      It's obvious. Gmoney. You know, down with the g-money. God, I'm white.

    8. Re:Wallet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paygle?

      Redundant.

    9. Re:Wallet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G-Money :)

    10. Re:Wallet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, people pay with Roobles! Wait a second..

    11. Re:Wallet? by GamingFox · · Score: 1

      GooglePal or my personal favorite... PayGoogle. :P

      I think PayGoogle is more fitting because Google want more than one source of revenue (AdSense). So by offering payment service, we would be "paying" Google. Therefore... PayGoogle.

    12. Re:Wallet? by dangitman · · Score: 1
      How about Goopay? Goopal? Paygoo? Palgoo? Paygle? Paygle?

      How about G$?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    13. Re:Wallet? by Alascom · · Score: 1

      Oh no... Could it be name

      gaypal?

    14. Re:Wallet? by dq5+studios · · Score: 1

      WARK!

    15. Re:Wallet? by Palal · · Score: 1

      Considering the fact that Mr. Sergei Brin is Russian, this would work!

      --
      -Palal
    16. Re:Wallet? by Nameles · · Score: 1

      Kweh!

    17. Re:Wallet? by MadMoses · · Score: 1

      Poogle?

      On a second thought, no.

      --

      Do not be alarmed. This is only a test.
  6. Hope they include a nice micropayment system. by Eunuch · · Score: 2, Funny

    So people can donate to the projects they rejected for the summer of code.

    --
    Transcend Humanity. Please.
  7. Various obligatory posts by Council · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Obvious jokes:

    Will the credit card numbers be searchable? (possibly including a wry link to the Google search for visa-format numbers that's so startling)

    Well, I'm sure there'll be SOME aspect of my life Google doesn't know everything about.

    Obvious theme of discussion:

    Evil plot for world domination or Google just bringing helpful service?

    Obvious joking twist on discussion of Google's evilness:

    Well, even if they . . . whatever. I don't even care anymore. My life is a sham.

    --
    xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
    1. Re:Various obligatory posts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent -1, annoying

    2. Re:Various obligatory posts by spellraiser · · Score: 1
      Way to go. Now I don't care anymore either. Plus I've nothing to add to the discussion. Way to ruin a Saturday night.

      F*** it, I'm getting drunk.

      Hmm - on second thought, seems you actually just made my night. Cheers!

      --
      I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
    3. Re:Various obligatory posts by Council · · Score: 1

      wanna go to a bar or something?

      --
      xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
    4. Re:Various obligatory posts by spellraiser · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that sounds good. If you want to join me, I hope Iceland isn't too far out of your way.

      --
      I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
    5. Re:Various obligatory posts by Council · · Score: 1

      So wait, how do I get moderated 'redundant' when I was the first non-troll post? As I've said before, I think I really don't understand the 'redundant' moderation.

      --
      xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
  8. Flamebait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of you won't like to hear it... But isn't google trying to get a monopoly on everything that is on our planet? I love google itself, I love gmail, and froogle too.

    little offtopic > They could split it all up in different companies, this would make competition possible on all the fields they are working on.

    1. Re: Flamebait? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Interesting


      > A lot of you won't like to hear it... But isn't google trying to get a monopoly on everything that is on our planet?

      They may turn out to be the Microsoft of the internet era. However, so far they haven't shown signs of being a great evil, and their stuff isn't crap.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re: Flamebait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am the poster of the post you replied to.

      Google might be doing whatever they do completely right now, but couldn't that be because they are succeeding? Microsoft has been good for computer technology, they made stuff unified, but now they won't give the data we need (protocols etc). I am not extremely sure, but I do believe there should be some OpenSource searching systems etc. I love google etc, but competition must be there!

      Maybe I am just a wheener that has had it with Microsoft, and maybe I just don't wish the world to have a second firm like that... George Orwell warned us, we failed to see it once, please dudes, don't let that happen twice!

      With the mixed feeling (loving google for their new service / being affraid what the future will give us) I'm going to bed.

      NOTE: Stop reading from here, next is just crap

      So SICK
      love you google
      but split
      but will love you otherwise too
      but just split in different companies please
      love you google

    3. Re: Flamebait? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      While I agree that competition is a Good Idea(tm), I've got a friend who insists on using MSN Search, as opposed to Google. She doesn't trust Google. I can't help but laugh when she tells me this ;-)

      And, no, that's not why I'm not with her. I don't think she's got any problem with my political viewpoints (she agrees with most of them) or my interest in computers.

    4. Re: Flamebait? by magefile · · Score: 1

      So far, they haven't. But they will eventually, as Page & Brin aren't around to enforce corporate culture, it'll probably drift. If not before. But then, I don't do anything over Gmail that is even remotely private - and I try to avoid putting such things on any email account, anywhere.

    5. Re: Flamebait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey hey. I'm not anti-Google myself, but when you say:

      ... so far they haven't shown signs of being a great evil, and their stuff isn't crap.

      ... may I remind you that early in Microsoft's history they relied on outside developers to provide applications for DOS and early Windows. The full documentation to the system APIs was available and development tools were intentionally kept cheap. It was when competitors started failing and Microsoft started buying everyone else out that they became an in-house development company. This lead to hidden API specs and the requirement for NDAs with anyone purchasing quality tools. Such was the reasons for their now ludicrously expensive tools. One has to fork out considerable cash to buy the tools to build applications that will no doubt benefit the Microsoft platform.

      This is what I wanted to emphasise, that companies often start out with good intentions, but the intentions of the equity holders become more accentuated in the direction a company takes. Duty to the stockholders often leads to insular and outwardly agressive behaviour from a once well intentioned company.

    6. Re:Flamebait? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong with having a monopoly , its when you start to abuse that monopoly that problems occur .

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    7. Re: Flamebait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure they are a monopoly, a GOOD monopoly. Now i feel so much better.

    8. Re: Flamebait? by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Signs of being a great evil? Well, my last AdSense cheque was drawn on CitiBank; does that count? :)

      --
      Me (Blog)
    9. Re: Flamebait? by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Well, that's the thing; a benevolent totalitarianism is the best form of government, as long as it can be relied upon to remain benovelent. Of course, it never does.

      --
      Me (Blog)
  9. Competition is a good thing.... by erick99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I had an eBayer complain about a transaction and PayPal did not just set aside the amount of the sale which was small - they locked out my entire account which had a ripple affect with other auctions I was running. By the time I was exonerated I had taken a beating. I am not opposed to competition if it might reduce some of this heavy handed behavior.

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:Competition is a good thing.... by Sancho · · Score: 2, Informative

      Lots of similar horror stories:

      http://paypalsucks.com/

  10. Coming soon: GBay? by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With Google coming up with their own PayPal, they're halfway to coming up with a full eBay-killer auction site. Imagine being able to create an auction that'd show up whenever somebody searches Google for the product's name....

    1. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by Entropy_ah · · Score: 2, Funny

      From the same story on fark.com:
      Bahamut: GBay sounds like bj, which is slang for oral sex.

      --
      my other penis is a vagina
    2. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by bajo77 · · Score: 1

      Imagine being able to create an auction that'd show up whenever somebody searches Google for the product's name....

      eBay items already show up in Froogle

    3. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by turg · · Score: 1

      With Google coming up with their own PayPal, they're halfway to coming up with a full eBay-killer auction site.

      I'm not so sure about that. eBay became huge many years before PayPal came along (and it was years after that before eBay bought PayPal). eBay was the killer app even when everybody paid by sending cheques in the mail.

      eBay took off because it was a new way to sell things. Whatever Google might come up with that might challenge eBay's supremacy, it's not going to be another auction site. To become the next killer app, they need to invent some completely new way of selling online -- not just a variation on what eBay does.

      --
      <sig>Guvf vf abg n frperg zrffntr
    4. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By that logic, Yahoo! Auctions would have killed eBay years ago.

      --

      There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    5. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by ipjohnson · · Score: 1

      And of any internet company out there that can not only compete but beat eBay on capital & brand name its google. Lets be honest here they don't need to make the wheel much better. Just easier and cheaper (two things google is very good at) and they have 25% of eBay's business in 6 months.

    6. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      By that logic, Yahoo! Auctions would have killed eBay years ago.

      yeah, but who really uses Yahoo??? just about everybody has heard of eBay by now, whilst only some of us who were around from the beginning really remember the glory days of yahoo...

      GBay would be a killer, but they'll have problems with that name... too close to eBay and eBay would accuse them of passing themselves off... GTrade as a short name for Google Trading Post???

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    7. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 1
      yeah, but who really uses Yahoo???
      Just about everyone, but back when Yahoo Auctions was new, it was ... truly everyone.

      And yet Yahoo Auctions never supplanted eBay despite having both search and auction features (and later, even a payment service). Point being that, historically, nifty synergies don't trump being first-to-market with a 60% product and 90% of the user base. Just ask the makers of Betamax, DR-DOS, etc.

      Two weeks ago, Yahoo finally caved in and made listings free, but I wouldn't count on them taking any significant marketshare from eBay anytime soon. It's just too entrenched a marketplace. Hell, there are businesses that exist just to service businesses that exist just to service eBay sellers.

      Google would have better luck opening its own stock exchange to trade Pokemon futures and equity interests in lemonade stands than going head to head against eBay. But if it lights a fire under eBay's ass to trim fat off their margins, I'm all for it.

      --

      There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    8. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've got an amazon.com killer in beta too. Here's a scan of my membership card.

    9. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Google would have better luck opening its own stock exchange to trade Pokemon futures and equity interests in lemonade stands than going head to head against eBay

      You vastly underestimate Google. If you own the web search, all else follows.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    10. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by cosmic_0x526179 · · Score: 1

      They (eBay) would fight it (GBay) like you would not believe. About 5 years back a guy in HI started a site called BrickBay to sell LEGO toys and parts. After a year or two the powers that be noticed this upstart and dropped the legal hammer on him. He finally changed the site name to BrickLink to avoid spending tons of money on something that was a useless excersize. BrickLink has flourished. Probably does more than twice the LEGO business that eBay does. Serves em right !

      --
      This msg is brought to you by the letter 'W'.. for Worthless Wuss
    11. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by timeOday · · Score: 1
      eBay took off because it was a new way to sell things. Whatever Google might come up with that might challenge eBay's supremacy, it's not going to be another auction site. To become the next killer app, they need to invent some completely new way of selling online -- not just a variation on what eBay does.
      First, realize that ebay was by no means the first auction site on the Internet. There were many others, some worse, some probably better. Through some combination of good execution and luck, ebay grasped the natural monopoly slot.

      Second, your comment is ironic with respect to google, because they struggled for years to sell or license their search technology. Nobody would give them the time of day, because there were many entrenched search engines already. Search was thought to be an bland commodity.

      Still, ebay's advantage as the incumbent is huge.

    12. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by yic · · Score: 1
      Btw, I auctioned something online for the first time recently, trying both Ebay and Yahoo. Yahoo Auctions does not charge listing fees, and is much simpler to use and navigate (although partly because they don't have price figures next to widgets -- if you check this widget, we charge you this much). So for the seller, Yahoo auctions is a lot better, and I'm sad the focus hasn't shifted from Ebay already. One reason I can think of is those established sellers on Ebay don't want to give up their 'trust karma' :/

      Yahoo really should promote their auctions more, encourage more people to browse it so that it's worth it for sellers to list there. You can only list in one place at a time.

    13. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 1
      You vastly underestimate Google. If you own the web search, all else follows.
      We're not talking about web search we're talking about being a marketplace.

      To put the difference in perspective, what's going to be the switching cost for a user when a better search engine comes along (assuming it's not Google that develops it)? Pretty close to zero, even if you're using any of their "sticky" services like GMail, personalized homepage, etc.

      Contrast that with the switching cost of moving your eBay business, reputation, inventory, fulfillment, etc. to a new platform, for no other reason than ... because it's Google's platform? Because your listings will show up in their search too? (as someone pointed out, they already do). It would take something just about as disruptive as the Internet itself for Google to get serious position as a marketplace. Clearly they are poised to continue to reap healthy marketing revenue from referrals to eBay auctions but that's strictly different than being a marketplace -- that's being a billboard -- especially when it's still cheaper to type "ebay" than "google" (let alone "froogle") if you're searching for something to buy.

