Slashdot Mirror


Google's New Click-to-Call Service

teknopagan writes "Google has debuted a new service called Click-to-Call, in which they will connect you by phone to any of their advertisers. You click a phone icon next to the ad, enter your phone number, and Google calls you and connects you for free to the advertiser."

288 comments

  1. Are they using Asterisk? by XorNand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pure genius.

    I'd love to know the technology behind this. Given Google's commitment to FOSS, I would venture to guess that they are using Asterisk somewhere in the mix since it's one of the most flexible and mature open source telephony projects. However, Asterisk isn't known for scaling very well when you start talking about enterprise level installs. In fact, one of the biggest complaints of the Asterisk community is that VoIP providers routinely hack the source to improve scalability and stability, but then never release those changes back to the project. If indeed Google is using Asterisk, it will be interesting to see how much they support the developer community.

    --
    Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    1. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1

      Could this be related at some future point in time and space to the subject of Cringley's latest Pulpit?

      On a side note, did this give anyone else a bad feeling for a moment before the fact that Google was doing this inexplicably won you over?

      --
      A B A C A B B
    2. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      It's most likely a custom implementation rather then Asterisk (Although it scales well, I'm not so sure how it could be incorporated into the Googleplex). All they're doing is SIP to connect the two parties (think Vonage, but using the PSTN for both sides).

      I guess we know what they're doing with all that dark fiber, eh? (I'm sure there are plenty more uses going on with it, but the amount of fiber they bought allows them to run an amazing amount of voice calls over their own infrastructure, with no need to hand over cash to a third party accept for termination costs)

    3. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by sr180 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Asterisk isnt really appropriate for this. They dont want to build a call server or PBX equivalent. They need an IVR that simply makes calls and connects the two parties. Something like Telco Perl is much more appropriate for this.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
    4. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Justifiable_Delusion · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I must say...Google continues to astound me. Continually they offer services which rewrite the rulebook. They are moving forward into new areas while others are simply wading and reacting, hoping to catch crumbs and turn them into silver while Google is reaping a harvest of diamonds and platinum. There is a reason google's tock just broke 400 and flew past it. And there is a reason they are hiring teh greatest minds in our country.

      I for one welcome our new search engine overlords...who knew?

      --
      Mad, adj : Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence. Ambrose Bierce - The Deveil's Dictionsary
    5. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by wealthychef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um, the bad feeling continues for me. Why are people thrilled about this? Jesus, yes, Lord, I wish desperately to talk with Google's advertisers. Oh, thank you Google! Gosh, I'm so happy now. "Pure genius?" Um... sure. I'm sorry if I'm missing the point. I'd be much more excited if I could click on a myspace.com link and call my friend's house right from there. Is that the next step? If so, then yes, very cool. Right now, I don't really want to talk to some sales dude at pricegrabber.com or wherever...

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    6. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by poopdeville · · Score: 5, Funny
      Pure genius.

      Indeed. I'm going to start making google prank call my friends immediately!

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    7. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      This isn't a feature so everyone can have free calls. This is something Google can show off to their Google Ad customers, to help them drive more revenue.

      Note to Slashdot readers: It's not a crime to be in business to make money. It's the way you do it that matters. Google just happens to be very good at making money in a very friendly way.

    8. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Newrad · · Score: 1

      Your friends advertise with google?

    9. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by joto · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This isn't a feature so everyone can have free calls. This is something Google can show off to their Google Ad customers, to help them drive more revenue.

      Obviously it is a feature so everyone can have free calls. If not, it would be easier to just list the phone-number to the advertiser, so I could call it myself.

      The fact that I can only get free calls to someone who is trying to sell me something is the thing that drives googles revenue.

      Is it something that I'm likely to ever use? No. Is it something that some marketers can be excited about? Probably. I trust google did some research before creating this service. Which makes me conclude that I have to become more cynical with regard to how many stupid people this planet contains. I could never be good in marketing, I have a tendency to assume people are intelligent.

    10. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used to work for a small data switching telco (which was later bought up by a larger company, and 90% of us were fired or left within 3 months). Anyhow, we had a private fork of Asterisk for our use. I and 3 others spent a fair amount of time trying to deal with the stability/scalability issues. We tried getting our changes merged back into the official version, but there were a number of key architectural changes that need to be made, and Mark Spencer was a complete asshole. We thought of releasing our own fork, but we didn't want to deal with supporting it (plus, it was a competetive advantage not to). I wish I had released the patches, at least, if only because I'm bitter over being fired :)

    11. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The purpose of not listing the number is so that google can charge the advertiser for this service. Also it acts as a protection against scammers who use your phone number as a way to ID you for nefarious purposes. If all you want to ask is "can your product do X?" you perhaps don't want them to know all of your identification.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    12. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are ready to buy, then you would want to talk to some sales dude, etc. and get some answers before buying. I have a Toshiba laptop, and when you call them about parts, they match your phone number to your file, and they already know how you want it shipped, etc., very fast and efficient. The Google setup encourages impulse buying, however. Only problem is getting the money in the first place! Who would not want to talk just a minute to someone at ThinkGeek about that neat flashlight that you are ready to spend $$ on! Neat idea, Google. They are the greatest.

    13. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pure Genius.....please...

      I work for one of the big "telcos" that has a "labs" group. We have this software on our PCs. Does the same thing (and more); dials you back, you pickup the phone and your outgoing call begins.

      We can only hope the great Google has violated a patent with this!!

    14. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      No, but since you enter "your" phone number so Google can call "you" and hand off the connection to an advertiser.. well, "you" doesn't really have to be "you", does it?

      I wonder how, if possible, they prevent such abuse?

      Of course, you probably need to enter your area code (didn't try it). Figure they can now link your phone number to your IP and both of those to a generic physical location. A simple tracking cookie and they can to improve the relevance of thier searches based on that knowledge.
      =Smidge=

    15. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by joto · · Score: 0
      The purpose of not listing the number is so that google can charge the advertiser for this service.

      That makes sense! Instead of increasing your prizes, you charge them for an additional service. It's like a real-estate investor renting out property for low prices, and then adding an extra payment in the form of "shared costs".

      Also it acts as a protection against scammers who use your phone number as a way to ID you for nefarious purposes. If all you want to ask is "can your product do X?" you perhaps don't want them to know all of your identification.

      If I don't trust them enough, to assume they're not phone number scammers, I sure as hell don't trust them with my money. My number is listed in the phonebook, so I don't see what good it would do them to collect numbers from callers. Also, I'm on the do-not-call list.

    16. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by digidave · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, this is just some lame tech that's been around for a couple of years on some yellow pages-type sites. Almost nobody uses it. I'm not sure which companies offer this, but I do know it's available. Vonage's Click 2 Call is the exact same technology, although I'm not sure if it's available for this use or not (http://www.vonage.com/features.php?feature=click_ 2_call).

      Quit heaping the praise on Google when they don't deserve it. They've done enough cool things that they don't need to get credit when they don't do anything.

      The biggest innovation here is that this can be used for a generic web ad, while AFAIK all implementations have been for paid business listings on business directory sites or on corporate sites to make it easier to call.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    17. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't be evil.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    18. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You keep forgetting they aren't evil.

      It says on their own page that they take your privacy seriously!

    19. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by miyako · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't speak for any other slashdotters, but I can immediately think of two reasons why this service could be useful.
      The first is that I have a fair few family members who are completely computer illiterate. Once every couple of months they call me wanting to buy some obscure thing, and I have to google for it, find a couple of sites, read what is available and what the cost is to them over the phone. They write it down on a bit of paper and call me back in a few days to tell me what they want, I drive over there, get some cash or a check, deposit it into the bank, wait for the deposit to go through, get online, and order it for them. This is a pain that could be largely mitigated by me simply being able to google and then enter their phone number and allow them to talk to a representitive.
      The second thing that I think this could be useful for is for helping smaller sites build trust with customers. I know there have been a few sites that I have decided not to buy from simply because the site looked unprofessional and I wasn't sure I could really trust the site to A: not steal my information, or B: actually deliver what I buy. In this case I think that smaller and lesser known sites might benefit from this service.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    20. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      Having publicly available phone books with millions of numbers doesn't help you identify say an Alzheimer's patient.
      Let's say grandma is on Google searching for information on Alzheimer's treatments for grandpa and a google ad pops up for a new treatment. In-fact it is just some scam company selling time shares or some such that is trying to identify sufferers of Alzheimer's. They call back until they get grandpa alone and convince him that yes, he and his wife (who is conveniently not present) did indeed purchase a timeshare yesterday and his checking account information is needed to finalize the transaction.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    21. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been reading Slashdot for a long time without commenting - but your post has got to be one of the most cynical, paranoid, and pessimistic responses I've ever read.

      And that's saying something even for Slashdot.

    22. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh give up that fanboy crap. As has been pointed out several times by other people further down in the comments, google was not the first to offer "click to call" (interestingly, most people who pointed this out were modded down). Google is the first however to get this service advertised for them on Slashdot.

      Google can do a lot of neat stuff, but they are very rarely first to do anything. And as for their stock price, anyone who has taken an introductory econ course would know that it means nothing. There is a reason that no serious investor would buy any google stock; it's called *overvaluation*.

    23. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The first is that I have a fair few family members who are completely computer illiterate..... They write it down on a bit of paper and call me back in a few days to tell me what they want, I drive over there, get some cash or a check, deposit it into the bank, wait for the deposit to go through, get online, and order it for them.

      Wow, that's an impressive level of trust you've got going in your family!

    24. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by wass · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I was just talking to my brother about this today. He's a financial guy, and compared the 'books' between Google and Yahoo, showing that Yahoo's revenue is still 90% of Google's, etc, and that Google really isn't that much better than Yahoo. He thinks Google's stock is overvalued, which maybe it is.

      But I had to tell him the major difference is beyond just the books, people tend to just like Google. Their services are a joy to use, the ads aren't in your face, they do tons of cool other things like Google Maps, Google Earth, etc, that Yahoo doesn't. Granted, Yahoo does many things that Google doesn't too, but for my personal preferences Google's take is pretty damn cool.

      Now if only they would make the Gmail interface more intuitive and sensical (to me at least).

      --

      make world, not war

    25. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by nacturation · · Score: 1

      I'd be much more excited if I could click on a myspace.com link and call my friend's house right from there. Is that the next step? If so, then yes, very cool.

      You can have that right now. Advertise with a unique phrase such as "call wealthychef" and bid $0.01 per click. Provide a phone number. Now your distant friends and family can talk to you all they want and it costs you at most a penny while Google picks up the long distance bill.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    26. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Ilex · · Score: 1

      Actually I'm always initially skeptical google or not. When you stop to think about it though, this technology is not intrusive, unlike most of the other web advertising 'Enhancements' (flash ads, pop-up's, spyware) we've seen over the years. It's an extra service for google's customers, the advertisers. The 'Consumers' (that's us folks) aren't inconvenienced by this. Clever! Makes you wonder why the other webvertisers didn't think about it sooner. Oh and as the parent states it'll be even better if google released some of this technology to the OSS community.

