6 ms·

FacePay?

54 points by ewilliamsh 12y ago

chrischen 12y ago
Glad to see they're catching up to WeChat (Tencent) in China, who's been doing similar functionality for a while now (messaging brands).
- frik 12y ago
  I heard good things about WeChat/its chinese counter part. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rosatrieu/2014/07/02/what-chinas-tencent-is-getting-right-in-mobile-payments/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/rosatrieu/2014/07/02/what-chinas...
minikomi 12y ago
There's also Line Pay for places where that's prominent https://help.line.me/line/android/categoryId/10001102/ https://help.line.me/line/android/categoryId/10001102/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv25NjPxzW4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv25NjPxzW4
- sanxiyn 12y ago
  Better URL: https://pay.line.me/ https://pay.line.me/
frik 12y ago
> What if buying something was as easy as Liking it? You’d probably buy a lot more, and buy it through whoever made it so damn simple. Exactly. There is Paypal. Afaik, Amazon and Google discontinued their similar service that was in competition with Paypal (API for third party website payments) - but why? (I think that were the services: Amazon WebPay, Google Checkout)
- chrischen 12y ago
  Also Apple Pay inside apps, and for retailers.
  - frik 12y ago
    That's not the point. Inside their walled garden, Amazon's and Google's payment works fine too. The point was it used to be easy to use their services outside in the open internet on normal websites like Paypal.
    - chrischen 12y ago
      A very big Walled Garden. As an owner of an ecommerce site, I can tell you it's very tempting to create an App version just to take advantage of one-tap thumbprint orders. Also I don't think Amazon or Google have a TouchID payment system.
- downandout 12y ago
  Google Checkout shutdown because it had reputational issues among merchants, and culture clash issues with the rest of Google. Payment platforms require human support personnel, and this is something that Google is diametrically opposed to. They algorithmically suspended many merchant accounts early in the service's life, with no explanation as to why and no one to talk to about it. This happened to me; I wound up filing a BBB complaint and they responded saying the reasons that they effectively stole thousands of dollars from me after months of operations without a single chargeback were "proprietary and confidential". I was not alone; the Google Checkout support forums were filled with stories like mine. This is why no one should ever use Google for any critical function that may require support (cloud servers etc.). Google just doesn't do the whole "human" thing very well. If it goes terribly wrong and they refuse to talk to you, good luck suing them unless you are a Fortune 500 company.
  - xyby 12y ago
    Im not in the US, so I wonder: If big company like Google owes you money - isn't there some institution that will help you get it? Maybe the BBB? Especially if Google wrongfully kept the money from many customers. I would think some government run institutions would get going. Something like the "public prosecutor's office" or so.
    - adventured 12y ago
      If Google were doing this at a large scale, the US Government or state government/s would usually be willing to sue them over it. At a medium scale (in # of cases), you might find a law firm willing to take on a lot of cases, in exchange for a big cut. You can also choose to pursue your own situation individually. At a small scale (just your case let's say, and a small'ish sum of money), you're going to mostly be limited to small claim's court, which can work perfectly well sometimes: http://consumerist.com/2008/01/21/suing-big-companies-in-small-claims-court-is-fun-and-easy/ http://consumerist.com/2008/01/21/suing-big-companies-in-sma...
      - dhimes 12y ago
christianmann 12y ago
This is also a good way to add unlimited context to a transaction.
DataCreep 12y ago
No thanks.
stewartbutler 12y ago
Honest question: has Facebook done anything to indicate that they are willing and able to protect user data? Because social and financial are two words that I don't like seeing near each other. I ask because I deleted my account years ago because I felt I had too little control over what was shared and with who, concerning when the service is from a company with no financial incentive to keep any data private. I have no idea if those behaviors have changed and no real interest in looking into it myself.
- mcintyre1994 12y ago
  I very rarely post to Facebook but I do feel that I know who my data is shared with when I do. They seem to have stopped their ridiculous habit of resetting all my privacy settings to public now as well. Like Google I imagine they do actually try to protect the data they have beyond what I explicitly share at least to the extent it's not sold (I'm assuming they use the same model as Google and sell ads from the data instead of just selling the data, but their ads are so badly targeted it's hard to tell). That said I don't see myself giving them financial details because I don't really know what they do with data that's not explicitly shared by users (which like I said has become a lot clearer) and I don't really particularly trust them. Plus I'd be amazed if they ever managed to show an ad I was remotely interested in.
itsbits 12y ago
This won't be like WebPay or Checkout. Considering all the businesses and Family/Friends already in FB, this can be put into very good use. But I was kind of waiting for Youtube competant from Facebook for sometime now. I think Facebook is one of the major sources for Youtube and FB has ability to do something about it.
- frik 12y ago
  YouTube belongs to Google. I too wonder why Google hasn't focused more of their attention on YT. It's their social network hub that works fine for about one billion people. Do the G+ comments below YT videos make sense? No (from the users point of view) . There used to be insightful replies to YT comments including video-replies. All that has vanished, only spam remains. Beside that, anyone remember their older social hubs Google Buzz and Orkut?
JoelJacobson 12y ago
"Facebook split Messenger off into its own app to save you one extra click on the Messages tab." Uhm, what? What they did was forcing their users to open up a separate app to do something with was working great already within the app, without having to open up a separate app. But now every time you want to do messaging, you have to wait the extra two seconds for "Messenger" to open up. What a terrible example by the TechCrunch author. Maybe he was ironic?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- philtar 12y ago
  If you took a moment to think of use cases other than your own, you would realize that there's a lot of us that ONLY use facebook messenger. I haven't checked my newsfeed in ages.
  - JoelJacobson 12y ago
    Good for you, and all other Messenger-only-users. But why force all other users who are using the Facebook-app to open up a separate app when they want to send or read messages?
    - testingonprod 12y ago
      They expected to add a TON of complexity to the messenger product (they announced messenger as a platform at F8) and they needed a way to decouple the already complex main FB app. It buys them a bunch of things, like easier maintenance, extensibility, and ability to push updates independently among other user experience benefits. They also didn't want to split the user experience of using Facebook messenger on mobile and hence the forced switch. It was only a big deal because of the surface area of the world that the main Facebook product (w/ messenger) covers. I guarantee you that if Google did something like that no one would care (at least not enough to give 20,000+ 1 star reviews)
      - 12y ago
DanielBMarkham 12y ago
Do retailers really want Facebook owning the entire marketing sales funnel, including the customer relationship? This article makes it sound like this is a new feature for businesses, but it sure doesn't look like they have the best interests of businesses at heart. It's not friction if you have to smile and say hello to the guy at the apple cart before you buy your apples.
Lancey 12y ago
I don't think the author of this article has ever used Facebook or actually read the details on the thing he's writing about. Facebook having a payment method doesn't solve a single problem with either Facebook or payment methods in general.
exelius 12y ago
Facebook has a huge opportunity here to build the mobile payment killer app. If they can get this integrated with NFC, you can pay for the tab at a restaurant and split the check among you and your friends. Realistically, you could use it to split nearly ANY bill - Facebook just has to build an interface. The only question is if the payment processors and Apple/Google will leave the door open wide enough.