      In fact, it makes more sense for eBay to augment their organic marketplace with an external product search, so there's no reason to search anywhere else if you're looking for something to buy, than it does for Google to try and augment their search marketing business with an empty marketplace. That's why eBay bought shopping.com, but Google can't buy a ready-made marketplace.

      --

      There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
    14. Re:Coming soon: GBay? by hobbit · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about web search we're talking about being a marketplace.

      You're not talking about web search, which is why I say you're missing the point.

      Cheaper to type "ebay"? Whatever. My browser has a Google search box built into it. It's my starting point. If I want to achieve something on the internet, I type it into the Google search box, whether I want to find out about it, buy it, talk to it, have sex with it, whatever.

      Of course sellers won't move their marketplaces from eBay; they'll just duplicate them to get maximum coverage. They'll start to build up a good reputation in the Google marketplace (inventory etc., are literally neither here nor there), and somewhere down the line, they'll start getting more custom through Google than they get through eBay, as more and more shoppers find the Google marketplace better-placed in their search results.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  11. Yes by eclectro · · Score: 0, Troll


    I, for one, welcome our new google pay overlord.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  12. Cool! by maelstrom · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now Google can store my e-mail, remember my searches, know who all my friends are, know where I'm driving, and know all my finances :-D

    Good job!

    --
    The more you know, the less you understand.
    1. Re:Cool! by tomjen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Remember, that the NSA recently retired carnivore - suppose that there replacement was google. Now that is a scary idea.

      --
      Freedom or George Bush
    2. Re:Cool! by RickPartin · · Score: 1

      Usually this mass takeover of the world by one company type of thing scares me. But how can you not like Google? Would you rather it be MS? *shivers*

    3. Re:Cool! by MutantHamster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh my God, I never noticed that before! Before I thought they were doing all this because it was allowing them to make billions of dollars a year, but now that you point it out it seems much more plausible that they're personally spying on you. You might want to look into this too.

      --
      My Greatest Heist - Muisc partly inspired by the unbeatable Qwantz
    4. Re:Cool! by Aggrav8d · · Score: 1

      Now all I need is Google GATC - when you need to find someone and all you have is a DNA sample.

    5. Re:Cool! by fr0dicus · · Score: 1

      Why does that corporation make you shudder any more than this one? Has Microsoft abused single user information, or just competitors?

    6. Re:Cool! by TykeClone · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't have said that - the feds are coming to get you now!

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    7. Re:Cool! by Feyr · · Score: 1

      carnivore was an fbi project, not nsa

    8. Re:Cool! by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Microsoft cheerfully sells OSes that are unfit for general use, and does it for lots of money. Google hasn't charged me $200 to let them cache my search history, So they're better.

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    9. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your first sentence is so ridiculous I actually nearly cried.

    10. Re:Cool! by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Oh, good, there's nothing at stake except billions of dollars. I guess we're safe then, because greed never causes problems.

    11. Re:Cool! by MutantHamster · · Score: 1
      Google is poisoning the drinking water! OPEN YOUR EYES, PEOPLE!!111

      I love Slashdot.

      --
      My Greatest Heist - Muisc partly inspired by the unbeatable Qwantz
  13. This seems reasonable... by Eberlin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Provided Google can somehow use their branding to reflect reliability, security, and stability -- I'd trust them with money. Feed the fear about paypal's insecurities and you've got yourself a deal.

    Perhaps a business link through Froogle could prove beneficial, too. You know, "preferred customer" type scenario.

    In the end, though, I really do think we should start worrying about the amount of information Google collects. Searches, identity, e-mails, and with this thing, buying trends and other financial information. Yeah, we love 'em...but their capacity for evil is growing and becoming a bit more scary.

    1. Re:This seems reasonable... by OrangeStar · · Score: 4, Funny

      How can any of this be scary when they have a "do no evil" slogan? That slogan alone has entirely assuaged my fears.

      --
      This .sig was pirated on BitTorrent, costing the MPAA millions of dollars.
    2. Re:This seems reasonable... by SketcheeBoy · · Score: 1

      Google should consider splitting into seperate entities. Like how we pretend like NBC and General Electric aren't the same company. They distance themselves enough that we don't worry about our electric bill mixing with our Thursday night line up (Well. No one really watches NBC anyway)

      --
      [ Sketchee ]
  14. Google v. eBay by TeacherOfHeroes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How long until google branches out to the point where they're in direct competition with eBay. From google wallet to google auction.

    You get to use google's extra-spiffy search features to find exactly what you're looking for. Plus, google would probably be able to create something 10x less cumbersome and akward than ebay's interface.

    1. Re:Google v. eBay by jbarket · · Score: 1

      We can only hope. eBay has become a menace.

      I sell high range PCs, and (several months ago) decided to go back to my "eBay roots" and see how things went there. What I discovered is that eBay Stores have become a way to oversaturate every category known to man with items that don't even exist (Sure, I have 500 AthlonFX PCs for sale, as long as you buy them and are willing to wait for me to order parts and assemble them). To make matters worse, all of those items were featured and all the rest of eBays standard BS, so there are apparently newer ways to be featured that cost even more.

      Absolutely insane.

      --

      -----
      jonathan barket
    2. Re:Google v. eBay by .killedkenny · · Score: 1

      gBay! To place an item for sale, you just send a Gmail to yourself:

      subject:gBay - Craftsman Table Saw Model 2075 - $65

      The body of the message can contain attached pictures and a detailed description.

      Anyone searching for any of those terms will turn up your item. From there, the 2 parties can consummate the deal through gmail and gwallet. Google gets a small cut, and eBay/PayPal go into receivership.

  15. Ties to Froogle? by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Google's going this way, it might be just as easy to tie it into the Froogle service: let people find the item they want, then pay for it from the same interface.

    In time, they could introduce their own eBay like system. Odds are, eBay won't just let Google Wallet into their system and people would have to do payments manually (they way they used to with Paypal). But if Google builds off of Froogle and inserts themselves as a middleman, it would be an effective way of getting extra revenue and balancing out their ad system.

    Just a random thought - naturally, I could be wrong.

    1. Re:Ties to Froogle? by slavemowgli · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Odds are, eBay won't just let Google Wallet into their system and people would have to do payments manually [...]

      In that case, I wouldn't be surprised if Google actually sued eBay for using a near-monopoly in one sector (online auctions) to help maintain one in another sector (online credit card payments). And personally, I think it wouldn't be without merit, either.

      But then, of course, IANAL.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    2. Re:Ties to Froogle? by XorNand · · Score: 1

      You can't sue a company for just being very successful. What sense would that make? There are plenty of other auction sites around the net. Just because they have a small fraction of the market isn't because of any nefarious behavior on ebay's part.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    3. Re:Ties to Froogle? by slavemowgli · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Abusing monopolies *is* not allowed, though. It's not that you can't be successful; it's just that if you are to a point where you are pretty much the only player left in the field, you're not allowed to use your market share to shut out others.

      It's like Microsoft bundling IE with windows, for example - using an OS monopoly to create a browser monopoly. For a similar, less historic example, check what's behind the EU's requirement that M$ make a windows version without media player available. Contrary to what it might seem like, it's not just some bureaucrats running amok; rather, the fundamental idea is that by creating a more level playing field where no single player can bully everyone else, the customers will ultimately benefit. Which, incidentally, is the whole idea behind capitalism.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    4. Re:Ties to Froogle? by coopaq · · Score: 0
      But then, of course, IANAL.

      Your anal?

      ___________________________ Karma be damned!!!!!!!!!!!!

    5. Re:Ties to Froogle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Just a random thought - naturally, I could be wrong.

      Funny how necessary it is to point these things out sometimes, scary how many people don't simply assume this for most everything. Thank you for bringing us back to cold sober reality.

  16. Credit Card Processing Racket by dduardo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find that the rates are incredibly high for what these companies do. Credit Card validation over the internet should be a relatively easy process, but there are so many middle men in the business that it's crazy. Visa, Mastercard, etc issue the cards, why can't I deal with them directly?

    1. Re:Credit Card Processing Racket by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Visa, Mastercard, etc issue the cards, why can't I deal with them directly?

      Well, Visa and Mastercard don't issue the cards. You can deal with a merchant bank account, which is pretty direct, but if you're just running some rinky dink website either your application is going to be denied or you're going to pay pretty much the same fees you pay with paypal plus some start up costs and monthly fees.

    2. Re:Credit Card Processing Racket by Duncan3 · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you are a real business, the fees are tiny.

      Payal and company only rip you off because such a huge number of transactions are fraud, since that's what they are really useful for, not asking any questions and all.

      --
      - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    3. Re:Credit Card Processing Racket by peatbakke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Strangely enough, Visa and Mastercard don't actually issue the cards -- banks do. Visa and MC are actually middlemen in the grand scheme of things ... they just pass messages between between banks and stores.

      They have a heck of a deal going. All they ask is a tiny amount of each transaction processed (I can't remember the number off the top of my head ... but it's a fraction of a percent). Of course, the companies that provide merchant services (bank accounts, point of sale hardware, etc.) tack on their own fees.

      When it comes down to it, "Visa" is just a collection of huge datacenters relaying billions of messages between banks and stores every day ...

    4. Re:Credit Card Processing Racket by TykeClone · · Score: 1

      Interchange is between 2% and 3% for most everything. The bank that does the processing gets part of it, the bank that has the card gets part of it and Visa/MasterCard/Discover/Whatever get a small part as well. The consumer pays the amount listed and the merchant has to cover the fees.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    5. Re:Credit Card Processing Racket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      All they ask is a tiny amount of each transaction processed (I can't remember the number off the top of my head ... but it's a fraction of a percent).

      try around 3%.

  17. The Trust Factor by lheal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just about everybody trusts Google.

    I trust PayPal/Ebay, but less than I trust Google.

    As long as Google Wallet can keep away from either a financial scandal or a security breech, they should eat Ebay's lunch -- except on Ebay.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
    1. Re:The Trust Factor by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Why do you trust Google so much? Because they said they'd do no evil?

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    2. Re:The Trust Factor by drewzhrodague · · Score: 1

      Has Google proved themselves to be untrustworthy yet? Have they performed actions considered evil?

      Which other company can say the same -- I mean, really?

      --
      Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    3. Re:The Trust Factor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't trust Google at all. I use their search engine and like the results that they provide, but trust? Not at all. If they require that I start "trusting" them, they can go fuck themselves. I already don't allow cookies from them just in case.

    4. Re:The Trust Factor by Usagi_yo · · Score: 1
      Paypal has made alot of mistakes and stands to lose alot of business should Google create an online micropayment system.

      Google has to do it right, with rock solid verification of accounts and credit cards.

    5. Re:The Trust Factor by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      It's not only about not doing evil things. It's about doing GOOD things, too. There's no reason to trust any corporation, because they only exist to make profit.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    6. Re:The Trust Factor by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      The thing is, that Google is now a publicly traded company. To an extent, they do capitalise on their reputation as an ethical, unbiased engine (no paid listings, only conventional ads, and so on) but that'll only last as long as it makes them more money in the medium-term than being ethical. Ultimately, it is the duty of a company to do what is best for the shareholder, within legal limits, not what is best for the employee, consumer or community.

      --
      Me (Blog)
  18. I really hope they go through with that by slavemowgli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I *really* hope they go through with that. So far, PayPal has what is pretty much a monopoly on online payments; there's alternatives like Moneybookers, but few people even know about them, and PayPal has consistently and systematically abused its monopoly by imposing more and more unreasonable restrictions.

    Two that annoy me the most, personally are the fact that you can't use it for "adult" transactions, and that it's quite limited with regard to how you can get your own money that sits in your own account in many countries outside of the USA. In fact, there is a list of countries where the only available option is transferring the money to a US-based bank account - which really is ridiculous when you think about it. It may not matter much to the average US citizen, of course, but think about it - what would you say if you found out that the online payment service you used to have people pay for the stuff you sold on eBay only allows you to transfer the money to a bank account in - say - Uruguay?

    PayPal's policies are consistent with those of eBay, though (its mother company nowadays); like eBay, PayPal is entirely inconsiderate of its users, a stark contrast to Google's "do no evil" philosophy.