    27. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know someone who prototyped the same concept / technology / business model earlier this year, but of course it needs to be integrated to search / directory enquiries to be useful.

      One of the key selling points for him is that there are an awful lot of people out there who have 'a web page' for their business but aren't actually office based / use e-mail a lot - think plumbers, builders, electricians, small shops.

      Of course people could always phone them up from the number on the web page, but this gives an easy way of making it free to the consumer, the cost falls on the advertiser - plus you get very immediate feedback on how effective your web advertising is.

    28. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you have read slashdot for that long and this is the most blah blah blah that you've ever read? Maybe you have Alzheimer's. Or, maybe you just got burned on a timeshare scheme and you are disgruntled about it.

    29. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      I know there have been a few sites that I have decided not to buy from simply because the site looked unprofessional and I wasn't sure I could really trust the site to A: not steal my information, or B: actually deliver what I buy.

      What makes you think that:
      1. Scammers build unprofessional looking sites (infact I suspect that an unprofessional looking site is _less_ likley to be a scammer because scammers are pretty good at looking professional since it helps them part your cash from you).
      2. You are less likley to be conned by someone talking to you over the phone (some scammers are very good at talking you into buying *more* stuff you don't want... can you say "extended warranties"?).

      Personally I prefer to read all the information on a site (and possibly email them for more information) and buy in my own time rather than (potentially) being pressured into buying over the phone.

      However, I do think this is potentially a good thing for technophobes who want to speak with a real person. And from the vendor's point of view, I suspect the "call to sale conversion ratio" will be higher than the "click to sale conversion ratio" and so it may well be worth paying the higher price Google will no doubt charge (and hopefully pass on to those of us who use AdSense).

    30. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Jondo · · Score: 1

      Asterisk is more than capable at providing a custom IVR. Asterisk is not just a PBX, it's a whole lot more.

    31. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by stevejsmith · · Score: 1

      Considering America's literacy rate is about 97%, I don't think your situation is terribly relevant. Especially since illiteracy is correlated highly with poverty, homelessness, etc., none of which are terribly conducive to online shopping, telephone ownership, and credit card possession.

    32. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by stevejsmith · · Score: 1

      HAHAHA...whoops!

      I read "computer illiterate" as "illiterate" -- disregard all of that!

    33. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When dialing a 1-800 number is too complicated, just use Google.

    34. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by miyako · · Score: 1

      I realize all of this from a logical point of view, but the point is that a lot of people still have an emotional reaction to these sorts of things. While more often than not I try to take these sorts of things into account, I cannot deny that I to have an emotional reaction to the sort of site I'm looking at. I bet you probably do too, even if you don't realize it.
      The point isn't necessarily "omg they'll scam me" most of the time. Instead it's just that when a site looks extremely unprofessional (and I've seen a few that seem to harken back to the early days of AOL with animated GIF backgrounds, blinking lime-green text, etc) it makes you wonder how much of a professional the person on the other end is.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    35. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were starting to make sense until i read "accept". For christ's sake can't you spell...I am pretty sure you meant "except".

    36. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by fedork · · Score: 1

      What was stopping you from doing this before? Not that you could not give some business someone else's contact info without help of Google... So what exactly is new here?

      --
      ...remember good 'ol times when IP used to mean Internet Protocol....
    37. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Jack+Zombie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right, like I'm gonna give my phone number to Google for them to give to advertisers (or for Google to keep, more likely, the bastards).

      Google keeps getting scarier day by day...

      --
      "You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka
    38. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by joto · · Score: 1

      Wow, you're a genius! This is why I could never succeed in marketing!

    39. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing stopped me. In fact, I've done it before. But not without filling out a lot of lame web forms.

    40. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      But if Google calls you, then calls the company, then connects the two all the company will get is Google's phone number. Voila, no chance of calling back unless te caller explicitly gives their phone number.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    41. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      You need to learn to read. Your point was my point--it was the entire point of my comment! Please, learn to read a thread in context, look at the parent of my post's parent: it was me! If you aren't going to use nested comments to your advantage perhaps you should stick to sites like digg.com, with their plethora of one-off comments.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    42. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by EvilStein · · Score: 1

      but, this is Slashdot. Whenever Google does *anything* we're supposed to give them a big e-handjob. Didn't you get that memo? ;)

    43. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Varchas · · Score: 1

      ESQUBE has an excellent VOIP Click to call service. Eventhough it is in the prototype phase, it can be easily productized. Please have a look at http://www.vqube.com/webphone/webphone.htm for more details. You need to click on the "call" button.

    44. Re:Are they using Asterisk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You keep forgetting they aren't evil.

      But the do allow evil pranks...

  2. I can see someone abusing this by Snarfangel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..especially if they have the phone number of someone they don't like.

    --
    This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
    1. Re:I can see someone abusing this by FhnuZoag · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's interesting. *click* Though I don't see *click* why anyone would be *click* so *click* mean *click* and nasty to annoy people *click* with constant *click* phone *click* ringing in real life. *click*

    2. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's interesting. *click* *click* *click*

      Alright, i think i'm gonna search for "sony" on google... be back in 30 minutes.

    3. Re:I can see someone abusing this by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can see someone abusing this

      That's a good point.

      It also raises the question: How will this interact with the Do Not Call bill that was passed a while ago? According to the bill, companies that have a past relationship with you are exempt from the blacklist. If you put your number into one of these boxes are you opening yourself up to get calls from hundreds of telemarketing companies all under one big corporate umbrella?

      This is Slashdot, yet I haven't seen anyone concerned about privacy yet. I guess that since we're talking about Google, all anyone can do is "Oooh" and "Aaah" over this. Depending on how this is implemented, it could open the door for all sorts of problems with privacy and annoying telemarketers.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    4. Re:I can see someone abusing this by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 1

      Anyone willing to post the home phone number of a few big spammers or telemarketing CEOs? :P

    5. Re:I can see someone abusing this by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      ...in which they will connect you by phone to any of their advertisers.

      RTF...blurb?

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    6. Re:I can see someone abusing this by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      NM, it's late, I wasn't thinking. I see how it can be abused. Sorry about that.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    7. Re:I can see someone abusing this by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Interesting


        Mod parent up please, the question about the Do Not Call bill is an excellent one, especially considering the potential for abuse.

        Any thoughts? I can't honestly see an easy way to prevent this from being abused easily.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    8. Re:I can see someone abusing this by shawb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google doesn't give the phone number to the advertiser. They delete your number after a short time. At least according to their privacy statement. Doing otherwise could open them up to litigation.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    9. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Stormy+Henderson · · Score: 1

      Not a problem. You're completely anonymous to the advertiser. Google doesn't give them your number and blocks caller ID.

    10. Re:I can see someone abusing this by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up please, the question about the Do Not Call bill is an excellent one, especially considering the potential for abuse.

          Any thoughts? I can't honestly see an easy way to prevent this from being abused easily.

      SB


      They problably cross reference, they may not call a number more then once every 20 min and maybe no more then 3 times a day. That would be enough for ads but would not be harassment. They might also figure the local area via the area code and limit calls after hours.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    11. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Confoundit · · Score: 1

      Just to see if I have this right...

      1.) You click on a button on the website.
      2.) You enter in "your" phone number.
      3.) "Your" phone rings, it then connects you with the company.

      This service has only 1 use: revenge. If you want to call a company but don't want your phone number to come up, all you have to do is enter *67 (or something) before you call them. And any company with this service also probably has a 1-800 number, so you wouldn't be charged for the call anyway.

      This is a terrible, terrible idea.

    12. Re:I can see someone abusing this by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      It also raises the question: How will this interact with the Do Not Call bill that was passed a while ago? According to the bill, companies that have a past relationship with you are exempt from the blacklist. If you put your number into one of these boxes...

      RTFA. "We won't share your telephone number with anyone, including the advertiser. When you're connected with the advertiser, your number is blocked so the advertiser can't see it. In addition, we'll delete the number from our servers after a short period of time."

      The only problem I see is that how do they stop assholes from putting in other people's numbers? I had assumed your phone number would be stored in your Google profile, but they say here that it is only stored temporarily, so that can't be so. (Though keeping for a "short" time would be long enough to track if someone complained.)

    13. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Red+Alastor · · Score: 1

      I just did and there wasn't anthing from Sony in the sponsored ads section. There was this however : http://www.sonyclassactions.com/

      --
      Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
    14. Re:I can see someone abusing this by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      If someone, say, sent a few hundred invitations and used my work number, I'd be more than seriously annoyed at even three times a day. In a busy work environment unsolicited calls are a real pain in the ass, and at home I've very much enjoyed being on the DNC list.

        Maybe Google should consider an "opt-out" list that gets parsed to limit calls. I imagine it could be done with a simple webform (and perhaps one could even choose a few "search terms" for opt-IN possibilities). It would have to be a serious effort, however. I think they'd easily be up to the challenge.

        I'll confess that I'd opt-out entirely; the phone can be a serious annoyance when you're focused on getting something done, even when it's an important call ;-)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    15. Re:I can see someone abusing this by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


        How does that stop someone who wants to effectively DDOS a phone number from clickety-clicking?

        Or am I missing something here, not having yet read ATC (All The Comments)? ;-)

        I want an opt-out list I can join, please.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    16. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Nutria · · Score: 1

      How will this interact with the Do Not Call bill

      DNC is for unsolicited calls originated by the seller.

      This service implies, by definition, that you are soliciting a call from them.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    17. Re:I can see someone abusing this by ShimmyShimmy · · Score: 1

      This would be great... whenever someone's being an asshole to you, just punch in his phone number!

      --
      Partial Credit: The Engineer's Best friend
      "Well, the bridge didn't fall all the way down!"
    18. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Nikker · · Score: 1

      Lets look at this a little closer.

      What they are offering is with the Google Ad you can click an icon that will connect you using VOIP to a call center for that company. They do not call you so there is no reason for the do not call bill. Also you are not calling from a telephone so *gasp* they cannot sick telemarketers on you.

      So as a wrap-up you can view the text ad, click to goto the site and if your intrest is still high you can call them from any computer without a quarter.

      Wow sounds like a privacy issue to me Captian Spalding.

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    19. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Baricom · · Score: 1

      If you want to call a company but don't want your phone number to come up, all you have to do is enter *67 (or something) before you call them.

      *67 blocks Caller ID, but a totally different system, called ANI, is used by toll-free number owners. Just like 911, you can't block your number from appearing in the records of a company with ANI access.

    20. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Answered in the FAQ (ie, RTFA).

      http://www.google.com/help/faq_clicktocall.html

    21. Re:I can see someone abusing this by firewrought · · Score: 1
      I haven't seen anyone concerned about privacy yet. I guess that since we're talking about Google, all anyone can do is "Oooh" and "Aaah" over this.

      That's the power of trust, my friend. Google has a good track record of conducting its business in a way that protects or promotes Slashdot's political zeitgeist. I don't think it's inconsistent to take that into consideration when determining how much criticism and suspicion to level at a new corporate endeavor.

      Is it possible to be too trusting? Absolutely. I take your point that we do compromise our objectivity when we consider the messenger. This story may be a bad example of it though... many people have pointed out the prank call and telemarketing vulnerabilities. Others are professing admiration for the business concept ("a new add revenue stream w/o making the ads more obnoxious"), but they aren't signalling a desire to actually use it.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    22. Re:I can see someone abusing this by pushkar_t · · Score: 1

      Now the way as I see out is i need to register my phone number with a passowrd once.So the prank by my friend will work only once.

    23. Re:I can see someone abusing this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon have been using a system to verify peoples' phone numbers, where they call, and the person being called has to type the code shown on their website account.

      As you say, even this might (should?) fall foul of automated-dialling laws, even if they limited the rate of dialling per-number. It also gives amusing options for misuse with public callboxes of course.

    24. Re:I can see someone abusing this by k1773re7f · · Score: 1
      -- Grammar tip of the day:
      Wrong: Their after us! Run!
      Right:They're after us! Run!

      Yes, but "Be they over their?"
      "No. There over they're!"

      --
      This sig. intentionally left blank.
  3. Phone Sex by fembots · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not that this is the first and only thing in my mind, but if phone sex operators are using this service......

    1. Re:Phone Sex by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that mean free phone sex, since you don't get charged for the call?
      I don't think that's gonna work.

    2. Re:Phone Sex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...no. It means Google's paying for the phone sex. The only caveat is that every 30 seconds or so the operator is required to stop and say "Speaking of eating out, would you like to hear about some nice restaurants in your area?" It's a logical extension of "ad-words".

      In fact now that I think about it, the above scenario likely means that Google's now got an in-house phone sex line to take advantage of the new technology.

    3. Re:Phone Sex by shawb · · Score: 1

      "We will need your credit card # to continue this call." They have to make money somehow... this just means that no long distance charges are incured by the caller or the company. Although I'm sure the cost will be just wrapped up in the google advertising fee.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    4. Re:Phone Sex by Young+Master+Ploppy · · Score: 1

      "if phone sex operators are using this service......"

      I used to work for a large Telecoms distributor, who launched a similar service on their web site, called "Call Me".

      One day all the sales staff in the call center complained that they were getting incoming calls and picking them up, and the voice on the other end would talk dirty to them, describing their underwear and exactly what they were doing with their fingers in great detail..... you know the kind of thing, right? (ahem) or you can imagine, I'm sure...

      Turns out that some enterprising soul had set up a premium rate porn line number at something like £5 per minute (that's about $8-$9) and then spent a few hours entering that premium rate number into every CallMe website they could find. So we were getting automated dials from CallMe which connected our sales staff to porn, at the companies expense.

      Anyone know what kind of measures Google has put in place to stop this kind of thing?

      --
      http://instantbadger.blogspot.com
  4. recording. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    are they recording the call as well?

    1. Re:recording. by mordors9 · · Score: 1

      but it would be okay as long as it is for training purposes only :-)

    2. Re:recording. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course not. They're "indexing" it.

  5. all right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    prank calls have now reached a new frontier!

  6. privacy vs authentication by Anakron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How do they make sure that the number entered is indeed from the person interested in the product? What stops me from entering (say) Darl McBride's number a million times?

    --
    There are 11 types of people. Those who understand binary, those who don't and those who are sick of this lame joke.
    1. Re:privacy vs authentication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because they will be building a phone book. Actually they will be building a huge personal profile, that just happens to include your phone number. When their database is big enough, they will realize that you're entering someone else's number, because it will be associated with someone else.

      Or even simpler, maybe they can simply offer up a "do not call this number" feature. It will be interesting to see if they do or don't do this.

      Moreover, what's to stop you from publishing Darl's phone number right now? If you did something that could be considered harassment, you wouldn't want to be found out, would you? Now don't you know that Google knows where you are, where you have been, and where you are going? They can correlate this information with anything you do, and disappear you anytime they wish. They are protecting Darl. They told me not to tell you these things, but ....

    2. Re:privacy vs authentication by kebes · · Score: 1

      Same thing that stops you from entering Darl McBride's email address into a million "please spam me" websites:

      (1) you have to know the (correct) contact information
      (2) you have to be a jerk
      (3) the middleman must not notice

      Basically nothing stops that from happening now. Since Google will formalize this system, it will be quite easy to write a script to enter someone's phone number repeatedly, causing that person to get an enormous flood of calls. However, since Google is acting as the middleman for the calls, they will presumably have a quick sanity check against massive floods against a particular vendor or customer phone # (or repeated activity from a particular IP). I don't think it will be too difficult to keep the noise down.

      Admittedly it will be easy to piss off someone you don't like, by giving their phone # to a dozen or so silly companies... but there's no way to stop that.

    3. Re:privacy vs authentication by XorNand · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If I were designing the system, the service would call you first and when you answered, it would say "This is Google Click-to-call. Press 1 to connect to the advertiser, press 2 if you didn't make this request". If you pressed 2, it would blacklist the number for a while.

      The biggest bummer for some advertisers is that I doubt that it'll work for callers behind a phone system and without a direct number. The callback number will just go to a receptionist or to IVR (auto-attendant) greeting. There goes much of B2B market.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    4. Re:privacy vs authentication by tommers · · Score: 1

      While I'm not sure where the got the info, another poster said that people getting the call have the option of opting out of the system over the phone. So the greater risk is to someone entering a bunch of phone numbers at once. While this does apply to email, our phones are much more private and intrusive. I can't imagine anyone would be using phones if they got as many spam messages as our inboxes do. While phones have always provided an outlet for jerks, its never been this easy and felt this anonymous. How many people have the equivalent of a war-dialer or would even risk using it maliciously. I wonder if there is any protection based on time. Even a few 3AM phone calls could be a headache for Google PR.

    5. Re:privacy vs authentication by kebes · · Score: 1

      Yes, you're right. There are many ways that this could be abused. I'm assuming (hoping!) that Google has thought about this, and will implement some checks. As I said before, they could have a system where a single IP cannot initiate a whole bunch of phone requests in quick succession (no more than one ever x minutes, no more than y per day, etc.). As with spam, these types of wars can escalate (attacker changes IP address repeatedly, then Google blocks a whole range of IP addresses, etc.).

      Another check that Google could run is to check the area code, deduce the time zone, and only allow the call to occur if it is during business hours. Or look up the registered location of the IP and make sure that it comes from the same general location as the area code (yes, I know that proxies and such may screw this up). Google will have to put in some measures to limit abuse. If certain call requests look "strange" then they should not be completed.

      I'll be interested to see what happens... whether this gets abused or ends up being quite useful.

    6. Re:privacy vs authentication by damned_mediocrity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because they will be building a phone book. Actually they will be building a huge personal profile, that just happens to include your phone number.

      Yeah, that's what I'm worried about. Their FAQ doesn't allay my fears much, either:

      3. Is this just a way for Google to track me?
      No. We take your privacy very seriously.... In addition, we retain your information (including your phone number, date, time, and call length) only temporarily. It will be deleted from our servers after a period reasonably necessary to operate, audit, and evaluate the service.

      Okay, so your number will be deleted after they've "evaluated" the service... Sounds good. Except that this is coming from the company that keeps their new projects in "beta" for, like, aeons.

      In summary... all our phone number are belong to Google. Until they "evaluate" the service, of course.

    7. Re:privacy vs authentication by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Most businesses I've worked with over the last 2 years give their employees and internal extension as well as a direct dial number (with the extension being the last four digits of the direct dial number).

    8. Re:privacy vs authentication by mibus · · Score: 1

      The biggest bummer for some advertisers is that I doubt that it'll work for callers behind a phone system and without a direct number. The callback number will just go to a receptionist or to IVR (auto-attendant) greeting. There goes much of B2B market.

      Great, so we need PH#v6 to get true P2P phone systems...

    9. Re:privacy vs authentication by EvanED · · Score: 1

      I'd replace your suggestion with one closer to the 'opt-in' end of the spectrum:

      The first time you want to make such a call to a number, Google doesn't immediately call you; instead, you must call first. Google gives you an 800 number and a PIN. User calls Google and enters the PIN. If the caller ID gives the same number as what was entered, it puts the call through to the most recently requested company, and from then on will call like as before.

    10. Re:privacy vs authentication by gameboyguy13 · · Score: 1

      Only allowing calls during business hours? I'm sure there are plenty of people who work during business hours (or are for other reasons offline) and wouldn't be able to use the service at all if they did that.

    11. Re:privacy vs authentication by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      I really wish there would be a rule that advertisers must have a single phone number that will show up on caller ID. It really pisses me off when the ID says 'private' when getting a call from Comcast.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    12. Re:privacy vs authentication by cecil_turtle · · Score: 1
      I doubt that it'll work for callers behind a phone system and without a direct number
      There are a number of ways around this. I had a new experience recently with Verisign when purchasing an SSL cert for a site. They sent me a link to a page that I could go to for "faster verification" so they could verify and issue the cert faster. When I went to the page I put in my phone number and they called me with a repeating automated message and the receptionist was able to route the call to me - something to the effect of "I'm calling for John Doe at extension 810. If you are John Doe press * now." that would repeat. Long story short I was able to verify the information through this automated call and it worked pretty well even through our phone system.

      Amazon has a demo of a similar click-to-call system here: http://www.estara.com/livedemo/a9/. If you click the "Click to Call Business" button you get a popup to put in your phone number and extension. If you click your mouse in the extension box another form pops up:
      Telephone Extension
      Enter your telephone extension below.
      You can include a pause by using the comma key (,)
      Example: ,143
      [text box]
      Will a receptionist answer this call?
      No Yes
      So it looks like that system is adaptable to be able to handle various types of phone systems or receptionists.
    13. Re:privacy vs authentication by All_Star25 · · Score: 1

      Why not just make this feature available to only those who have a Google account? I think that'd cut down on the amount of prank calls.

    14. Re:privacy vs authentication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If I were designing the system, the service would call you first and when you answered, it would say "This is Google...