    Let's hope that Google will revolutionize online payments the same way they revolutionized searching, and let's also hope that PayPal will soon be just as forgotten as Hotbot, Northernlight, Mamma and all the search engines we used before Google was there.

    --
    quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    1. Re:I really hope they go through with that by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      The problem is much bigger than Paypal, though. Visa and Mastercard are the real duopoly, and the shit rolls down from there. And once you've agreed to accept Visa/Mastercard, they force you to charge the same fees whether the person pays by credit card or not. Unfortunately, I don't think even Google has enough power to successfully fight Visa/Mastercard, so I doubt Google payments will be revolutionary.

    2. Re:I really hope they go through with that by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      you can't use it for "adult" transactions

      You must live in another country, because I know the slave trade is illegal in the US, even if it's not children.

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    3. Re:I really hope they go through with that by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I take it you're self-enslaved, uh, employed?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  19. Re:And so, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Yes, but Zen Master.

    Where does it end?

  20. Finally! by OverflowingBitBucket · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Finally!

    It's about damn time a company with a reputation like Google's got into this area. I hate PayPal with a passion; they wouldn't accept one of my credit cards for an online payment (there were no other choices for the site I was paying), so I contacted their support. Guess how that went? Long story short, two automated emails and one "we won't help you" email over a few weeks. They don't want to help you, they just want your money. Also check out the horror stories of frozen accounts floating around the web.

    Another guide to these type of sites is how many hoops you have to jump through to actually contact them. Try it, drop by and click through. See how long it takes to contact someone.

    Anyway, sub-rant over. Imagine how a company like google could shake up this area. It's about time a reputable company came in and did a good job. Maybe even micropayments or something similar in the future? I imagine online comic creators would love that one. :)

    1. Re:Finally! by rhizome · · Score: 1

      Another guide to these type of sites is how many hoops you have to jump through to actually contact them. Try it, drop by and click through. See how long it takes to contact someone.

      Call me cynical, but I'll laugh when we soon witness the kinder gentler PayPal. Sure it only took 5 years, a zillion complaints and...oh yeah...some competition to convince them the time is now! They've listened to their customers, and they're tired of being treated like garbage. PayPal listens!

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    2. Re:Finally! by OverflowingBitBucket · · Score: 1

      Call me cynical, but I'll laugh when we soon witness the kinder gentler PayPal. Sure it only took 5 years, a zillion complaints and...oh yeah...some competition to convince them the time is now! They've listened to their customers, and they're tired of being treated like garbage. PayPal listens!

      You'll have to be laughing fairly loud to drown out the booming laughter coming from my place when it happens. Competition from a large entity is what is sorely needed; and of all organisations, one loaded with goodwill like Google. Their customers will leave in droves if they don't adapt. I honestly can't wait to see how it turns out. :)

      Note to Google execs: I sell software and will happily pay a much higher margin for a merchant account through a reputable organisation than one with demonstrated poor practices and piles of complaints leveled against them. I am not the only one. You don't even have to match their percentage. This service is sorely needed. I will be watching this one closely.

    3. Re:Finally! by kobaz · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised that so many people here post about having contact problems with paypal. Paypal's customer support number is pasted right on the contact page. I've called them about 10 times in the past year with various minor issues. Hold time was less than 5 minutes and my problem was resolved in less than another 5.

      --

      The goal of computer science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.
  21. Small or Micropayments would be nice by WoTG · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you send a couple bucks via PayPal, even if the sender has a positive account balance (i.e. no CC transaction costs exist), the fees are quite hefty, percentage wise. (The minimum transaction fee is USD 0.3).

    It would be really nice to get a break on small transactions, especially ones that don't incur CC costs.

    1. Re:Small or Micropayments would be nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are only fees if you have the upgraded account type that allows you to accept credit cards. The more basic account has no fees for receiving money, but you cannot receive credit card funds and are limited in transaction volume as well.

    2. Re:Small or Micropayments would be nice by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It would be really nice to get a break on small transactions, especially ones that don't incur CC costs.

      The thing is, if you accept credit cards, then you've got to sign a contract with Visa and/or Mastercard. And that contract is going to say that you have to charge the same fee regardless of whether or not the person uses their credit card.

      So you really have to choose one or the other. Micropayments, and no credit cards, or credit cards, but no micropayments.

      Maybe Google will take the road less travelled and go with micropayments, but that'd be a big risk on their part.

  22. I'm Feeling Lucky by slashmojo · · Score: 2, Funny
    This special offer ebook costs just $100! *

    [Buy This] [I'm Feeling Lucky]







    *and might rebill at $100 per month.. if you forget..

  23. I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Famatra · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree with you, I look forward to a viable alternative to paypal. I am not please with Paypal after having had a false charge back happen against me, and being pinged for an aditional $10.00 as well as losing the original money. Paypal sucks has more horror stories too, and I offer some advice if you have to do business with paypal:

    • Make sure your checking account is deposit only. You can have this specified in writing, but another way is to have the account be joint co-signed so both parties have to sign to take something out if you have a significant other. This way paypal cannot take money out of your account (which in the terms of service last time I saw you give them permission to take money out of your account to settle balances with them).
    • Keep a minimum amount of money in your paypal account.

    Since google seems to be holding to its 'do not evil' policy they should make a for good competitor with customers fed up with paypal. I wouldn't mind seeing a google auction site to compete with ebay (Paypal's owner) as well :).

    1. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Keep a minimum amount of money in your paypal account.

      Why? Do they let you keep overall more of your money if you do?

    2. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by MindStalker · · Score: 4, Informative

      No but paypal often locks up entire accounts over a complaint. So if you frequently keep hundreds of dollars in your account, you could be royally screwed and put out of buisness over one false complaint. So you funnel the money into another account as quickly as you can and don't let paypal take it out.

    3. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by gmack · · Score: 1

      I have an account I keep *just* for online payment sustems to keep them from draining it. I can transfer between my accounts but if paypal tries to get money I don't want it to have then it will just bounce.

      My BMO rep gave me a funny look when I asked for a label of EFT.

      Only payment system I trust right now is Neteller

    4. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by ZiakII · · Score: 1

      Keep a minimum amount of money in your paypal account.

      no worst part is then they issue out a cheack from your bank and the other person cashs it and it comes from you so you get a bounced cheack fee, paypal then blames you, I really dislike the company, I for one welcome our new google overlords for sending money across the internet.

    5. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Rorschach1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have you tried accepting credit cards directly? You'll still get a $10 fee for chargebacks. *IF* you're not dealing with a high-risk industry, PayPal's not all that bad. I've received hundreds of PayPal shopping cart purchases from customers in 24 countries, and have had only one minor problem.

      Yes, they charge more - over 3% on most of my transactions - but there's no monthly fee. I'm just now getting enough sales volume to make it worth switching to a regular merchant account with a 2.02% discount rate (plus $0.27/transaction). PayPal's an easy, low-overhead way to get started.

      That said, their customer service sucks big time. Got ripped off by a vendor and discovered that even if you receive an empty package that's good enough for them. They won't do anything to the vendor. And it's damn near impossible to get a human on the phone.

      If you're looking to get a merchant account, I'd suggest checking out MerchantPlus.com. I'm only using them for payment gateway service, but they've been very responsive. I had my account set up less than an hour after sending a message, and got an immediate response to support questions. I can't say the same for most of the other outfits I checked with.

      A lot of it comes down to the customers you're dealing with. Some people are never satisfied, and in certain industries you can expect people to try to rip you off. Caveat vendor.

    6. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm posting anonymously not so much because I'm a coward as because I can't lose my job just yet, but I'm "one who should know" and I can say that being in the money-issuing business and doing no evil are VERY hard. Issuing money is not like being a search engine or giving-away a free, ad-supported email service or whatever -- it's a function governments have traditionally reserved for themselves because (especially when you break your word on backing it with for example, a certain yellowish heavy metal) it's hyperlucrative to issue money if people can be made to THINK it's valuable (intrinsic/actual value means little these days).

      Want a not-so-real real-world example? Look at Everquest -- Sony has struggled AGAINST a market in that totally-virtual form of loot for the better part of a decade before finally giving up and letting a market openly-happen, and at this point the Everquest Economy is said to be bigger than a number of African nations, put together! I believe it...

      But the moral hazards of issuing money (and the attendant privacy-concerns) IMO will DWARF the past no-evils Google has confronted, so they'll need to tread very lightly -- as this is also a way to piss-off their bankers...
      someoneintheindustrywholikesgooglealot

    7. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by BitGeek · · Score: 1, Offtopic


      (This does eventually get around to google, and is actually on topic, but requires a bit of explanation.)

      Right, and I think your points are underappreciated. Unfortunately, to be pendantic, you're talking about the issue of currency, not money. Visa is a currency, because its a representation of money, and it happens to be backed by something people think is money- the federal reserve note.

      But, and here's what trips people up, the federal reserve note is not money.

      To be money, currency has to have a couple features:
      1. Divisability -- this the federal reserve note does, you can get quarters for your dollars and dollars for your quarters, its exchangeable.
      2. Physical Robustness-- FRNs have this as well. They tend to last quite awhile and you can get a replacement when they are worn out, unlike, say, salt or corn, or other things people used as currency in the past.
      3. Intrinsic value-- this is where the federal reserve note fails. Even salt is better money in this view. The paper and metal in our money have virtually no economic value-- between %1 and 1/100th of a % of face value.

      And thus the "Dollar" is not money. But it is ignorance of this that leads people to think it is money, and this ignorance is something the government sure does appreciate.

      It didn't use to be this way. The dollar is defined as about an ounce of silver. For much of this countries history, and according to the constitution, that is what a dollar is (or a comperable amount of gold- the founding fathers didn't link our currency to just one metal-- they linked it to those two.)

      This means that legally you can get an ounce of silver for every dollar in your pocket--- if the government was followng the law.

      But thru a series of steps starting with the founding of the federal reserve in 1913, the criminalization of gold ownership, and ultimately, when Nixon "closed the gold window", the governmetn weened us off of money, and let us keep trading currency instead.

      BTW, Currency means a "current reciept." A "Current reciept" is a piece of paper that acts as a proxy for something of value, usually an amount of gold or silver.

      Amazingly, people accepted this worthless paper as if it had the same value as it did back when you could exchange it for gold or silver... and still do today. Furthermore, I've heard an amazing number of justifications for why its *good* that our paper isn't backed by anything of value, including that "foriegners who hav dollars shouldnt' be allowed to hold them without penalty, and os we need inflation."

      The reality is, government couldn't meet its responsibilities, and rather than change its ways, it just violated the law and continued to print money that it couldn't back. When it was called on this (By France, who demanded gold for their dollars) we just reneged on the whole deal.

      So, despite the law, despite the constitution, we have a currency that is not money, and that is redeemable for nothing, and ultimately, worth nothing.

      Eventually this situation, and the excesses that have been allowedd by it, will come home to roost in teh form of a currency crash.

      So, google can do good, by providing a currency that is one to one backed by dollars, or if they want to be really good, by gold.
      egold and other companies have set up gold payment systems that allow people to pay for goods wtih grams of gold, electronically. Hopefully, google will do paypal's multiple currency features one better by offering gold or silver as an asset you can hold your account balance in.

      Also, I think that bankers will not be able to do much about this situation-- if Google goes the route of paypal and is not a bank (And does not engage in fractional reserve banking) they are not a threat to banks-- because they are not making loans... but they are sure to give one bank a lot of card clearing business.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    8. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had it happen to me and the message when I signed into paypal said that "This action can not be disputed." or something to that effect. It was over alleged "adult use" of my account, what the specifics was, I don't know and was never told. I found a website (wish I still knew what it was) that listed email addresses at Paypal and I emailed pretty much everyone at the company. Almost all emailed me back. Most said that nothing could be done, but a few sent me a form letter that my account was reactivated. It was reactivated and I got my money back.

    9. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Maniakes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Intrinsic value" is a slippery concept.

      People are willing to pay for convenient, spendable stores of value, and if they trust that store of value, they're often willing to pay far more than what that item would be worth if it wasn't used as money.

      Take gold, for example. Economists talk about "monetization" and "demonetization" of gold, referring to how gold prices shoot up when people start buying it as a hedge against inflation, then fall back down again when inflation fears diminish or an inflationary episode dies down. Historical gold prices: note how despite inflation, the dollar price of gold in 2001 was less than half the dollar price of gold in 1980.