      If I were designing the system, I would give two options: (a) it would give you a toll free number (e.g. 800, 877, 888) to call and a unique onetime PIN, or (b) you would tell it your phone number. Either way, you would then call the toll free number of your own volition. If you gave your number to Google in advance, you wouldn't have to enter the unique PIN because it would be expecting your call. Once the "authentication" step is passed, the PBX would then forward your call to the merchant.

      In short: I think it's bad to design a system that calls the customer, even if the customer requested it (that includes email), and I will not stand for that as a customer.

    15. Re:privacy vs authentication by happymedium · · Score: 1

      What stops me from entering (say) Darl McBride's number a million times?

      Nothing! Go for it, man. This is gonna be hilarious...

    16. Re:privacy vs authentication by Mithrandir · · Score: 1

      What about those using mobile phones and happen to be on the opposite coast from where they live? There could be as much as a 5 hour time difference between the home area code and that of the current caller's location (more if they're say east coast USA and in Hawaii).

      --
      Life is complete only for brief intervals in between toys or projects -- John Dalton
    17. Re:privacy vs authentication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On my phone, the ID says "Anonymous Coward". (Well, except that the display cuts off after nine characters...)

  7. If Google knows everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't they know the reason that I use the web is because I don't like the phone?

    1. Re:If Google knows everything by kebes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      True... often I use the web because it's much more efficient than trying to talk to someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

      On the other hand, one thing I hate about calling a business is that I have to wait on hold for a very long time. Wouldn't it make more sense for me to give them my phone number, and then they can call me when they have a rep available? I'll be in my office all day... and typically I don't get as many calls as they do, so when they call I probably won't be busy. It just makes sense.

      And besides, if I'm thinking about buying a product, and then I have to wait on hold, I'll probably give up and not buy it. If, on the other hand, I can just type in my number and wait for the vendor to get hold of me, then it's much more likely to work out for everyone (me and vendor). I know in the past I've done this before with some companies. They have a web form, you enter the info, and a short while later you get a phone call from someone (who has presumably read your question/request and is ready with an answer/offer). Google is formalizing this system, making it a snap to put customers in touch with companies.

      In short, I think it's a good idea.

    2. Re:If Google knows everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You should have read the part of the article that describes how it works. You will still end up on hold because you are calling the advertiser, the advertiser is not calling you. Google calls you, then forwards your call on to the advertiser. Basically, they are just dialing for you.

    3. Re:If Google knows everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, calling can be pretty annoying. Now if they could just connect you directly to a site's livechat service as well if they had one...
      And it wouldn't even cost them a thing

    4. Re:If Google knows everything by hokeyru · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. But sometimes you're forced to use the phone. Tech support, for instance. It would be really nice if I could navigate all those cursed telephone menus on the web, and THEN click to call. Are you listening, Dell?

    5. Re:If Google knows everything by thesandtiger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't they know the reason that I use the web is because I don't like the phone?

      Don't you know that you don't have to use this service if you don't want to?

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    6. Re:If Google knows everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if it's made by Google, I must. There's peer pressure involved.

    7. Re:If Google knows everything by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Google hasn't even figured out that I don't like advertising yet.

      And I used to think the 'nerd community' frowned on advertising, too. But now we have these ad-men who we're supposed to admire called 'Google'. . .

      --
      resigned
    8. Re:If Google knows everything by legirons · · Score: 1

      Don't they know the reason that I use the web is because I don't like the phone?

      And that the reason I don't use the phone is because the modem is...

  8. Do No Evil, Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all this information gathering technology at there hands, I find it hard to believe that Google will in fact not be evil for much longer.

    1. Re:Do No Evil, Maybe by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      Google: tick tick tick tick. It's gonna be a gas and half jack when this too shall pass.

      The last gasp of the Dot Com Bullshitters....

      I bet the stock will go to a thousand!

    2. Re:Do No Evil, Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is of course silly socialist drivel. There are many reasons for a corporation to exist, including raising capital, shielding investors and employees from lawsuits, and surviving the death of its founders with minimal disruption.

    3. Re:Do No Evil, Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 1. A body that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.

      > In other words, the only reason to form a corporation is to legally do things that their conscience and the law would otherwise prevent them from doing.

      Huh?

      I think you must have left out part of your post; this or maybe I was unable to grasp some logical relation between the two paragraphs.

      A charity is a kind of corporation, mind you. How is a charity construed to do things evil?

    4. Re:Do No Evil, Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are many reasons for a corporation to exist, including raising capital, shielding investors and employees from lawsuits, and surviving the death of its founders with minimal disruption.

      Investors could be shielded from lawsuits through the free market--they could purchase insurance. The free market, which I can see you love, would ensure an optimal solution. The cost would be perfectly balanced against the risk. This would be far better than just giving everybody a free pass. You want to own 0.000001% of GM? Good, you are now responsbile for 0.000001% of their debt. If they can't pay their creditors, you get to personally. Can't afford that? Buy insurance.

    5. Re:Do No Evil, Maybe by Jekler · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the problem. Shielding the employees from lawsuits. At the same time you shield them against petty lawsuits, you shield them from legitimate lawsuits. No accountability. The employees are free to work with impunity. They can rape countries for resources (cheap labor, environmentally unsound harvesting), illegally dispose of toxic waste, and not have to answer for it, because the employees are shielded.

  9. Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great. Where do I sign up?

    1. Re:Great! by gameboyguy13 · · Score: 1

      They'll call you.

  10. Wow... useful and impressive. by davecrusoe · · Score: 1

    Wow, a useful and impressive innovation, although I'm certain that the "Live Chat" software providers are probably stewing in their cauldron over this one. I wonder, though: could this be abused by phreakers? With the digital age of IP Telephony, let us live in interesting times! ~d

    1. Re:Wow... useful and impressive. by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The real question is, who has a patent on this service? If it isn't Google, they're fucked, because someone else has one for sure.

    2. Re:Wow... useful and impressive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Wow... useful and impressive. by Slashdoc+Beta · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but probably Amazon.

    4. Re:Wow... useful and impressive. by killjoe · · Score: 1

      MS lawyers are probably rushing to the patent office as we speak. They patented the ipod interface after ipod was on the market remember.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  11. Brilliant idea. by xdroop · · Score: 4, Funny

    Here I am looking at male enhancement products... what's Taco's phone number again?

    --
    you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
    1. Re:Brilliant idea. by sr180 · · Score: 1

      You make a joke out of this, but it raises a serious issue. What is stopping a malicious party from using this as a prank calling service? Just keep feeding numbers into it that you dont like.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
    2. Re:Brilliant idea. by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      Great. Give it two weeks and he'll end each story with "BTW, I'm typing this with my penis." Just let it be.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    3. Re:Brilliant idea. by djSpinMonkey · · Score: 1
      Great. Give it two weeks and he'll end each story with "BTW, I'm typing this with my penis." Just let it be.

      Er... you must get different spam than I do.

      "Finally, you too can have the PREHENSILE PENIS you've always wanted!!!"

    4. Re:Brilliant idea. by Chubby_C · · Score: 1
      well, how would you like to order a product like that over the phone as opposed to online where there is no human interaction.

      Business: Hi thank you for calling 'cock-enlarge-co', how can I help you...

      Caller: Umm, yes I'd like some... umm... enlargement...

      Business: well sir, we can help you with that, how small are you? and how large do you want to go?

      --
      - My question is: Can Slashdot be Slashdotted? -
  12. If I have to enter a phone number... by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    I might as well enter the advertiser's number.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  13. Your phone number by ornil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to the FAQ the advertiser can't see your phone number, so they can't add you to their list and annoy you if you decide not to order anything from them. That's pretty nice.

    1. Re:Your phone number by mboverload · · Score: 1

      Google most likely acts as a middle man.

      They call you AND the advertiser, then connect together when both callers are ready. I also agree with above posters, Asterisk is most likely being used here. Other programs/systems like it cost INSANE amounts of money. In-house then releasing it to the community is probably alot cheaper. FOSS that really works!

    2. Re:Your phone number by bad+jerkface · · Score: 0

      It could be a mixed blessing. Since they won't have your number, it probably won't be long before the advertisers train their sales reps to trick you into giving it to them.

      --
      It's a hand twinkler, you dumbass! And I got a bag of whoopass for you!
    3. Re:Your phone number by onthost · · Score: 1

      From their website: "Connectivity for Google Click-to-Call is provided by a third party vendor". So it probably isnt even googles technology or anything modified by them.

  14. Example? by Prometheus+Bob · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does anyone have an example of a link that shows this? I've tried googling IBM, business, computer...I cant find where this mythical phone icon is I should be looking for.

    1. Re:Example? by tommers · · Score: 3, Informative

      Given the searches I've tried, I really doubt that this feature is turned on. I tried a lot of searches that result in some of the most appropiate advertisers many of which show up on AdWords. Even if this was only available to a few AdWords customers, I'd think one of our searches would have found them: flowers moving vans pizza pizza 94043 car rental vacation hawaii vacation hawaii orbitz hotels new york

    2. Re:Example? by TragicLad · · Score: 5, Informative

      Screenshots can be found on Greg Yardley's blog

      --
      --- No Boom? No Boom today. Boom tomorrow, there's always a boom tomorrow.
    3. Re:Example? by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      A working somewhat similar service can be found here

  15. Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by The+Amazing+Fish+Boy · · Score: 1

    The reason is (or seems to be) that Google blocks your number from them. The advertiser can't see your number. I guess that means you won't get telemarketing calls or something?

    How long until they integrate this with Google Talk?

    1. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 1

      Ok, but we have this now withh caller ID blocking...

      More worrysome is that there doesn't appear to be any way of checking that the phone number you enter is yours. There are other ways of playing phone pranks on people but Google has just made it single click convenient!

      I really don't see any purpose for this whatsoever. If we need something like this, I'd rather have my browser place the call to the company directly via VOIP by clicking on an icon than have google place the call for me and "promise" not to use that information. :(

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
    2. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by Wizarth · · Score: 1

      Depending on where you are, this may vary, but I understand that "Caller ID blocking" is just raising a flag on the Caller ID signal, that says "here is their ID, but please don't display it". I beleive that call centers, especially ones with reversed charge numbers (free calls) are permitted to have phones which ignore the Caller ID blocking flag.

    3. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The google talk thing is actually a superb idea. Say you have google talk, but you don't have a microphone on your computer. Google calls you and the other person. Airs a small ad before you can talk, and you're connected. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised if they have this in the works right now.

    4. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Yes, any free number (800,888,877 etc) or premium pay (900) number which you call is given cart blanche both technically and legally to obtain your phone number.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    5. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by nacturation · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not every company has a toll-free number. So now you can talk on the phone with them and not pay long distance charges.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    6. Re:Why not just put their phone number in the ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent poster means "Google click-to-call via Google Talk".

  16. Really disappointing from that bunch of PhDs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google already knows everything about me: my contact info and my buyer habits.
    I would have expected them to know exactly when to connect me with the company I was about to Google!

  17. just a thought by ladyjane_calm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    will our children mock google the way our generation mocks microsoft?

    1. Re:just a thought by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Yes. You know kids tomorrow. I have to walk uphill through three feet of snow to get to school. Kids tomorrow won't understand that.

      They'll probably be on my lawn, too.

    2. Re:just a thought by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like the way we were mocking IBM not that long ago? Yes, but don't let that bother you. By then they'll teenagers and you'll have other things to worry about.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:just a thought by yamum · · Score: 1

      Yes. You know kids tomorrow. I have to walk uphill through three feet of snow to get to school. Kids tomorrow won't understand that.

      True. They'll probably be talking in metres.

    4. Re:just a thought by generic-man · · Score: 1

      In five years, Slashdot commenters/editors will mock Google the way they mock Yahoo! today. Google will be evil in the eyes of some, there will be zealots who preach both extremes, and there will be other companies (Google cast-offs among their employees) that will be doing the next generation of Cool Stuff.

      Slashdot is basically a tech gossip site. If something's not new and fun, it doesn't get attention here.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    5. Re:just a thought by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lets hope so. The alternative is that our grandchildren will still be mocking microsoft just like we are mocking them now.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    6. Re:just a thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the way things are going at the moment, but who knows what will happen. One thing is clear however. Microsoft from the very beginning couldn't hide its incompetence in its product quality from the critical observers, and demonstrated repeatedly it couldn't care at all about its reputation for sleazy business practices. Google hasn't shown neither of those up until now. You could argue that Google also employs quite a few sleazy tactics, but you can't deny that Google values its reputation as an honest businness greatly.

    7. Re:just a thought by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      If they deserve it.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  18. Wow...too bad it is restricted to Google... by skogs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wish this was everywhere. Not necessarily because I want to talk to every advertiser, but because I would love to be able to talk to these jerks sometimes. Really, if you got a spam email, wouldn't it be better if you could then just click, and be connected with them and tell them what you think about their -bodypart- enhancement, or their new guaranteed -success at something-? This would be an excellent feedback mechanism to increase the cost of internet advertising so that every hokey jerk out there cannot bombard me mindlessly. I enjoy google ads, I like those for the most part, and the do work. Targeted ads work. I wish I could provide feedback to the dimwads that do not target their marketing. I wish I could feeback to those that abuse my bandwidth.

    --
    Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey Him? Surely this computer must submit also!
    1. Re:Wow...too bad it is restricted to Google... by Grey_14 · · Score: 1

      If you want to give them feedback, Don't do it over the phones, not to their marketting agents, I work tech support on the phones, and if someone has a problem with their computer that's fine, I'll fix it, but if they have a problem with the manufacturer (Who shall remain nameless), that's really not my concern, if you voice your complaint to me in a civil manner, I'll accept it kindly and make you feel better, then forget about it in 5 seconds, otherwise if you get mad and scream, I might do something to annoy you, otherwise I'll just hang up and move on, Those on the phones have little to no sway on a company, and even their sup's don't usually have any sway, write an honest to god snail mail letter and you might actually get someone's attention.

    2. Re:Wow...too bad it is restricted to Google... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      But who do you call when your comma key is stuck on?

      You're right about the snail mail, though. Especially if you spend the buck or so to send it certified. That always gets attention.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Wow...too bad it is restricted to Google... by skogs · · Score: 1

      The point, my good friend, is that the company is paying you to sit there and answer the phone. That costs money. That is the only point, and a sizeable addition to their budget, which may slow some down.

      --
      Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey Him? Surely this computer must submit also!
    4. Re:Wow...too bad it is restricted to Google... by EvilStein · · Score: 1

      Great idea, but pretty much any spammer with a valid phone number just lets it run into a voicemail box.
      And thanks to VoIP technologies (which many spammers do use) the old "Let's fill up their voicemail box" gig won't really work. :-(

  19. Google has safeguards against Crank-calling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. There are guards against crank-calling. Try calling your own number and hanging up right away. Then call it again. You are given an opportunity to block your number. So no one victim will be repeatedly crank-called.
              Also, remember that you don't need an online service to crank-call someone, you can just use a phone; so there is some tolerance there.

        2. To the responder who said he might as well key in the merchant number, the point is that you only have to enter your own number once. After that, your number is securely stored and you don't need to enter either number again.
    So it's easier than dialing on your phone.

    1. Re:Google has safeguards against Crank-calling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. There are guards against crank-calling. Try calling your own number and hanging up right away. Then call it again. You are given an opportunity to block your number. So no one victim will be repeatedly crank-called.

      Sounds sorta like modern "opt-out" spam.

    2. Re:Google has safeguards against Crank-calling by EvanED · · Score: 1

      So no one victim will be repeatedly crank-called.

      From the same number.

  20. Sales, or customer service by Threni · · Score: 1

    I bet they can't put you through to the latter for free!

  21. Abuse by VanWEric · · Score: 1

    Now I have the PERFECT use for my list of people who have wronged me. Now I can't wait to find bondage adverts!

    --
    www.olin.edu
  22. awesome by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    why ddos someone's website when you can ddos their phone network

    is that all of the telephones ringing in the office at the same time i hear?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:awesome by Filthysock · · Score: 1

      You'll no more be able to ddos their phone system as you will be able to ddos google itself.

    2. Re:awesome by Chubby_C · · Score: 1
      will the slashdot effect carry over to the phone system?

      why read an article advertising a product/service when you can click-and-call?

      --
      - My question is: Can Slashdot be Slashdotted? -
    3. Re:awesome by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Don't worry -- I'm sure they're running PhoneAssassin.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  23. Already supported with Google and a PDA by dada21 · · Score: 1

    If I go to google.com on my PDA phone, Google forwards me to http://www.google.com/pda

    If I do a standard google search such as John Johnson, Chicago, IL it'll list all the phone numbers, and if I click on a number, it will automatically load up my phone dialer and begin dialing.

    This IS a little different from the Click-to-Call, but it has been part of Google's PDA services for well over a year. I use it every day (I hate saving contacts if I don't have to).

    I read on some SEO forums that Click-to-Call was limited to a few States and might stay that way for a while. I haven't seen any CtC links in Illinois or Wisconsin, yet.

    1. Re:Already supported with Google and a PDA by cecil_turtle · · Score: 1

      Yeah I haven't been able to see it on google's site either after trying a number of searches on the main google, google local, google mobile, etc. I wonder if it's also limited to the business hours of the advertiser.

      Google's PDA search on your phone uses the tel: protocol, if you go here in your browser and look at the links at the top you'll see what I mean - your computer's browser won't do anything with it (maybe it could though...) but your phone recognises it. Very usefull stuff on a web capable phone but as you said not the same thing.

  24. Old News.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Amazon has been doing Click To Call via A9 yellow pages for some time now. It's not terribly useful to when you sitting at the computer with a phone right next to you, but I've used it when people call me looking for a phone number. Put their's in, and they don't have to worry about looking it up.

  25. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU call the telemarketing guys.

    Thanks a lot Google! Our day of revenge finally came!

  26. Oblig: Sounds familiar by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

    My ex once worked for an outfit in England that had a service like this for websites. Cellular Services Development I think they were called. Their service was called 'contact me' and the way she described it sounds identical to this. That was about six years ago.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:Oblig: Sounds familiar by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      My ex once worked for an outfit in England that had a service like this for websites.
      Yup, our company uses their service on our websites as well. "Click here if you want to talk to us". Very useful

      Google's innovation is not the service in itself (it's been around for a few years), but offering the service to their clients to use in Google ads. Pretty slick... I like the way Google works to add value for their advertisers, clients making use of Google ads, and web surfers in general all at the same time.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Oblig: Sounds familiar by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      out of interest how much do such services cost compared to freephone numbers (0800 in the uk 1800 in the US +800 internationally etc) and normal outgoing calls.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  27. Cool idea by AutopsyReport · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Okay, cool idea. Except how many people actually click their ad links (I've never clicked one in my life), let alone would actually call these advertisers?

    --

    For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    1. Re:Cool idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, cool idea. Except how many people actually click their ad links (I've never clicked one in my life), let alone would actually call these advertisers?


      Well, considering that their last quarter revenues were something like $950 million (USD) and that the vast majority of that is made from users clicking on their ad links, it looks like quite a few...
    2. Re:Cool idea by AutopsyReport · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I didn't quite mean it that literally. My focus was more on who would actually call these advertisers...

      --

      For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    3. Re:Cool idea by raoul666 · · Score: 1

      Enough, obviously. Personally, I click ads to support sites I like, especially if the company advertising is big enough or seedy enough looking that I don't care that they lose a few cents.

      --
      When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
    4. Re:Cool idea by Famanoran · · Score: 1

      I actually click quite a few adverts. For example, I was looking for a diabetic-safe cake for my mothers birthday. Couldn't find any local, so I searched for recipes, and saw a few adverts.

      I clicked on a couple to see what they offered. After all, it didn't cost me anything - and it gave me a great way to come up with a recipe I was able to get a local company to make up for it.

      Sure, I probably should have ordered it from the website I clicked to, but then again - I don't really think that a cake would ship all that well from the USA to lil' old New Zealand....

    5. Re:Cool idea by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Think of it a different way: instead of thinking about seeing a random ad and wanting to call them, think about wanting to call a particular company for some reason, and instead of doing a Google search to find the company, then going to the company's web site, then hunting around for their contact page, then finding the number on that page and quickly punching it into your phone, then apologizing to some random stranger because you misdialed the number... all you have to do now is do a Google search for the company, and click the phone icon in the ad sidebar right there on the search results page. Confirm your callback number (it'll be saved by a cookie or your browser's autocomplete so you don't have to type it every time), and pick up the phone when it rings.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    6. Re:Cool idea by nacturation · · Score: 1

      My focus was more on who would actually call these advertisers...

      So you're suggesting instead that businesses are wasting their money with all these phone lines and call centers they have so that customers can reach them? You should let them know... I'm sure they'd be happy to hear some sound marketing advice from a seasoned veteran such as yourself.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    7. Re:Cool idea by Rxke · · Score: 1

      Apparently enough people to make GoogleAds a nice source of income. If one in 10000 does it, it's a very effective advertising system.

  28. What's the friggin' point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can someone wiser than I fill me in on the value of this? I'm not trolling here -- what's the point?

    1) If I want to do business with someone, I can pick up the phone and call them myself.
    2) If I am going to buy their product, sooner or later I have to give them some information about myself (so anonymity isn't really a value of this service).
    3) The system is easily abused -- no reason I can't put your phone number in instead of mine.
    4) If I am an advertiser, I want to know that my product's demographic is being reached. If all I have to go on is a phone number, how does this help me?