      It's true that federal reserve notes have next to no non-currency value (they're a perfect size for bookmarks, and I hear they burn pretty well), while gold is useful for jewelry, for electronics, and as a catalyst. But gold's practical price is probably somewhere in the low 200s; the rest of the price of gold comes from the same place the value of federal reserve notes came from: it's a convenient way to store value. Any other commodity used as money would likewise see its price inflated.

      The true advantage of gold (or silver, or salt, or unobtanium, or leaves, or whatever) as a store of value is that the supply of gold is limited by the real costs of finding it, digging it out of the ground, and purifying it, while any sufficiently irresponsible government may decide to finance itself by simply printing more money. Even with a fractional reserve system, the payout requirement keeps the issuer moderate in his dishonesty.

      Countering this, using a commodity as money partially denies us the practical use of that commodity by inflating its price and tying up much of the supply in stockpiles, as well as inducing people to put far more effort producing that commodity than would otherwise make economic sense. In addition, inflation of a commodity money can result from a large find of new reserves, or by a technological breakthrough that allows a lot more of the commodity to be produced for a lot less money. Theoretically, it's best for the economy (consistant prices, minimal liquidity problems, etc) if the money supply grows in lockstep with the real size of the economy, and you can (not necessarily will, but can) come a lot closer to that with federal reserve notes than with commodity money.

      --
      A legparnasom tele van angolnaval.
    10. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I understand you now. I read "minimum" to mean "at least X dollars or more" instead of "as little as possible" (perhaps more clear as "minimal").

    11. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by BitGeek · · Score: 1


      Actually, Golds practical price is in the 800s, though theoretically it should be in the 3,200s.

      The reason the price of gold is below 800 is that historically central banks accumulated gold for centuries-- the US federal reserve confiscated all privately owned gold in the country. Other countries did it for longer.

      When their fiat currencies show weakness, they dump gold on the market. This manipulation has been going on for the last 30 years or so-- since Bretton Woods.

      For a good description of the international monetary system, that is not at all dry, check out "The creature from Jekyll Island". For a description of money, read "What has the government done with our money" by Murrey Rothbard.

      The intrinsic value of gold is set based on teh quanity of it in the planet-- not the quantity above ground or currenty on the market. While makrets often do not refelct intrinsic value, you can determine that gold has intrinsic value while federal reserve notes are pure fiat.

      Usiung the commodity as money does not tie it up in stockpiles-- it does not inflate the price. You use some ina gold necklace if you wish, but hte price of that necklace will be MUCH higher than the price of gold, so it will not be a commodity price affecting situation.

      It is actually false to say that the monetary supply needs to grow with the economy. This is one of those keynsian waving-of-hands things. The size of the monetary supply is irrelevant to the size of the economy-- providied the monetary supply is actually money.

      Money is divisible. If there physically is not enough of a given commodity metal, then other metals can be used, or more likely, simply smaller quantities of it will be necessary.

      Furthermore, its impossible for federal reserve notes to be managed to grwo with the size of the economy because federal reserve note supplies are not managed... federal reserve notes are simply issued when the government wants to spend money it doesn't have.

      When the US was on a gold standard, prices were not constant-- they went DOWN. The reason is that technology resulted in increases in productivity.

      These increases were reflected in the price of just about every consumer good on the market.

      Imagine a situation where its not just computers that go down in price over time?

      That's the natural result of increases in poroductivity (which also, counters the argument that more money is needed when the economy grows-- divisability isn't necessary as lower prices mean a relatively constant amount of money supply needed.)

      If you think about this, you'll see that this is always the case-- its a law of nature. Teh price is the economic value, and the value of the money is the inverse of the value of the economy.

      With a constant money supply, based on something impossible to counterfit prices would go down.

      ALL of inflation, and all the loss of the benefits of productivity in consumer prices is a tax on the economy and a tax on people. That is money literally stolen out of your pocket by the federal government via counterfiting of the US Dollar.

      With a stable money supply, prices would go down and profits would go UP. With inflation, prices go up, and profits seem to go up, but actually they are just denominated in ever cheaper dollars.

      Unfortunately, socialist economists who want to argue for devaluation of the dollar will use figures denominated in dollars to "prove" their points, while never acknowledging that the value of a dollar is different between their two examples. This slight of hand has fooled many generations of "economists".

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    12. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by cosmic_0x526179 · · Score: 1
      Make sure your checking account is deposit only. You can have this specified in writing

      In writing to who.. the bank or to PayPal ?

      PayPal transfers to the bank are accomplished via ACH. ACH is very old (been around 20-30 years I think). My impression is that ACH, by definition, is bidirectional. How do you inform the bank to only accept deposits from PayPal and not withdrawls ? Anyone know the R/T number for PayPal ACH traffic ?

      --
      This msg is brought to you by the letter 'W'.. for Worthless Wuss
    13. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by Maniakes · · Score: 1

      The reason the money supply is supposed to grow proportionally with the economy is to keep prices constant. This is a Monetarist concept; Keynsians like moderate inflation.

      Deflation is not necessarily a good thing. Price is information, and deflation distorts that information as effectively as inflation does. Deflation also taxes debtors (by increasing the real values of their debts) as much as inflation taxes creditors by decreasing the real value of their savings.

      Deflation also damages the liquidity of the economy, since if the deflation rate exceeds the real interest rate, the nominal interest rate would be below zero, and investors will simply sit on their gold, reducing the supply of credit and increasing real interest rates until the nominal rates are above zero.

      Many economists blame the Depression largely on the Federal Reserve pursuing a deflationary policy following the 1929 stock market crash -- the Fed deliberately reduced the money supply by a third between 1929-33, and the resulting liquidity crunch drove the waves of bank failures. Similarly, lesser depressions occurred in the late 19th century simply because gold production couldn't keep pace with the economy, leading debtors whose deflated incomes left them unable to make payments to default on their loans, in many cases driving the banks under since the deflated value of the collateral often didn't cover the balance of the loan.

      --
      A legparnasom tele van angolnaval.
    14. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      But, and here's what trips people up, the federal reserve note is not money. To be money, currency has to have a couple features:
      3. Intrinsic value-- this is where the federal reserve note fails. Even salt is better money in this view. The paper and metal in our money have virtually no economic value-- between %1 and 1/100th of a % of face value

      I looked up the dictionary definition. It didn't agree with you. Additionally, I think you are completely wrong. You think the artificial inflation of gold is ok, but the artificial inflation of paper is not ok, just because the intrinsic value of gold started higher. I think that is just as stupid as the current system. But, since the current stupid system is more practical, it is superior. Why do you want a system that isn't any better, but is less practical? There is an absolute cap on gold. The artificial inflation of gold would have to be immense to back all the currencies, so far that it would be just as precarious as with inflated paper, as well as causing problems using gold for industrial purposes...

    15. Re:I agree - I look forward to Google Wallet by BitGeek · · Score: 1


      I never argued for the artificial inflation of gold. The whole point of gold is to stop evil people from stealing your money.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
  24. And Google become regulated... by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Getting into payment systems will expose Google to new levels of regulation that may affect user's privacy. Regulations related money laundering and anti-terrorist laws may force Google to collect and turn-over data on users of its payment service. I wonder if those rules might also force Google to turn-over other data on "customers of interest".

    Having all your information (your banking, your email, your internet search activities) in one basket makes it a tempting target for government.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:And Google become regulated... by Duncan3 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh hush, this is Slashdot, Google is god here.

      Pointing out facts about the banking system, and the very close eye governments keep on such things will get you nowhere ;)

      --
      - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    2. Re:And Google become regulated... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      Getting into payment systems will expose Google to new levels of regulation that may affect user's privacy. Regulations related money laundering and anti-terrorist laws may force Google to collect and turn-over data on users of its payment service. I wonder if those rules might also force Google to turn-over other data on "customers of interest".
      All this data will be, of course, searchable though Google excellent user-interface...
    3. Re:And Google become regulated... by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Oh hush, this is Slashdot, Google is god here.

      But also home of the tinfoil hatters!

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    4. Re:And Google become regulated... by Xarius · · Score: 1

      Who says they have to host it in a restricted country, like america, at all? They have Headquarters elsewhere and datacenters everywhere AFAIK.

      --
      C17H21NO4
    5. Re:And Google become regulated... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah yes, but google are rolling in money and so can simply buy up a small country and host from there

  25. Good. Paypal needs this. by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Paypal sucks - they'll freeze out accounts, or: what's worse: they'll empty your bank account and completely fuck your life up.

    For some horror stories on who PayPal really doesn't give a shit about you, go here:

    http://www.paypalsucks.com/

    read it and weep.

    Paypal needs the competition - especially from a company like Google that professes a higher sense of ethics.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    1. Re:Good. Paypal needs this. by johansalk · · Score: 1

      That paypalsucks site you linked to is set up by a paypal competitotr.

    2. Re:Good. Paypal needs this. by Nasarius · · Score: 1

      Evidence?

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
  26. I will NOT use it... by johansalk · · Score: 0, Flamebait


    Not a chance in hell! At the risk of being modded down into oblivion by google fanboys, I will NOT use such Google Wallet. Google already knows WAY too much about me and I have only been willing to use its services in as much as I have had a faint, albeit not exactly true, hope in being at least slightly anonymous to them.

    Now they want my name, address, and bank details?!!

    Has anyone seen the sign-up forms for Orkut?! Google is hedious! I have never come across *anyone* online who expressed such an interest in expecting me to provide them with SO MUCH personal information about me! No one ever even dared to ask. May all those who are suckered by "Google doeth no evil" just suck it!

    1. Re:I will NOT use it... by wetdirtmud · · Score: 1

      Why not sign up..? Everyone in the world will eventually be controlled by google anyways, so at least join now so you don't look like an ass in the future. ;) Also, I think google would have no reason to steal the information of every middle class person in America. If you're a billionaire, I can see why you would avoid google; if not, what do you have to lose? A Ford F150 and a two story house? Comes as a small price for such great services.

    2. Re:I will NOT use it... by Gothmolly · · Score: 0

      So don't use Orkut, troll.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    3. Re:I will NOT use it... by Nasarius · · Score: 2, Funny

      And for every search, Google kills a kitten! OMG!!!1111!!!!!!

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    4. Re:I will NOT use it... by TykeClone · · Score: 1
      And for every search, Google kills a kitten!

      And?

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    5. Re:I will NOT use it... by SketcheeBoy · · Score: 1

      Then don't use it. I don't use Google's "My Search History" because it seems too insane that my entire search history can be tapped from any computer that cracks my Gmail username and password. Aren't there brands that you trust who you don't use for absolutely everything they offer? I may by Old Spice deodorant, but somehow I don't use the bodywash and am not antioldspice.

      --
      [ Sketchee ]
  27. Re:And so, by jsweval · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Crap comment

  28. What! by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google wants my wallet! The next thing they want will be my first born. Sheesh... I thought Microsft was bad; they only wanted my soul.

    1. Re:What! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The next thing they want will be my first born. Sheesh... I thought Microsft was bad; they only wanted my soul.

      No, Google wants your money. GWB wants your first born (and 2'nd, and 3'rd, and ....).

    2. Re:What! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next thing they want will be my first born.

      Google Babysitter (GBS) is scheduled to start beta late 2007, so you have a while before you actually have to have a kid.

  29. Adsense by shird · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Id say one of the significant reasons for Google doing this is for payments to and from adsense publishers and adwords advertisers.

    Currently they just send cheques in the post every month to publishers, which is crazy for overseas publishers and must increase their costs a fair bit. They don't use services such as Paypal due to the fees.

    It would also help in obtaining money from advertisers for adwords.

    Google deals with a lot of (sometimes small individual units of) money from publishers and advertisers, and their current system would be far better off if it were handled online through themselves.

    --
    I.O.U One Sig.
    1. Re:Adsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Currently they just send cheques in the post every month to publishers No, they do direct deposit to checking accounts now. Very handy.

    2. Re:Adsense by mparaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Direct deposits have limited coverage. I think what they're trying to do is avoid paying out when the AdSense advertiser is going to buy AdWords anyway.