    As an investor and someone working in the tech industry, I'm pretty disappointed that this is the best Google's army of PhDs can come up with.

    1. Re:What's the friggin' point? by raoul666 · · Score: 1

      I'll give it a shot.
      1) That's what you'd be doing here - except you don't have to even bother going to their website to find the number to call, you just click the little phone.
      2) Maybe you want to be anonymous while you decide whether or not to buy the product. Not every inquiry leads to a sale.
      3) Someone above suggested a system where it calls the number you put in, then blacklists it for a period of time if the person didn't put it in themselves. Or, tie the number in with your google account and have them confirm it. Or a combination.
      4) It's at least as much information as if the person clicks a text ad. More, in fact, since you can usually tell gender, maybe race and age, over the phone.

      --
      When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
    2. Re:What's the friggin' point? by OBeardedOne · · Score: 1

      I imagine that the main point (and only point) is that the phone call is free.

      Not particularly a money saver if you are only making a single call every so often but it would probably save you a bit if you wanted to "let your fingers do the walking" so to speak and call a bunch of companies for a quote.

      Having said that, I don't see it lasting too long with the prevelance of ISP's rolling out free VOIP services.

  29. Sample of it working? by Barkley44 · · Score: 1

    I tried a google search for a few items and didn't see a phone icon. Anyone have a sample search that would show this? And what prevents me from entering my number as someone down the street, to piss them off? ;)

    --
    KeepTrackOfIt.com - Find the lowest gas prices in your area graphically
  30. bad idea by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

    This could be really irritating. If it is embedded like a hyperlink, there may not be a phone icon. This could create simple denial of services, piss people off who accidently click them, bugger up routers, and etcetera. Perhaps if they make this only workable with the google bar and make the page produce a bone grinding soud evytime there is one of these links on page, just so as you can't be mistaken.

    1. Re:bad idea by dana340 · · Score: 1

      Umm, you still need to provide them with a phone number, and it's only for advertisements.

      --
      "10001110101 - periodic table with a centerpiece of mind" -Clutch
    2. Re:bad idea by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, your right, but still kinda wrong. I might like to subscribe to this service. After that point, everything I had noted, is valid, depending on implementation. So as a suggestion, don't be an asshole - slashdot is meant to be a community of professionals, not a dick size competition smartass. All it would take is not adding that 'Umm' on the front. It's easy not to be for most people.

  31. Hope they aren't going for a patent... this is old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1996 or 1997, someone introduced a clickable "call-back" service. Given that I don't remember their name, I don't think it:
    a: Went very far
    and
    b: Was really that big of a deal

  32. Examples? by g0at · · Score: 1

    I've done some searches for seemingly common things, and I haven't seen this phone icon yet. Anybody have a live one?

    -b

  33. Is it wrong? by OneIsNotPrime · · Score: 1

    Is it wrong if I use this new service just so I can say Google called me? :(

    --

    ---

    WARNING:Slashdot karma not redeemable in the afterlife.

  34. MOD PARENT UP... it's all about your ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are building more than a phone book, they are building the most valuable database in the world. Right now, all they have is your IP address and it's killing them that they don't know who you really are. But when you sign up for Google services, they *will*
    find out who you are and connect all your google activities with your real identity. Every search, every phone call, every online store you browse, will be up for sale.

  35. Trolling by bprime · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'll confess: I'm basically going to use this to troll people I don't like by entering their phone numbers in ads for "freehotsex.com" or whatever.

    1. Re:Trolling by CaptainPinko · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid that would qualify as sexual haraassment and I bet Google could track your IP. After all it says that your personal details are deleted "shortly"

      --
      Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
    2. Re:Trolling by bprime · · Score: 1

      Good point. What's your phone number? I'd like to discuss this concern with you.

    3. Re:Trolling by CaptainPinko · · Score: 1

      911 - 4527 feel free to call. Don't worry about area code... you'll get through anyway.

      --
      Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
  36. Ho Hum. A9 has had this feature for monthes by owlmon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Amazon.com has a search engine named a9.com. It has a "yellow pages" feature. The businesses listed in these "yellow pages" have had "Click to call" for several monthes now.

    But now that Google offers it, it is big news. Right?

    1. Re:Ho Hum. A9 has had this feature for monthes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares what Amazon is doing? Why would their search engine be talked about on a technology news site? Amazon and search engines have nothing to do with technology!

      No, there are only 2 things in the technology world that nerds like us want to hear about: The dark side (MS, DRM, etc) and the light side (Google, Open Source). It is a delicate dichotomy of gross over simplifications that we nerds love, and I'll be damned if I'm going to listen to you spout off about anything that undermines my perceptions!

    2. Re:Ho Hum. A9 has had this feature for monthes by thesnarky1 · · Score: 1

      And I suppose you submitted their feature as a story? If not, why complain? It could be that some people, such as myself, haven't seen this feature before. To me, it is news.

      I'm getting tired of people saying slashdot and google are in the same bed, who cares if they are? If you dont like the trend, start submitting story ideas for the competitors. I'm willing to bet people are just watching google release crap, and spitting back /. stories for 'em. (Notice how this isn't even a news story, but an FAQ).

      Before I end the rant, lemme just ask this. Did you ever think of submitting that as a news story? And if not, why should you be mad if someone who hasn't seen Amazon's saw this and was impressed?

  37. Click-to-Call? Come on...where's the G? by ip_freely_2000 · · Score: 4, Funny

    What a boring name. No GClick, GCall, or G-Click-to-Call?

    They just don't put the effort into their naming schemes like they used to.

    1. Re:Click-to-Call? Come on...where's the G? by SpinJaunt · · Score: 1

      Really, all this "G" business.. next up, G-Unit.. oh, wait..

      --
      /. is good for you.
    2. Re:Click-to-Call? Come on...where's the G? by Gleenie · · Score: 1

      No G-Spot?

      --
      -- Your mother uses Emacs.
  38. Debut nothing. by NoGuffCheck · · Score: 2, Informative

    This has been around for years in the UK. I used to work for a company that used the service(A very large mobile phone retailer). Let me tell you, as a call centre rep who took the calls it was total bollocks most of the time. Dead lines from people who change their mind, and worse just people not knowing what their doing. Its very gooods though for people who cant pick up a phone and dial. But what the hell do they want with a mobile phone anyway??

    --
    serenity now!
  39. And this wasn't thought of sooner? by Electr!c_B4rd_Qu!nn · · Score: 4, Funny

    For people like me who prefer phone communications over e-mail(*Prepares sheild for attack*), this is the best technology that I SHOULD have thought of first. And to think, I'd have made a killing if I just saved that damn dinner napkin....

    --
    " i r 1337. j00 a l0z3r "
    That talk kinda makes you cry, doesn't it?
    That's right..cry those nerdly tears
    1. Re:And this wasn't thought of sooner? by timeOday · · Score: 1
      I wonder if google's customers (companies buying advertising) will prefer calls over email?

      On the one hand, placing a call costs more than an email. And I'm sure google will charge a lot more for each call transferred than for a click-though (nice move google).

      But presumably somebody who calls is more likely to buy than somebody who clicks, and at least you know it's not a click-bot.

    2. Re:And this wasn't thought of sooner? by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      But presumably somebody who calls is more likely to buy than somebody who clicks, and at least you know it's not a click-bot.

      Well, up until now, at least. Now it will be so much easier to casually call the vendor that the call center may get just a tad bit more congested than in the past.

      --
      resigned
    3. Re:And this wasn't thought of sooner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder if google's customers (companies buying advertising) will prefer calls over email?

      I advertise with AdWords and I definitely prefer email.

      Responding promptly (i.e. within 2 hours) to an email inquiry is a lot cheaper than being able to respond promptly (i.e. immediately) to a phone call. It's also easier to get the right information back to the potential customer if the inquiry is via email whereas if you don't have the information at your fingertips on a phone call, you'll probably have to call them back which implies even more time, and that's money.

      Plus if the phone number is offered at the time your ad is displayed, the user is probably going to check your website out first and then call you from there. I suspect that most people that call via Google aren't going to have enough information about your product/service to even know if what you're offering is what they want... so you're going to end up spending a lot of time servicing calls from clueless customers that aren't actually even interested in what you are offering because they called before even spending 10 seconds determining if you're offering what they want. But it doesn't cost 'em a penny to call and ask, so what the heck.

      It seems the only way this could make sense is if a potential customer clicks on your ad, checks out your site, then clicks "Back" to the Google page and clicks on the phone link to save himself about 20 or 25 cents on long distance. And are you really looking for a customer that's going to go to that much trouble for a "free ride?" Those are often "problem customers" when it comes to support and end up costing you more than you earn from them anyway.

    4. Re:And this wasn't thought of sooner? by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Dude, you should stop modeling your business habits on your slashdot habits. Any company that doesn't aggressively encourage potential customers to contact them in the way of his/her choice and especially by phone is bound to fail. I am not going to sit in front of computer for 2 hours and wait for your return e-mail when I can get the information from somebody else in 10 minutes and be done with my shopping plans. Moreover, you have chance to convince me I need your product and sell me a case, extra battery or offer me a deal on a higher-end model.

      Do I really need to tell you that you can and should put a 1-800 number on your website so that the customer doesn't have to look for the Google's link? Why should anyone trust a business that goes to that much trouble to save 20 or 25 cents on long distance?

  40. No chance by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

    No WAY am I giving my phone number up to some shonky web form, even if it is Google.

  41. A sneaky way around the "Do Not Call "law? by tinrobot · · Score: 0

    I wonder if advertisers will use this permission to call as a way around the "do not call" law.

    John Doe just gave company X permission to call... little does he know company X is a telemarketing company (that now has explicit permission to call him.) So company X proceeds to call John Doe to plug it's 500 other products.

    Ya think?

    1. Re:A sneaky way around the "Do Not Call "law? by wyldeone · · Score: 1

      No. You evidently didn't read google's page on this, which states:

      We won't share your telephone number with anyone, including the advertiser. When you're connected with the advertiser, your number is blocked so the advertiser can't see it. In addition, we'll delete the number from our servers after a short period of time.

      --
      In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and is widely considered as a bad move.
    2. Re:A sneaky way around the "Do Not Call "law? by Mr.+Byaninch · · Score: 1

      Google never deletes ANYTHING! '...a short period of time'???? Yeah, right. Google already knows too much about me.