      I'd go for that - it takes a month for my check to get here (Philippines) and 45 banking days to get the check cleared. (though my next check should be in the local currency)

  30. kill'em all by papar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google is really trying to take over the world and the way they're conquering different internet services is just frightening. I wouldn't be surprised if they would announce a new googlebay (or whatever) online marketplace in the next few years. They are tightening their grip and it's strong! Could they really kill'em all and succeed in taking over the internet?

  31. And with Google Maps by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 1

    And with Google Maps, the path that the stolen item has taken to get in to the buyers' hands can be interactively displayed! Useful if the item is in poor condition, as you can bitch at the original owner.

  32. Beta? by ralejs · · Score: 1

    I just hope for Google's sake they don't make Google Wallet a Beta when they first release it. I wouldn't trust my money to something that said Beta on it. When all your money suddenly disappears you'll get some more guarantees than just: "Sorry, this service is still in Beta and don't say we didn't warn you".

  33. Yeah, lots of similar horror stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... from 1998.

    Google is about to find out just how many morons there are out there. If they actually are planning to offer an online payment service, I don't envy them.

  34. natural progression by enrico_suave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google basically made it's own micropayment transaction system internally to handle the accounting of google adwords and adsense revenue changing hands in millions of transactions every day.

    They just needed to take the next logical step with it.

    e.

    --
    Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
    1. Re:natural progression by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      I haven't heard the word "micropayment" in a long time. That just got me thinking - if Google came up with a payment service and already have the infrastructure for a micropayment system, perhaps this could result in a revenue system for publishers on the internet. And not just for books, but other forms of media as well.

    2. Re:natural progression by ignavusincognitus · · Score: 2, Interesting
      That's not "micropayment". That's only transferring billing information between servres which are all owned by google, and charging the client monthly by a standard credit card transaction.

      Real micropayment systems have to deal with untrusted (and potentially non-identifiable) parties. Google has zero exeprience doing that.

    3. Re:natural progression by enrico_suave · · Score: 1

      what do you think happens when a person who uses "paypal" money to make a payment to another person on the paypal network? It's just moving beans around. It's when money goes into and out of the system and it's turned into "real" currency...

      I don't think you understand how google adwords/adsense work...

      There's already a gateway/barrier to entry of sorts... you sign up for (and provide personal "real" information for) google adwords from which advertisers put real money into google's system.

      This real money is then distributed in smaller chunks (after google takes it's cut) to the adsense publisher sites downstream that are publishing these clickthrough ads. When someone clicks on these ads your adsense account acrues small amounts (or medium/large amounts per click if you have a good/popular keyword)... if you acrue over 100 dollars, you take money out of the system (monthly).

      Money is changing hands, facilliated by google servers/technology... How is that any different than paypal (execpt the general public component which I'm saying is a natural next step)?

      And i'd better dollars to donuts that google could come up with "smarter" fraud identification algorythms (even if I can't speel it) than paypal... They already do similiar work to identify fraudelent clicktroughs...

      I'm telling you it's not that different/removed from the infrastructure they have in place now (not that it is an easy endeavor). It's not like I came up with this idea on my own, I heard it from a google rep. 2 years ago describing some of their internal systems and the complexities of handling all these transactions...

      *Shrug*

      e.

      --
      Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
    4. Re:natural progression by ignavusincognitus · · Score: 1
      That's still not "micropayments" in the common sense of the word. A micropayment facilitates, for example, the economical transaction of $0.05 from a reader of an online article to its auther.

      Google's system, of which I am a client, mind you, does not enable that. You said yourself money is only transferred when the balance reaches a threshold. This is done precisely because the fees and overhead associated with a credit card transaction (which is the infrastructure used here) are too large to make such a thing practical.

      So, yes, google's systems add billions of tiny little numbers efficiently and precisely, and at some points in time, amounts which correspond to sums of some of these numbers change hands on the "real" monetary system. Still, they don't have a micropayment infrastructure deployed in any publicly accessible installation.

    5. Re:natural progression by enrico_suave · · Score: 1

      "Still, they don't have a micropayment infrastructure deployed in any publicly accessible installation."

      Of course not, not yet anyways. But it's not far fetched to think that they can, and that if there's a market there, they will. Which is what I'm saying and TFA alludes to.

      If you want to nitpick about what constitutes a true "micropayment" system, go sit in the corner and do so. I was just trying to read the writing on the wall.

      e.

      --
      Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
  35. What if we have it all wrong? by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 1

    What if the massive cluster they have going has acheived sentience, and is controlling the minds of Page and Brin? All this information they're accumulating could be a prelude to the ultra-efficient subjugation of the human race by helpful, deadly, autonymous little Googlebots!

    --
    Stasis is death. Embrace change.
    1. Re:What if we have it all wrong? by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 1

      You know what; as long as I can still link to porn via Google Images, I really don't care.

  36. GooPay? by binaryspiral · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a porn payment service... scratch that one off the list - please!

  37. Final name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Codenamed Google Wallet...


    Final Name: Google Wallet
  38. One question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How hard would it be for Google to buy Paypal and eBay?

  39. I have had good luck with PayPal by elgee · · Score: 1

    No problem in a couple of years of sending and receivng money. However, they definitely need a good competitor and Google can do it. I also like the suggestion by someone that Google start its own auction site. Ebay needs competition in all areas and Yahoo auctions never went anywhere.

  40. Google is the new.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Giant corporation, soon to eat all of your personal information alive.

    And most of you are totally clueless or so fucking lazy that you are unmoved to react.

    Too well entertained...

    If you believe this to be a tRoLL, then all is lost for western society.

  41. PayPal can not do anything for me- goodluck google by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful
    In fact, there is a list of countries where the only available option is transferring the money to a US-based bank account - which really is ridiculous when you think about it
    The list is/was very large - and even if you were not on it if you had a credit card with a numbering scheme not used in the USA (ie. both my mastercard and visa) you couldn't use paypal. These and other policies are the reason we still pay surprisingly large fees to Wells Fargo to get small amounts of cash to another country instead of there being an easy on line solution where the costs of a fraction of a cent per transaction are not mutliplied by a few thousand percent to charge to the customer.

    Google could do very well in this situation to the benefit of all. The greed of the banks is probably preventing them from making a lot more money by charging less on what would be a lot more transactions.

  42. Google Wallet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they should codename it "G-Unit" instead so it would go more along with G-mail.

    Anyone who thinks otherwise will be shot in the face nine times.

  43. An alternative to PayPal would be great! by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
    I am particularly annoyed at PayPal spamming me to get my account "verified". What they really want is for me to give them direct access to my checking account, so anyone who gets into the PayPal systems can remove money from my checking account. I continually refuse to allow PayPal such access. As a result, PayPal made me close my account because I was over the limit for "non-verified" accounts.

    Throughout all of this, I was unable to get a reply from a human being in their Customer Service department. All I received were canned replies telling me how wonderful it is for me to "verify" my account.

    PayPal has never been able to explain to me the reasons why being "verified" was A Good Thing for me, or why it was anything more than a possible security mess with my checking account.

    1. Re:An alternative to PayPal would be great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having good alternatives to Paypal would be great. But, IMHO, all the alternatives right now suck compared to Paypal.

      Having more Paypal accounts VERIFIED than NOT-VERIFIED would be great because it reduces fraud. But providing your primary checking account info (one where you deposit your paychecks) to paypal is royally stupid. Imagine the level of fraud if 100% of all Paypal accounts can be established anonymously. VERIFIED means better source of info for both identity and physical location (not perfect but better than nothing).

      WHAT I DID WAS THE FOLLOWING:

      I setup a new checking account at a new bank for the sole purpose of using with Paypal.

      I made sure the new checking account does not have any monthly fees and did not require any minimum monthly balance.

      I never deposit any money into this new checking account except for what I transfer from Paypal.

      I regularly transfer money from Paypal to my new checking account. I try to keep my Paypal balance under $100 at all times.

      I regularly transfer money from my new checking account and only keep around $100 in there just in case my Paypal balance is not sufficient to cover refunds.

      Worst case scenario for me is getting a $100-balance Paypal account locked and less than $100 taken out of my paypal-dedicated checking account.

      One more thing: always have a backup plan. In other words, have at least one paypal-alternative available to handle your transactions (yes, they suck but it sucks more if paypal has an outage while they are your only credit-card processor).

  44. A sneak preview... by Duncan3 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Picture it... A "confirm" button... surrounded by 427 text ads for related products.

    I already have to goto at least page 3 to find anything, because the first few pages of google results are fake sites, keyword bait, and crap not even containing the words I used.

    Lets not forget what Google is, an ADVERTISING company, that want to know everything about everythign you have done and ever will do, so they can sell YOU to companies.

    No, Google past the "big brother" line long ago, now they want to be a bank too? They will force Ebay to stop taking 15% of all transactions, and that's good, but Google is getting seriously scary.

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:A sneak preview... by wootest · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Who decides if Google is an advertising company or a search company? *What* decides it? Revenue or what most people use their services for? Don't Google still do good in helping people find what they're looking for above being ad-toting corporate concentrated evil?

      'Selling me to companies' is ridiculous - Google has been one of the biggest players in the market of bringing ad spots to ordinary people. Anyone can buy AdWords for a paltry sum, and all they use is keywords - from your search or from the web page you're visiting. I don't see where this tips over from handy way to finance the other aspects of one's company to evil big brother attitude.

      Is it the cookies? Block the cookies. Is it the ads? Block the ads. The 427 text ads crack is blown up for a quick laugh - I've never seen any Gmail page show me more than four *text-based* ads and Google have been consistently good at not getting ads get in the way of or distract from the actual content - with the only possible exceptions being the blue boxed "sponsored links" at the top of some search results. I find the ads on Slashdot, for example, to be more annoying and more in-my-face.

      Speaking of Gmail, I'm okay with their computers scanning my correspondence for keywords. That's what they do - scan emails for keywords. Nothing else. The Google servers aren't secretly reading my emails, and if I would ever click those ads then it would at least be ads related to what I'm reading about or writing about at the time and thusly be much less annoying. I appreciate that.

      (To knee-jerkers: Go ahead and call me a Google apologist or a Google fanboy or what have you if you want to. But refute my facts, refute my point of view, challenge my opinions and *back it all up* before you even think about sticking a label on me. Wouldn't you be mad if I blew you off as a "conspiracy theorist" or "corporate-hating hippie" and left it at that?)

    2. Re:A sneak preview... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Who decides if Google is an advertising company or a search company? *What* decides it?
      The shareholders decide it. Google is beholden to their shareholders to maximise profit. Advertising is the source of their most of thier revenue and profit. Thus Google is an advertising company.

      >>Google has been one of the biggest players in the market of bringing ad spots to ordinary people. Anyone can buy AdWords for a paltry sum, and all they use is keywords - from your search or from the web page you're visiting. I don't see where this tips over from handy way to finance the other aspects of one's company to evil big brother attitude.

      Selling Adwords to ordinary people does not preclude them from using the data that they have accumulated on you to create a profile that can be sold to companies. They can very well do both. The company that buys the profile might not even use Adwords but instead spam you.

      >>Is it the cookies? Block the cookies. Is it the ads? Block the ads.

      No, this isn't about cookies or ads. The informatoin provided by your Google Wallet would be stored in their database, making no need for a cookie. If you have a Gmail account in the same name (or you used a gmail account to sign up for the wallet) there would be no need for a cookie to connect the information toegther.

      >>That's what they do - scan emails for keywords. Nothing else.

      That is not all they do. Using those keywords the server decides what Ad to taret you with. In other words a (simple) profile is created based on the conversation and they use that to create Ads for you. If you are not bothered by that, then thats your personal opinion.

      Considering the evidence I would agree with the grandparent that a Google Wallet would be a cause for concern, even if you ultimately decide that it is a service you would want to use.

    3. Re:A sneak preview... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't you be mad if I blew you off as a "conspiracy theorist" or "corporate-hating hippie" and left it at that?

      Not if I am a consipracy theorist and/or a corporate-hating hippie.

      You are what you are. Why bother denying it? (But I'm not saying you are a Google fanboy either.)

    4. Re:A sneak preview... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wise men don't argue with fools. and wise men know that power corrupts. fools do not.