      --
      Sig not available, please try again later. If the problem persists, then the submitter is an idiot.
    3. Re:A sneaky way around the "Do Not Call "law? by dana340 · · Score: 1

      Hence why they keep things in beta. it's good business practice. The computers dell sells are always in beta. (but now that tehy have AMD availlible for the N series that may change)

      --
      "10001110101 - periodic table with a centerpiece of mind" -Clutch
  42. true, but.... by drewxhawaii · · Score: 1

    ...what's to stop google from storing your phone number?

    1. Re:true, but.... by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      Unlike most companies, Google came right out and said yea your number will obviously be stored on their servers for a little, but they will be removed and never given out or used in anyother way (without you wanting it to). Google says they'll remove it though, they need it on their systems a) to call you, and b) to make sure the system is working right.
      Regards,
      Steve

  43. The point of all this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are several comments here saying this has already been done elsewhere. But have any of those services been offering to foot the bill for it? I figured Google added that part themselves to keep with the idea of all their services being free for all.

  44. Google Space launched too by Lord+Satri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Busy day for Google?
    The Mysan website announces the new Google Space for London's Heathrow Airport. From the article: "A half of British passengers surveyed said they had nothing better to do in airport terminals than eat, drink and shop. [...] To answer this demand, on Thursday 24 November, Google is launching Google Space at Heathrows Terminal One. Google Space is a laboratory comprising Google pods, which travellers can access for free once through security to log onto the Internet, check their mail and use Google tools to find out about their destination."

    1. Re:Google Space launched too by michaelhood · · Score: 1

      WTF was with that link, dude? Got something with some more uncloseable flash popups and spam?

  45. Anybody can buy AdWords by tepples · · Score: 1

    Use case is somebody buys an AdWords spot and enters the victim's telephone number as the contact number.

    1. Re:Anybody can buy AdWords by Electrum · · Score: 1

      Use case is somebody buys an AdWords spot and enters the victim's telephone number as the contact number.

      Very likely, phone numbers will be confirmed just like email addresses. After entering a number, Google will call the phone number and give a verification code, or simply say "Press 1 to confirm...".

  46. gmail anyone? by KurdtX · · Score: 1

    With all their other personalized services requiring you to log into your gmail account, why do you think this would be different?

    --

    Kurdt
    I'm not anti-social. Just pro-technology.
  47. Did you even read it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't give your number to anyone.

    1. Re:Did you even read it? by Presence2 · · Score: 1

      oh, so all that spam in my email box has never once come from people who "didn't give my email to anyone" lol.

      Please..

      "click to sell your phone number to an advertizing war dial list" probably is too long for googles banner adds.

  48. Why is this so much better... by RoadDogTy · · Score: 1

    Than just adding the advertiser's phone number so that somebody can call them on their own terms?

    1. Re:Why is this so much better... by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Because the advertiser wouldn't get your phone number [presumably].

      I can see this getting abused though...

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  49. :D by HunterZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sweet! Now I'm just waiting for someone write some bots to connect advertisers to EACH OTHER! Phone DoS!

    --
    Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
    1. Re::D by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      They'll never let the other person hang up!

      They'll all die!

      I say it's cruel but fair!

  50. You couldn't be more wrong by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You either don't like corporations or you're trolling.
    Either way, your statements are wrong.

    A corporation is created for a variety of reason like limiting liability or creating an 'ongoing concern'. Corporations can be used to raise funds. Can you sell 10,000 shares of stock in a partnership?

    The main reason anyone files for articles of incorporation is to separate the business from themselves. If your corporation tanks, creditors won't come after your house, your car and your savings account. If you are the business, everything you own is on the line.


    Further, I take issue with your blanket statement that "it is simply evil to have the power." Is it evil for police to own guns? Is it evil for you or I to own them? Is a pointed stick evil?

    Like anything else, a corporation (or a gun) is neither good nor evil. It is neutral. You can go file for articles of incorporation and then do nothing with them... and guess what? Neither you nor the world becomes 'more' evil.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:You couldn't be more wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You either don't like corporations or you're trolling.

      It seems like it's both. This is what's known as the "fallacy of the excluded middle."

    2. Re:You couldn't be more wrong by fermion · · Score: 1
      Forming a corporation is like modding overrated. Most will do both to limit personal liability. Limiting personal liability is logical and resaonable, as the parent suggest. However, most people do look to consequences to guide thier actions, and with corporation, for the most part, their are few consequences. Both the grandparent and parent agree that corporations limit liability. In which case would you be more likely to lie on a financial statement to your partners? The one where you can walk away scott free, or the one where your house will be taken away?

      Furthermore, one can sell 10,0000 shares of stock in anything. A stock is merely a document of ownership. Anyone with a high school education knows this. There are many partnerships where the firm is divided just like this. Also, one can have a limited partnership to minimize liability. The stock that most know about is sold over one of the boards, governed by the SEC, and administered by a board of directors, but there is more on heaven and earth than what the common person knows.

      The big problem with corporations, and this goes back to the founding fathers, is that it comes awfully close to creating an entity that looks like a person, i.e. a entity that has rights and responsibilities, without the concience or at least the ability to exact consequences. The board of directors can be sued, the CxO can be sued, but, at the end of the day, when people die from misconduct of the corporation, the only death sentence will be to a fictional entity, and most of the perpetrators will be free to commit other crimes.

      What is truly scary is that the parent was as unfair, wongminded, and ploemic as the grandparent. Yet one was modded down, and the other modded up. One could say that free speech on the internet is self censoring to minimize the discussion neccesary for a vibrant democracy. One could say that we are so desperate to continue our comfortable consuming life, even in the face of the reality that it is unsustainable, that we welcome any flute player that promises us even a hint of salvation.

      BTW, I don't hate corporations. I don't hate america. I pay my taxes without complaint. I vote. I hope all our soldiers are safe and don't have to kill anyone. But modding one rant up and one rant down just shows how dogmatic the world is getting.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  51. Re:Telemarketing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But then you RTFA and find out that your number is not given to advertiser and not retained by Google for any extensive amount of time.

  52. jumping on the bandwagon by eagl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe I'm just easily excitable but that sounds like a neat idea. Cross-license with ebay and skype, flavor with paypal, and you can call from your computer and buy stuff without picking up the phone or even pulling out your credit card to read out the numbers or giving your address.

    Yea it's consumerism and capitalistic BS, but who wouldn't give a pinky finger to have the rights to the tech and marketing concept?

    1. Re:jumping on the bandwagon by christooley · · Score: 1

      UnWired Buyer does something like this for eBay already. It doesn't use Skype, but it does call you to let you have interactive bidding on auctions.

  53. Google is great. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are quite imaginative in their approach to advertising. I wonder if the advertiser will have to pay Google each time someone is connected via phone (for other than phone charges), and whether, as an advertiser, you can limit the number of phone calls that will take place (to, say, five per hour), in case you're just a small business without hundreds of operators standing by.

  54. Wow, what a terrible idea by expatsoftware · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I advertise through google, and they have my Cell number on record. The last thing I want is to have everybody on the internet start "automatically" calling me on it!

    I hope that this feature is not enabled by default.

  55. Re:Telemarketing! by dana340 · · Score: 1
    Okay RTFA.

    No. We take your privacy very seriously. Google does not share your telephone number with anyone (without your consent), including the advertiser. When you're connected with the advertiser, your number is blocked. The advertiser can't see your phone number.

    In addition, we retain your information (including your phone number, date, time, and call length) only temporarily. It will be deleted from our servers after a period reasonably necessary to operate, audit, and evaluate the service.

    Learn more about our privacy policy.

    The sad thing is, the article is not that long. This was also commented on, almost verbatim. and speculation(and jokes) about what Google will do with your number with that term evaluate in there, they can leave it in bets forever to hold on to your number, and build a customer profile, but still, can't share it unless you let them (stupid idea).

    --
    "10001110101 - periodic table with a centerpiece of mind" -Clutch
  56. Alternative title by dtfinch · · Score: 1

    Google's New Free Anonymous Online Dating Service.

    Finally, I can talk dirty to call-center chicks with complete anonymity, without paying a dime.

  57. Re:Google Space launched too / Fake? by Lord+Satri · · Score: 1

    Well, honestly, I'm wondering if this 'Google Space' news is fake. Even if it seems quite possible and not surprising, I only found two occurences of this Google project on the web and yes, this website is of unknowned reliability...

  58. Telemarketing Natural Selection by broody · · Score: 1

    LOL. Another tool for those who want telemarketing calls. Hopefully it will suck up even more call center manpower. With luck and do not call lists, I will never receive another telemarketing call again.

    --
    ~~ What's stopping you?
  59. Link to official website by Lord+Satri · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ok, I'm not crazy, there you go, Google Space !
    http://www.google.co.uk/googlespace/

    Linked from http://www.ogleearth.com/2005/11/google_space.html
    quite better from the first link I provided...

  60. Not really a new innovation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Y'know, I'm generally a fan of Google's, but this isn't really a new 'innovation', or 'pure genius' the way some posters are making this service out to be. Amazon's A9 search has offered click-to-call for a while now. Paypal has being using a similar service to verify users. Vendors like eStara have been selling their "Push to Talk" service for a while... Arguably, eStara is the 800lb gorilla in this space. Major Financial Institutions are using this to help sell products. Dell is using it to help out with financing questions. Anything that can be simplified by a short conversation can benefit from Click-to-Call technologies.

    So yes... it's innovative to use Click-to-Call with advertising. But it's hardly the earth-shattering 'pure genius' that people are making it out to be.

  61. You already can, silly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could already do this with relay calls.

    Many of the video phone companies have this feature free on their website.

    http://www.siprelay.com/

  62. Who modded this insightful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a dumbass comment. Of course they won't turn on it on by default. Do you think Google wants to commit suicide?

  63. Wonder what the click-through charge is? by gatzke · · Score: 1

    Just for fun, google "private jet" or "fur coat" and open the google ads in a new tab. Each ad makes a few bucks for google and drains the high end advertisers.

  64. Two-way pranking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people thought of using it for pranks by putting in other peoples numbers.
    I thought about using just to call up the advertisers - assuming the advertisers are paying for the call.
    I'm in Australia - odds are that the advertisers aren't. Even if I just do Beavis and Butthead impressions until they hang up, the cost will add up.

    And the advertisers can't see my number so they can't block my call without going through Google.
    Probably a decent defensive strategy against getting pranked in the other direction...

  65. Why calls? by Rirath.com · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I can't say I quite follow Google's logic here. Google is already doing enough things "on their dime", without paying for searchers to call advertisers. What are they, a phone company now? I can only think of a few reasons you'd want to call an advertiser, and any decent company will typically have a 1-800 number. Even if they don't, unlimited long distance either through your local phone company or your mobile carrier is pretty common.

    Furthermore, this is going to cost the companies regardless. Sure, they want people to call them up and say "Advertise to me!", and this may make Google an even more attractive place to put an ad... but somebody has to man the phones. I don't think you want to call up such a number only to get a pre-recorded message. A private "click to email" where google blocks your address would have made a lot more sense to me.

    About the only real use I can think of is small time advertisers, think auctions...

  66. Slashphone by Rdickinson · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So now we can put companies phone lines out of action aswell as their websites.

  67. Great! by evilviper · · Score: 1

    Isn't Google wonderful? They're letting me hear advertising and sales pitches over the phone... FOR FREE!!!

    Why isn't everyone doing this!

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  68. How to Patent and requirements ? by managedcode · · Score: 1

    All:
    Does anybody in here know how to file for patents ? Does one need to have a working model or prototype to patent a process/innovation ? Response appreciated.
    Thanks.

  69. Sales leads by Fengpost · · Score: 1

    This is a good one from Google! This has gone beyond advertising! This is a big step of transforming just advertising to real sales leads!!!!

    --
    The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity....Calvin
  70. This is revolutionary?! by dhalsim2 · · Score: 1

    SmartPages.com (now YellowPages.com) has had Click-to-Call for almost two years!

  71. and if you put the same # of the advertiser? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    infinite loop?
    busy signal?

  72. Examples? by Jules+Mercuri · · Score: 1

    Anyone actually _find_ one of these buttons yet? If so, what did you search for? I'd kinda like to try this.

  73. Looked into this in 2000 with USLaw.com by snowwrestler · · Score: 1

    When I was with USLaw.com in 2000 we looked into this type of service to connect people with lawyers directly from the site. Basically if someone browsing the site had a question about one of the articles they could click a link, enter their phone number, and they would receive a call that was then connected to one of our "ask a lawyer" staff.

    Unfortunately the entire Web team was laid off before we got a chance to try to implement it.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  74. I can see it now... by cwsulliv · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google connects you to the advertiser and you get the usual recorded announcement: "Please hold for the next available operator. Due to the high volume of calls this may take some time. For faster service please visit our website."

  75. IP tied to Phone Number? by cffrost · · Score: 1

    Discounting the obvious exploits this system provides to (ab)users, how about Joe Sixpack using this system as it was intended... Google's complied record on Mr. Sixpack has just scored two very valuable data points: Not only his phone number, but the nature of his call.

    No doubt the telemarketing industry would be very interested.

    --
    Thank you, Edward Snowden.

    "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  76. Blocks the "relationship" loophole in do not call by Devistater · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is great stuff. Now you can talk to companies and get information out of them, without them getting your phone number. Google doesn't give your phone number to them, and the callerid shows googles stuff, not yours. This way the company can't call you back and claim they were exempt under the do not call list since you had a business relationship with them. They wont even know your phone number in the first place :)

  77. Unstructured data by jawahar · · Score: 1

    Web is primarily about strutured data which is around 15% where as phone is about unstructured data

  78. I wont be happy until they release... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google Porn Beta

  79. Heh by andreyw · · Score: 1

    I bet Google didn't think of one use of this new service - annoying and harassing the hell out of people whose phone number you happen to know.

    "Honey, why did ``Joe's Male Escort Service and Gay Bar call your cell twenty times last night?''"

  80. Phone sex - "We put the 'Goo' in Google" by Eternal+Vigilance · · Score: 1

    Perhaps Gooooooo(eww!)gle will christen them "Click-to-Callgirls."

    Soon guys will be swapping stories like "Ohmigod, last night this chick, her PageRank was f***ing incredible!"



    "But I feel so...so....dirty."
    "Don't worry, baby - using Internet Explorer is all part of the kink."

  81. Thats great but... by somedude9theweb · · Score: 1

    How about a search engine that returns relevant results like Google used to? The usefulness of their search results have gradually but quite steadily gone downhill, yet they continue to roll out one new service after another. Don't get me wrong, they are doing some super cool stuff, but it just kinda seems more and more like their search engine has lost its magic, and in some cases... well... sucks.

  82. Obligatory Google call waiting tune.. by halleluja · · Score: 0

    Swedish chef anyone?

  83. Are you retarded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or are you some sort of shill that works for Google? Either way, you sound retarded.

  84. Following the latest trend, by going_the_2Rpi_way · · Score: 1

    This seems to be the latest form of internet integration to the "offline" world. The next move will be to charge advertisers on a pay-per-call basis, as MIVA and AOL and others are already doing.

    Really, it's an ideal way for more traditional 'walk-in' businesses to make online advertising pay without the need for a huge ecommerce site. It's a natural fit with things like florists, restaurants, and other small businesses -- and will work particularly well on portals like Google Local.

    It also a move that anticipates most people will soon have VOIP ready to go on their PCs so you click and bang you're talking without the need for a BBS-style callback which is still quite crude. Maybe the Google toolbar will soon include something for this?

  85. If you want click-to-call links for your website by LinuxParanoid · · Score: 1
    If you want a similar click-to-call link for your website, there are third-party providers like Civicom. They've had this service since 2001, with a merchant-pays-per-minute (like regular toll-free calling) business model although they've more recently diversified their product line.

    I know they require persons to "press 1 to join the call" to minimize certain types of pranks/scams; I dunno if Google is doing that or not but they probably will.

    --LP

  86. Re: Privacy by billybob2001 · · Score: 1

    This is Slashdot, yet I haven't seen anyone concerned about privacy yet.

    Be patient.

    You'll see plenty when the dupe articles get posted to YRO...

  87. Skype and ebay by jlebrech · · Score: 1

    For one second i thought i Read Ebay and Skype.
    Now that would be good to be able to call the sellers if they are online.

  88. You couldn't be more ignorant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Forming a corporation is like modding overrated. Most will do both to limit personal liability. Limiting personal liability is logical and resaonable, as the parent suggest. However, most people do look to consequences to guide thier actions, and with corporation, for the most part, their are few consequences. Both the grandparent and parent agree that corporations limit liability. In which case would you be more likely to lie on a financial statement to your partners? The one where you can walk away scott free, or the one where your house will be taken away?"

    AND

    "The big problem with corporations, and this goes back to the founding fathers, is that it comes awfully close to creating an entity that looks like a person, i.e. a entity that has rights and responsibilities, without the concience or at least the ability to exact consequences. The board of directors can be sued, the CxO can be sued, but, at the end of the day, when people die from misconduct of the corporation, the only death sentence will be to a fictional entity, and most of the perpetrators will be free to commit other crimes."

    Uh, huh. Just for research purposes, have you ever actually owned or run a corporation (any kind) of your own? Bonus points if you had gotten away with something illegal. e.g. swiping office supplies, or embezzeld money from your partner. I'm just wondering since I seem to be seeing a lot of these "business experts" on Slashdot and I want to tap into this "consequence free" pool of expertise. If I can do something illegal, then I know that it'll be because of the fact that I own a business, and not because I simply have a lot of money. After all rich people don't have such a good racket.

    1. Re:You couldn't be more ignorant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which so misses the point. The issue is that original grandparent made statment that were extreme and contained factual errors, and the parent made statements that were extreme and contained factual errors. Corporations can be used by people who wish to do evil to do so, as well as good. This does not mean that the corporation is nuetral, unless you exclude the human element from the corporation, which is myth that most want to promote, and in fact is the myth that the original parent was promoting. However, instead of noticing both for what they were, propganda with no balance and substandard basis in fact, one was rejected while the other promoted. It is difficult to have a civilized dscussion now becuase while it is accepted that all liberals are traitors, those that put this countries agent in jeoperdy to satisfy personal political agendas are patriots.

    2. Re:You couldn't be more ignorant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said.

  89. Seven ways to abuse this by Chapter80 · · Score: 1
    1) Put in the number of an enemy, and connect them to the advertiser of your choice. Repeat.

    2) Get a 900 number that charges $350 for the first minute, and call it - so Google owes you $350

    3) Prank phone calls, connecting your favorite Pastor to a pr0n advertiser

    4) Connect two competing advertisers, just for fun ("You called me", "No, YOU called ME!")

    5) Call your cousin in China, who happens to work for a Google advertiser. Free Long Distance!!!

    6) Call your favorite phone-sex operator (assuming she advertises on Google) - all on Google's tab.

    7) Write a script to perform any of the above functions multiple times in an endless loop - achieving the Slashdot affect by phone.

    Wonder of these would work. I don't encourage you to try any of them! (Kids, don't try this at home!)

  90. pop up window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i can see this getting exploited to the point of ....hey it's an x10 ad, ring ring, would you like to buy some x10 products....ack noooooooo!

  91. Google Repackages Old Technology... by xoip · · Score: 1

    What is interesting here is that Google is taking a look at stuff that was Bleeding edge at one time, and adding their brand power to it. Back in 1999 we had a partner that developed this type of callback technology. At the time,web sites were simply brochure-ware and the interactive capabilities were too novel for most marketing managers. Time for everyone to dust off some old code.

  92. the logical next step... by rkww · · Score: 1

    The caller doesn't know the advertiser's number, so the only way the customer can contact the advertiser is through Google. And Google knows you called, so it can take a commission on any sale.

  93. Someone has to do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia, Google calls YOU!

  94. gimme some numbers people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone have Jimmy Swaggart's Home phone number? How about Rush Limbaugh? I'm pretty sure their penises aren't big enough.

  95. In Soviet Russia... by BillX · · Score: 1

    ...you call the telemarketers, but here in America, you ask someone to ask the telemarketers to call you ASAP.

    --
    Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
  96. Part of Goggle's Free WiFi offer to San Francisco by kimo123 · · Score: 1

    see my blog from San Francisco where we discuss Google's offer of Free WiFi (interesting...) to the city for a defacto Yellow Pages Franchise It's the new Business Model for capturing Yellow Pages and Local Newspaper Advertising This Click-to-Call is part of that strategy to capture small local business advertising (like your local Deli) which are currently speading their local ad dollars on NewsPaper Display Ads and Yellow Pages (for which their value is hard to measure, unlike paying for leads with click to call - good for consumers, bad for local newspapers and local yellow pages, potentially bad for community businesses competing with nationwide chains, bad for local government with local ad spending now going to google, vs local ad jobs) http://www.webnetic.net/2005/11/why_should_you_car e_if_google.html

  97. This is cool, but... by tkennon · · Score: 1

    There is another level they need to get to with this, "Click to Face". I am working with a start up here in NYC metro area called Avivocom and they offer live interactive help desk / sales support with audio and video. They embed it and deliver it within a banner or any browser. Very cool stuff. www.avivocom.com. TK

  98. Re:Why calls? Ans: The price... by pcause · · Score: 1

    The reason Google wants to do this is that they get paid a LOT more when someone clicks a call link. Advertisers pay several dollars per click. Google isn't an innovator here. Other have done it before. Google is just going to kill the others becuase of their reach with advertisers.