    5. Re:A sneak preview... by wfberg · · Score: 1
      (To knee-jerkers: Go ahead and call me a Google apologist or a Google fanboy or what have you if you want to. But refute my facts, refute my point of view, challenge my opinions and *back it all up* before you even think about sticking a label on me.


      At least you don't hold yourself to the same standard of backing up your point of view. After all, if you did, you'd have to prove that no google employee ever has or will in the future mis-use the information they collect on punters.


      "I'm sure they wouldn't do it" isn't a convincing argument against concerns over potential abuse.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    6. Re:A sneak preview... by wootest · · Score: 1

      It's not impossible that an employee at Google could abuse information that they have or can get access to - in fact, given enough time it's highly likely. But it's not far more likely than at any other web mail provider, or at any other web search engine, or at any other online advertisement service, and it's this irrational belief that Google is somehow worse in this department than anyone else that bugs me.

      Example: Your Hotmail emails are in the MSN server bank, your Yahoo! emails are in the Yahoo! server bank, and your Gmail emails are in Google's server bank. Yet I've only seen the privacy issue come up for Gmail's service on the basis that they're scanning it for keywords. Isn't it likely that an employee that could reprogram the routine to scan for keywords could also by extension get access to people's emails in other ways? I personally think it's about as likely as an employee mis-using the information.

      It's not dumb in any way to warn people about the potential privacy issues with using web-based email, but at least those who're doing it should be fair and attribute the problem to the medium and the human nature, and not just to whatever provider is popular currently - Gmail or otherwise.

    7. Re:A sneak preview... by wootest · · Score: 1

      You mean the power that you as a customer have? The same power that you can take elsewhere if you find out that a company you like does something that you do not agree with?

    8. Re:A sneak preview... by wootest · · Score: 1

      "The shareholders decide it." Fair point - I think of the definition as being a function of the public views at large on the company myself, but shareholders sounds reasonable.

      "If you have a Gmail account in the same name (or you used a gmail account to sign up for the wallet) there would be no need for a cookie to connect the information toegther[sic]." By cookies in my original comment I refer to the fact that Google sets cookies for individual users in order to track search habits, an attempt that fails spectacularly when more than one person is involved, or when the person doesn't use Google for every web search. Surely such profiling could be made better which one account, but I contest the pure usability and reason of not using one account in order to please people for whom consolidation gives the willies.

      ">> That's what they do - scan emails for keywords. Nothing else.

      That is not all they do. Using those keywords the server decides what Ad to taret you with. In other words a (simple) profile is created based on the conversation and they use that to create Ads for you. If you are not bothered by that, then thats your personal opinion.
      "

      That's all true - my point was that by design they don't snoop through emails for any other purpose, which some people do believe.

      Google Wallet may very well be a cause for concern, to the extent that letting people play with too much of your personal data may be a cause for concern. Some grocery chains have these plastic cards which may or may not be used to record frequently bought items, and some even let you withdraw money from your bank account through them. This is in a lot of aspects a good parallel - properly used projection of usage can lead to (a better search engine/lower prices on common wares) but if abused all hell could break loose in either way.

      I guess it boils down to this: I trust Google. It's easy to decry me as a fanatic, or as unexperienced, or as naïve, or as a nitwit ruining it for those who really really really want tight privacy. Conversely, it's easy for me to decry anyone else as a tin foil hat anti-corporate loon with something to hide, which, although not my original intent, I very well may have. (For that I apologize, if someone feels hit.) My personal opinion remains that I don't mind this kind of tracking as long as it in the end makes my life easier and doesn't disrupt my privacy, and that I don't mind one company in a position to fuck me royally if they're not very likely to, and in my mind Google fills both criteria because to my knowledge they haven't actually crossed that line yet, only been widely speculated to be able to.

      Your mileage may vary.

  45. Micropayments by fulldecent · · Score: 1

    What do you think about them supporting micropayments? Is there anything that they could tie in with micropayments?

    --

    -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    1. Re:Micropayments by destrux · · Score: 1

      I was waiting for someone to bring up micropayments, because it is, in my humble opinion, exactly the point here. The future of the way mankind connects and collaborates increasingly looks like it will be powered by Google, and that future will allow use of a feature-rich, web-based digital panel (their Fusion strategy is this in its infant stage) including office applications, satellite/maps, e-mail, social network utilities, and of course the ability to search a by-then massive world of structured and meaningful information.

      And as you use the system, a few cents get deducted from your Wallet here and there. :)

      Did I mention Google will shift much of its back-end server architecture to P2P, to the people, thus really giving new meaning to their "do no evil" mantra?

      My blog coming soon. I promise. (http://dave.notik.com/) --D

  46. it seems everyone hates paypal by Dr+Kool,+PhD · · Score: 1

    Personally I think their fees are too high. A lot of people seem to take issue to their fraud policies, but it's really a no-win situation for paypal. If someone steals a credit card and orders goods that you ship, someone is going to get screwed in the end. The credit card holder isn't going to get screwed, they are protected under law. The credit card company isn't going to get screwed, they have a contract with Paypal - fraudulent transactions are voided as a condition of performing credit card transactions. Only two people left to bite the bullet - Paypal or YOU. And Paypal can't afford to get hosed on every bad transaction, their fees are high but not that high.

    So in conclusion there's really no good way for an e-bank like Paypal to come out looking like a good guy. I think Google's reputation will suffer if they try and enter this business for the above reasons. Unless they have some new innovation for fighting fraud... maybe drive to fraudsters' houses and beat the crap out of them??

    1. Re:it seems everyone hates paypal by TykeClone · · Score: 1
      So in conclusion there's really no good way for an e-bank like Paypal to come out looking like a good guy.

      They could start by allowing themselves to be regulated like a bank since they are providing banking services. There are alot of regulations in banking that address a lot of the complaints seen here about paypal...

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    2. Re:it seems everyone hates paypal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you back that up with facts? My gut instinct tells me that PayPal could eat up the losses of fraudulent transactions, which in turn would ENORMOUSLY raise customer satisfaction and would get them a lot more new customers. Including me.

  47. He meant porn you idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And no I am not anyone you know.

  48. Google Mission Statment by nonicenamesleft · · Score: 1
    Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.

    Which information is Wallet going to make accessible? My credit car number?

    1. Re:Google Mission Statment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which information is Wallet going to make accessible? My credit car number?

      your CREDIT car? I want its number too (mine just gives me expenses...)

  49. Re:revolutionary, evolutionary or just scary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uh....no.
    Not trollish.

    Too many people look at the company as a plucky good maker of useful tools that they can use.
    The thing is the company is poised to make more revenue off of more and more specific information about anyone. This goes even for people who've never been online in their lives. It makes it worse that somehow people volunteer idioscyncratic-to-specific information to the company without considering the consequences of using the cool tools.
    In all earnestness, it isn't just Google either; it is business.

    Perhaps the format of the above post is skitzy but trollish it ain't.

  50. Email is not secure by dbIII · · Score: 1
    But then, I don't do anything over Gmail that is even remotely private
    Seriously guys, learn about email. Take the trivial case of the virus (bugbear?) that sent out random recieved emails from peoples email clients out. Take the trivial case of your email being bounced due to a network problem and being read by someone with the postmaster account at either end in the course of their job just to find out what it is and where it should be going - do you trust them with your credit card number, paticularly if you misspelt the domain and got a spamming domain name squatter?. Take the case of old mail server backup tapes not boing disposed of correctly, or someone in the middle watching the traffic. Email is not really a private communication, and if something is important enough that it really should be private, encrypt the thing - it doesn't take much effort to zip up a PDF or text file in encrypted form and attach it - even winzip can do it. Just don't send the password in the same email (seen an idiot HR guy do that). I don't use email for stuff like that - scp works, and everthing else in my case is a fairly small bit of information (eg. password) which can easily be relayed verbally - when noone who shouldn't know it is in earshot, or on paper that goes in the shredding bin later.

    Once you send an email it is beyond your control and will probably be held in four places (sender, recipient, server backups at each end) and everyone with access to those four places can read a plain text email. A paranoid law enforcement official may well go on a fishing expedition through those backups on a completely differnent issue and read the mail (eg. US Secret Service vs Steve Jackson Games - long before the patriot act extended powers and a good example of people confusing a game with reality). Also your new significant person will get to read your old love letters to someone else - live with it.

  51. Will eBay allow them to compete on their site? by medix1 · · Score: 0

    Since eBay owns PayPal I am wondering if they will allow google to introduce their service on their site? If they are allowed to compete with PayPal on eBay austions, what kind of fees will eBay come up with to cover lost revanue from PayPal users? I agree 100% that compatition is good for the market and there needs to be more than 1 online service like PayPal and the google wallet.

    1. Re:Will eBay allow them to compete on their site? by Kredal · · Score: 1

      When Google unveils GBay next year, eBay will become obselete...

      Just wait, it'll happen...

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    2. Re:Will eBay allow them to compete on their site? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Ebay can't stop a seller from having a google wallet account, or from being willing to accept payments through it. That's all that really matters, IMO.

  52. what's in a name? by Gezackt · · Score: 1

    lol, they should just call it G-money. I am referring to this http://www.starmakerrecords.com/gmoney.htm

  53. How does this fit in with their mission statement? by AthenianGadfly · · Score: 3, Funny

    From http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/:

    "Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."

    I'm not necessarily opposed to Google creating this service, but how do they make it fit with their mission statement, assuming the information their talking about making universally accessible isn't your credit card info.

  54. Lowest forms of life... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Of course it depends on how long they have owned it, and what they have been doing with it, but I wouldn't mind Google telling them to fork it over for small but reasonable price. Domain squaters are no better than the lowest type of Spsmmer, they are just the lowest forms of life.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Lowest forms of life... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Domain squaters are no better than the lowest type of Spsmmer, they are just the lowest forms of life.

      Why in the world would you say that? I mean, OK, if you register a name belonging to someone else and hold it for ransom that's one thing. But just registering what you think is a good name with the hopes that you'll be able to resell it for a profit, I don't see the harm in that.

      Is a real estate investor the second lowest form of life? Is a baseball card collector the third worst?

    2. Re:Lowest forms of life... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First, "registering what you think is a good name with the hopes that you'll be able to resell it for a profit" is not the same as registering various permutations of *Google* or any other trademark you don't own. And second, these Spamer companies that own acres of common and useful words that invariably lead to pseudo-search sites that when I navigate away try to make me set them as my home page, these people should be shot. They are hogging decent domain names from people that might actually use them for useful things, their sites boarder on fraud, they serve no useful purpose at all.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:Lowest forms of life... by hondo77 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't be silly. Real estate developers are the second lowest form of life. They're followed by radio DJs, people who change lanes without signalling, car subwoofer manufacturers, and the cast of Beverly Hils 90210.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    4. Re:Lowest forms of life... by Manuel+Lafond · · Score: 1

      if being a low form of life could make me earn easy money, then I could be a larva for all I care

      --
      you slashdot geeks only criticize people...finally a community where I'm not different
    5. Re:Lowest forms of life... by OhioJoe · · Score: 1

      Well, I registered "GoogleJoe" not in hopes to resell it, but to use it for my own purposes later.

      However, I agree somewhat about squatters. Some guy registered my last name years ago SOLEY because it was a last name (it has no other meaning) and he bought all kinds of other last names. His name was Jerry Sumptin. The good part was that he only charged $5/year to get my first name at my last name dot com (and an aditional $10 for a website to match). But.. when he finally sold his company to NetIdentity, I had to pay them 5 times as much to keep my address, and another $25 for a matching website.

      --
      "Artificial Intelligence usually beats real stupidity."
    6. Re:Lowest forms of life... by Ocrad · · Score: 1
      Is a real estate investor the second lowest form of life?
      Yes.
    7. Re:Lowest forms of life... by fasnashun · · Score: 1

      You have it all wrong! The top two lowest forms of life are lawyers and politicians (arguably they could be combine into one item since most politicians seem to be lawyers these days).

      --
      fasNAshun "all the worlds a stage..."
    8. Re:Lowest forms of life... by ecloud · · Score: 1
      ...car subwoofer manufacturers...


      This dude has subwoofer envy, I think.

    9. Re:Lowest forms of life... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      First, "registering what you think is a good name with the hopes that you'll be able to resell it for a profit" is not the same as registering various permutations of *Google* or any other trademark you don't own.

      I didn't realize Google had trademarked the letter G.

      And second, these Spamer companies that own acres of common and useful words that invariably lead to pseudo-search sites that when I navigate away try to make me set them as my home page, these people should be shot.

      OK, but we weren't talking about them.

  55. Competition is good for the customer by starX · · Score: 1

    This is great news. I've heard enough bad things about paypal that I've avoided ever using it, but that still has all of the associated inconveniences. It will be nice to see an offering from Google that, at the very least, will let Paypal know they're not the only game in town.

  56. How will they handle support? by Revolver4ever · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't know too much about Google outside of search, maps and Gmail but from what I see Google has never done anything that requires mass customer support (dealing with average joe's like us, not the marketing companies that put up ads on google).

    While I'd love to see Google compete with PayPal and Ebay, I think that at least in the beginning the really crazy Google fanboys (the millions of them) will be dissapointed because Google probably is not used to dealing with millions of customers (some stupid, some arrogant, some smart asses, and so on) at the same time.

    Thus, at least for a couple of months, I would not sign up for this service for that reason alone. Once they got the customer support thing down (and I'm sure they will, there's a whole bunch of smart people over there) I'll join.

    Good luck Google.
    --
    If O2 is good, O3 must be 1.5 times better!
  57. Re:Cool phrase by saskboy · · Score: 1

    If Google keeps up this expanding there will be a new phrase in our lexicon:
    There are two sure things in life - death, and google.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  58. As the old saying goes.... by The+Hobo · · Score: 1

    Steal a penny from a man, you're a thief, steal a penny from many men, you're a banker.

    (Like others, I find competition might garner lower fees, so here's to hoping)

    --
    There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
  59. Re:PayPal can not do anything for me- goodluck goo by TykeClone · · Score: 1
    These and other policies are the reason we still pay surprisingly large fees to Wells Fargo to get small amounts of cash to another country

    Dude - 4 letters - OFAC

    Paypal doesn't want to touch that kind of transaction.

    --
    A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
  60. Fuckin' Right by netfool · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Gotcha' Google. Do it. Do us wrong though - feel our wrath (nothin', literally). You're rollin' with it, please don't forget /.

    --
    Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
  61. Hyperwallet.com by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    I like and used Hyperwallet whish is based in Vancouver and usable with a lot of Canadian banks. https://www.hyperwallet.com/

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:Hyperwallet.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People feel the same about a Canadian-only payment system as they do about Canadian musicians. The worthwhile ones will come to the US.

  62. Depends on perspective. by jd · · Score: 3, Funny

    Getting thrown on a bonfire by psychotic fundamentalists is not what I would call a good return.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  63. Powered by Yahoo??? ;) by Palal · · Score: 1

    At the bottom of http://googlewallet.com/ is a little phrase: "Powered by Yahoo! Web Hosting" LOL! I wonder if Google will be able to get that domain. And if they don't we'll get another PayPai and other look-alikes!

    --
    -Palal
  64. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  65. Google's 60 Minutes Interview by battamer · · Score: 1

    A couple of months ago CBS's 60 minutes featured a 40 minute story on Google. The interviewer (the lady with short hair) asked about Google's ambitions, and used an Ebay-like service as an example of a service Google might introduce. Google's rep said something to the effect of "if that were brought up at one of our meetings, the reaction would be 'why, Ebay does a great job.'" The idea being that Google focuses its resources on more wanting industries.

    Do you think this was just a ploy to devert attention, or what?

    1. Re:Google's 60 Minutes Interview by dnixon112 · · Score: 1

      No, I think they were referring to Ebay's auction service, not paypal.

  66. Google losing focus? by tonyquan · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this is a contrarian viewpoint, but perhaps it is time for Google to think about what its real core mission is. It can be argued that becoming a bank (which after all is what Paypal is) is not really part of "organizing the world's information and making it universally accessible and useful". It seems to me that Google is veering off in far too many directions, with some of them being flat out flops (Web Accelerator), while others are weakly executed or missed opportunities (Orkut, Blogger, and Froogle). Even the core product, search, is often cluttered with poor results. Google needs to focus on a smaller number of things they can execute well, rather than overextending themselves into every area just because they can.

    1. Re:Google losing focus? by SketcheeBoy · · Score: 1

      Most of the Google Labs are done by individual employees in their time that is set aside to develop new products. With that many minds trying to get their ideas through google, it's no wonder that they can tackle so many areas

      --
      [ Sketchee ]
  67. Warning - Google is anti-2nd amendment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As much as I dislike and distrust Paypal, I'm not sure Google would be any better. From what I've read, certain of Google's founders are interested in curtailing Constitutional freedoms that don't go along with their hippy-dippy, overprivileged and underexposed view of American citizenship.

  68. Reasonable as long as they keep the searches by LeBlanc_Joey · · Score: 1

    The part most worrying to me is that they make a lot of money in various other businesses and then neglect their search. I know they're far from it now, and I know they really care about searches, I keep hearing about other ventures, maps, print, picasa, now they move into online payments. I honestly don't care if they 'go evil', I care about my searches, their search is really useful, but it has to use a ton of resources. If it gets axed because it takes 50% of their resources but only makes 10% of their money, I'll cry.

    --

    Everything in moderation, even moderation.

    No, especially moderation.

  69. Powered by Yahoo??? ;) by Palal · · Score: 1

    At the bottom of http://googlewallet.com/ is a little phrase: "Powered by Yahoo! Web Hosting" LOL! I wonder if Google will be able to get that domain. And if they don't we'll get another PayPai and other look-alikes!

    --
    -Palal
  70. Scary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been said before but...

    I, for one, welcome our new Google overlords!

  71. Re:Too late for Gauction as well by DPFroese · · Score: 1

    It appears that the site www.gauction.com is owned by Naji Haddad, www.naji.com. Wish I had gotten there first. www.gauction.com only points to google's homesite though.

  72. As a merchant... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
    ...this sounds like plenty-o-fun for everyone. We've been experimenting with a paypal button for one product, and have seen more response than we anticipated. We tied a discount to it, which may help, but still, it's been a positive experience all around.

    I'm not sure Google will see the same degree of success that paypal does because they don't have EBay pumping "wallets" full of "cash" that may be easily perceived as discretionary by the account holder. What I mean by this is that when someone has made a few EBay sales, they'll have some funds in paypal; then, encountering a paypal button for a product, service, charity or just a tip, that's a pretty easy mental step to take... you didn't have the cash in your hot little hand yet, so perhaps it isn't so difficult to let go of.

    Google could -- perhaps -- accumulate Adsense dollars in the "wallet" but it is a lot more involved becoming an Adsense vendor than it is selling the dusty stuff out of your basement on EBay. Still, they're a huge market presence and maybe I'm just selling them short here. Gawd knows Adsense and Adwords are working out for a lot of people.

    Along moderately related e-commerce lines, anyone know of a US-centric investment->loan mechanism similar to Zopa (Zone of possible agreement)? My company is looking for something like this to put some funds into within US borders (for both tax and accountability reasons.) I came up dry with Google; perhaps this isn't legal in the US?

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  73. Cringley by dotc · · Score: 1

    Cringley predicts this (probably other did as well). Will be interesting to see the execution/format Google decides to pursue. Should pit them against Amazon and Ebay, huh?

  74. i didnt think paypal made any money from fees by carl0ski · · Score: 1

    i didnt think paypal made any money from fees I figured they made money on the interest of average $20 x 20 million users $400 million dollars equates to a lot of interest that is why i don't use standard banks or paypal to store my money they make money out of my money and either charge me fees or offer me free storage. HSBC :) and ING may make millions from my money but at least i get some interest from it.

  75. Wanna kill Ebay? by seanvaandering · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If Google wanted to kill ebay and paypal in one quick swoop, just offer lower pricing on auctions, and be realisitic. Extra features are nice, but eBay just kills the entire idea of the upsell, every stupid thing you do costs an added fee, until your 99 cent item costs $12.00 to list! Would I put a ton of stuff on auction if it was cost friendly? You bet -- and might end up paying more **IN THE LONG RUN** then paying ludicrous amounts now and waiting 6 months between transactions.

    Secondly, dont kill sellers and buyers with fees on both ends of the transaction, maybe link both services together, with free transaction and merchant processing for auctions when you utilize GWallet on your auction - BOOM - right there, youve got them hooked, and you dont need to worry about alot of fraud auctions.

    Google in their infinite wisdom I'm sure has already come up with a great idea, and I cannot wait to see it. I am so sick of EBay, and when I log in there - I just feel dirty all over again from the way they rape you with charges that you end up owing money once its all done. Sheech.

  76. Wrong by jbellis · · Score: 3, Informative

    Once you have a premier account (which is required to accept credit card payments AT ALL or other payments over some small limit -- $100 per month, I think) you get charged fees for all payments you receive. Even ones that don't cost paypal a thing, like a transfer from someone's paypal balance.

    1. Re:Wrong by qopax · · Score: 1

      haha, according to my personal account I can receive up to 500 dollars a month, and send an unlimited amount of money. Really, anyone who receives more than 500 dollars a month using paypal should be charged on their transactions. They are clearly running a business. That's a part of paypal I consider completely fair. Do you have a way in real life to receive payments from credit card holders personally, without owning a business? It's all logical to me, a 16 year old child.

      --
      I pwn this comment. "The Fine Print" says so.
    2. Re:Wrong by qopax · · Score: 1

      The parent is speaking about a personal account. A premier account is equivalent of running a business using paypal as a means of transferring funds. Thus paypal is justified in charging you more, since you are using it as a primary tool in receiving payment.

      --
      I pwn this comment. "The Fine Print" says so.
    3. Re:Wrong by rsynnott · · Score: 1

      Erm, you know, banks tend to charge fees as well. So do credit card processors. And it's $500 a month. Just 'cause it's the internet, you shouldn't expect everything to be free, you know ;)

      --
      Me (Blog)
    4. Re:Wrong by arodland · · Score: 1

      Yes... and how does that make me wrong? As I said, some transactions (those ones) have fees, which are usually fairly low, and comparable to those of credit-card processors. Others (personal transactions up to a certain limit) are free.

      Keep in mind that I don't even particularly like PayPal; I was merely clarifying a point from the grandparent that could easily be misleading. While there are several reasons to dislike PayPal, and to like the idea of competition, the premise that they're leveraging a monopoly position to jack up rates isn't a particularly strong one. Yet, anyway.

  77. A bridge too far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Much as I adore Google, this definitely goes too far for me. No one company should be able to track... well, pretty much all my online activities.
    Although I trust Google mostly, the only way I'd ever use this is if they'd explicitly stop all tracking already happening. Publicly state that they don't track you. Get rid of the never-expiring cookie, unless you explicitly asl for it. Make it opt-in, rather than opt-out, because the only way opt-out would work right now is by... well, a never-expiring cookie.

    I'd really, really love a decent system for micro-payments, but unless alltheweb or wisenut or one of those other erstwhile google-killers seriously steps up its ante, so that I can switch to them for search, I won't use such a system if it's offered by Google.

  78. Why not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    G-Bay? It just sounds PIMP man! :)

  79. I Trust PayPal more by team99parody · · Score: 2, Funny
    Acually, I trust them both 100%.
    • I trust Google to track my every move, and to archive every search/click/purchase/EVERYTHING that I ever do on line; and keep this information and slice&dice it to build up a profile that knows me better than myself.
    • I trust PayPal to mess up regularly; and to mix up my transactions with that of people overseas; and to occasionally lose money and occasionally find random amounts of extra money.

    Viewed in this light, PayPal == anonymous cash; while Google == Big Brother.
    In many ways, this makes PayPal safer.
  80. Who else is shorting eBay on Monday morning?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks the beginning of the end for eBay...

    The empire is now beginning to fall!

  81. I'm glad by jbellis · · Score: 1

    my reading comprehension was already better than that when I was 16.

    1. Re:I'm glad by qopax · · Score: 1

      I'm very happy for you, but I gess that means your writing never quite improved, did it?

      --
      I pwn this comment. "The Fine Print" says so.
  82. Good by Thaelon · · Score: 1

    Of course this being /. and me being a bit drunk I didn't RTFA, but I welcome some serious paypal competition. As it stands right now eBay owns Paypal, so when you use paypal to pay for an ebay purchace or worse yet, sell something on ebay and recieve payment through paypal eBay takes two cuts of your money.

    However don't get too excited about all the "horror stories" of people having bad experiences with paypal. I've never had a problem with Paypal and I've had the account for over four years. Of course a few people will have problems with a new service (as paypal once was) and being what it is (paypal that is) expect it to be risk and therefore cry all the louder when something goes wrong. In fact I got my money back from a disreputable site when they ripped me off. Sure lots of people complain but a whole lot more have no problems, you just don't hear them complaining because they've got nothing to complain about.

    --

    Question everything

  83. Paypal Class Action? by Infe · · Score: 1

    Whatever happened with the Paypal class action thing? Have they already paid out what they were going to pay? They locked my account for two months and never even told me why! In the interim, to unlock my account they said I needed to fax my birth certificate, social security card, drivers license, two bills and some other such nonsense. I was fully willing to walk away from my $50 rather than do this. Boy, oh boy I still fume over that one...I signed up for the class action but since they only had 50 bucks of mine, I probably didn't qualify for payout.

    --
    Posted by yintercept - "...science...[is] the study of the 'divine creation.' "
  84. guess the next move by etzel · · Score: 1

    so aah, what is launch date for gbay?

    --
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
  85. Paygoo by Neoncow · · Score: 1
    Paygoo is a name for one's behind in Chinese.

    The more you know.

  86. Don't you know? by Neoncow · · Score: 1
    Money is all about numbers. Billions of financial transations occur around the world and the only thing that happens is the someone agrees to change their number one way and someone else agrees to change their number to other way.

    Google just wants to be your online number manager

  87. I don't think it will be done as Google Wallet... by coldcup · · Score: 1

    Domain Name: googlemoney.com

    Registrar Name: Markmonitor.com
    Registrar Whois: whois.markmonitor.com
    Registrar Homepage: http://www.markmonitor.com/

    Administrative Contact:
    DNS Admin
    (NIC-1467103)
    Google Inc.
    1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
    Mountain View
    CA
    94043
    US
    dns-admin@google.com
    +1.6503300100
    Fax- +1.6506188571
    Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
    DNS Admin
    (NIC-1467103)
    Google Inc.
    1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
    Mountain View
    CA
    94043
    US
    dns-admin@google.com
    +1.6503300100
    Fax- +1.6506188571

    Created on..............: 2004-Dec-25.
    Expires on..............: 2006-Dec-25.
    Record last updated on..: 2005-Mar-14 12:18:43.

    Domain servers in listed order:

    NS2.GOOGLE.COM
    NS1.GOOGLE.COM
    NS3.GOOGLE.COM
    NS4.GOOGLE.COM

  88. Re:How does this fit in with their mission stateme by SketcheeBoy · · Score: 1

    Presumably I'll be able to buy information

    --
    [ Sketchee ]
  89. so, I guess this means.... by popra · · Score: 1

    Google stock price won't be dropping as many here said

  90. Even overseas by nietsch · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen or used a check for ages, so I am pretty happy with them just putting the money in my local account. Now if you would be so kind to click some ads on my site, i'll maybe have that money in my hands soon...

    Actually I am using adsense ads as a tipjar. If I like the site I am reading, I click one or two ads. Given the amount you get for most clicks, that counts as a micropayment, doesn't it?

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
  91. ALSO! by coldcup · · Score: 1

    Domain Name: googlecredit.com

    Registrar Name: Markmonitor.com
    Registrar Whois: whois.markmonitor.com
    Registrar Homepage: http://www.markmonitor.com/

    Administrative Contact:
    DNS Admin
    (NIC-1467103)
    Google Inc.
    1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
    Mountain View
    CA
    94043
    US
    dns-admin@google.com
    +1.6503300100
    Fax- +1.6506188571
    Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
    DNS Admin
    (NIC-1467103)
    Google Inc.
    1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
    Mountain View
    CA
    94043
    US
    dns-admin@google.com
    +1.6503300100
    Fax- +1.6506188571

    Created on..............: 2004-Sep-26.
    Expires on..............: 2007-Sep-26.
    Record last updated on..: 2005-May-05 15:42:55.

    Domain servers in listed order:

    NS2.GOOGLE.COM
    NS1.GOOGLE.COM
    NS3.GOOGLE.COM
    NS4.GOOGLE.COM

  92. Sig error! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have "property" spelled incorrectly.

  93. As long.. by necromcr · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ..it will support all countries, I'll be willing to pay for any extra costs for money transfers. PayPal sucks for not-so-known countries (e.g. Slovenia).

    --
    No more I say.
  94. Watch out for your wallet! by 1000+words · · Score: 1
  95. Makes sense by simon2263 · · Score: 1

    To pay for your Google Adsense, you use Paypal - so eBay get a slice of Google's action. Taking Paypal out of the Adsense picture will automatically raise Google's profit.

  96. Re:Maybe it will be called . . . by SlashdotMeNow · · Score: 1

    That's actually funny. If it wasn't posted AC it would probably have gotten a 'funny' mod. Or is it just me?

  97. Look at the bigger picture will you!!! by Shadez666 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this is the breakthrough for a global micropayment currency that a *lot* of people and businesses worldwide has been waiting for. Don't be evil!

  98. $ 1 GB (GigaBuck) Free with registration. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'll use it if they give me $1,000,000,000 (1 GigaBuck) Free!

  99. Google does it again... by dtk13 · · Score: 1

    I think google will come up with some thing great here. A lot of companies have tried but failed and I beleve that google will triumph over all. But they need to be careful of fruad, scammers, and phishers. I look forward to seeing this in action!!!!

  100. Fees, Evil, et al. by orionware · · Score: 0

    One thing you have to understand about Paypal. They are offering you the ability to accept credit cards without having to set up a merchant account and have good credit. Even if you formally set up a merchant account and a processor you'd still have to pay 1.5 - 2.0% unless you had a massive volume.

    Many people will complain about their resolution methods and chargebacks. What most of them don't say is that they can be protected against this by ONLY ACCEPTING VERIFIED payments. If you are accepting a payment from a user in the former USSR who can not verify his account, it's at your OWN risk. This is perfectly legitimate and reasonable. Credit card processors do the same thing. Most wont even tak e a payment from a sketchy part of the world.

    I was ripped off by an EBay seller who just wouldn't respond to emails about some damaged cases for two sets of poker chips. UPS had denied the claim due to poor packaging so I filed a paypal claim. The seller responded by filing a NON-PAYING Bidder claim! I quickly solved that by sending my payment confirmation email to Ebay. A week later paypal had reversed the charges completely since the seller couldn't prove his actions were in good faith.

    Result. I got my money back and free product. Paypal worked for me.

    I think EBAY is more out of line with their fees than Paypal.

    --


    Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
  101. Paypal bad for Virtual Service Providers too by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This, of course, is absolutely true. I have used it in the past, and hated it. I always transfered money out same day. Once in the bank, I moved over to my non-paypal account. The account signed up with at Paypal was an empty non-minimum balance one. I constantly monitored it for any outgoing, and planned to call bank to stop payment on any activity. If Paypal terminated my account for failure to provide them money back, I really didn't care. I was looking for better payment options anyways, and closing it was not a concern for me. Here's why...

    Paypal is especially nasty if you sell any type of virtual services. The specifically say that if you sell a virtual service, be it providing internet, web hosting, member only sites, program downloads... whatever, they offer you zero protection. If there is a dispute, their TOS basically says (last time I read it, and paraphrasing) "We're going to side with the buyer 100% of the time, regardless of any evidence you could provide that the transaction was completed."

    Unfortunately, this is a side effect of FedEx/UPS/USPS tracking and reciepts being far more reliable, and no digital equivilant. But, imagine selling someone a years worth of hosting for a theoretical $1000, only to have them complain 10 months later that the service was not up to the advertised standards, and get every penny of their money back. I can understand giving back a partial refund for time not used, but a full refund?

    That's why virtual service providers are better going with any other service. I would name what I use, but don't wish to introduce any form of slashvertising here. I'll just say, it sure as hell ain't paypal!

    --
    I8-D
  102. GreenZap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  103. They should be shot by guet · · Score: 1

    Where do the denizens of Slashdot rank?

  104. Organizing the world's information? by Bemmu · · Score: 1

    How is this organizing the world's information?

    Well, I guess my account can be represented as an integer of information. Actually, a byte would do just as well...

    As a bonus, here is a small stress relief game if you're annoyed with all the news being about Google.

  105. Don't forget.. by hyfe · · Score: 1
    http://www.neteller.com/ is what took over the electronic money market for pokersites after paypal decided it was immoral and they didn't want to support it.

    Transfers between members/pokersites are free. Only fees paid are when sending money to/from real accounts. From what I've seen yet, it seems damn reasonable.

    --
    "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
  106. Deposit Only means Deposit Only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "How do you inform the bank to only accept deposits from PayPal and not withdrawls ?"

    You have to make the account deposit only as the grandparent said, not paypal desposit only but entirely deposit only.

    The safest way to do this is to make sure that you need a cosigner to withdrawl. So if the bank starts making withdrawls one or both of the parties could say "any withdrawls requires both (you and your husband or wife) of our permission and you violated our agreement mr. bank manager". Usually the bank isnt that stupid but if they are then they are on the hook so its insurance if Paypal starts withdrawing.

    What this also means is that this bank account should be for paypal only so you can close it if any shit starts up.

  107. Another sig comment by Ikester8 · · Score: 1

    You forgot Mr. I Can Buy You Out!

    --
    That's the last time I run code posted in somebody's sig...
    1. Re:Another sig comment by arose · · Score: 1

      That's just exchange of property.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    2. Re:Another sig comment by Ikester8 · · Score: 1

      And therefore legitimate. It is, however, another way to get property, which is what the guy's sig was about. Just wanted to make sure all the bases were covered.

      --
      That's the last time I run code posted in somebody's sig...
    3. Re:Another sig comment by arose · · Score: 1

      It's not another way to get property, just exchange of property you already have.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  108. HELL YES by asscroft · · Score: 1

    GOOGLE, Apple, Microsoft, ANYONE

    EVEN

    Yes. I'm gonna say it.

    Even AOL.

    PAYPAL SUCKS.

    The only people I'd veto would be RealPlayer.

    --
    because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
  109. Beware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In looking through the posts, no one seems to be asking why does paypal act so petty and mean-spirited? Historically, paypal had a lot of competition. I used to work at paypal, and the thing they are the most proud of, is their fraud model. That stuff is top-secret too. Most of their competitors were killed off by fraud. Paypal has survived by being the most paranoid. They are extremely cautious about that stuff, and not afraid to lock out accounts. Does it hurt their business? Of course, but fraud hurts even more.

    If Google wants to pay too, they'll have to deal with the same forces as Paypal. They too can be crushed by fraud. They too, will have to institute draconian, or at least irritating, features to protect themselves.

    Those wanting Google to enter the market, be careful what you ask for...

  110. International purchases by Sun+Rider · · Score: 1

    "Oh well, I'm sure someone will find a good use for it." If you don't live in the US but buy in the internet from US companies you'll find most of them, specially the smaller ones, don't accept international credit cards, even if the same cards can be used in the US when you shop in person, and even if the shipping address is in the US. So, something like Paypal and Western Union money orders by internet are invaluable since they accept international cards. Problem is many business don't accept Paypal. Hope Google Wallet becomes more popular among business.

  111. Maybe not only that... by Sun+Rider · · Score: 1
    "Matt wrote SafeSearch, which is Google's family filter. In addition to his experience at Google, Matt held a top-secret clearance while working for the Department of Defense"

    http://www.webmasterworld.com/conference/bios/matt _cutts.htm

  112. PayPal alternative by Gigi+San · · Score: 1

    Here is a good alternative to paypal www.emocorp.com. If you have problems real people will answer your concerns + no frozen accounts or chargebacks. (Merchant Guide is on https://www.emocorp.com/s/template/Merchants.vm)

    Cheers

  113. I'm still waiting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for Google to release their own OS.

  114. Naive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just about everybody trusts Google.

    Actually it is exactly the opposite. Starting with the introduction of GMail the trust just keeps fading with every new 'integrated' service they introduce.

    They accumulate too much cross-referencable personal information for anyone to trust them based just on do-no-evil corporate motto.