54 points by ewilliamsh 12y ago

Glad to see they're catching up to WeChat (Tencent) in China, who's been doing similar functionality for a while now (messaging brands).

frik 12y ago
I heard good things about WeChat/its chinese counter part. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rosatrieu/2014/07/02/what-chinas-tencent-is-getting-right-in-mobile-payments/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/rosatrieu/2014/07/02/what-chinas...

minikomi 12y ago

There's also Line Pay for places where that's prominent https://help.line.me/line/android/categoryId/10001102/ https://help.line.me/line/android/categoryId/10001102/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv25NjPxzW4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv25NjPxzW4

sanxiyn 12y ago
Better URL: https://pay.line.me/ https://pay.line.me/

frik 12y ago

> What if buying something was as easy as Liking it? You’d probably buy a lot more, and buy it through whoever made it so damn simple. Exactly. There is Paypal. Afaik, Amazon and Google discontinued their similar service that was in competition with Paypal (API for third party website payments) - but why? (I think that were the services: Amazon WebPay, Google Checkout)

chrischen 12y ago
Also Apple Pay inside apps, and for retailers.
- frik 12y ago
  That's not the point. Inside their walled garden, Amazon's and Google's payment works fine too. The point was it used to be easy to use their services outside in the open internet on normal websites like Paypal.
  - chrischen 12y ago
    A very big Walled Garden. As an owner of an ecommerce site, I can tell you it's very tempting to create an App version just to take advantage of one-tap thumbprint orders. Also I don't think Amazon or Google have a TouchID payment system.
downandout 12y ago
Google Checkout shutdown because it had reputational issues among merchants, and culture clash issues with the rest of Google. Payment platforms require human support personnel, and this is something that Google is diametrically opposed to. They algorithmically suspended many merchant accounts early in the service's life, with no explanation as to why and no one to talk to about it. This happened to me; I wound up filing a BBB complaint and they responded saying the reasons that they effectively stole thousands of dollars from me after months of operations without a single chargeback were "proprietary and confidential". I was not alone; the Google Checkout support forums were filled with stories like mine. This is why no one should ever use Google for any critical function that may require support (cloud servers etc.). Google just doesn't do the whole "human" thing very well. If it goes terribly wrong and they refuse to talk to you, good luck suing them unless you are a Fortune 500 company.
- xyby 12y ago
  Im not in the US, so I wonder: If big company like Google owes you money - isn't there some institution that will help you get it? Maybe the BBB? Especially if Google wrongfully kept the money from many customers. I would think some government run institutions would get going. Something like the "public prosecutor's office" or so.
  - adventured 12y ago
    If Google were doing this at a large scale, the US Government or state government/s would usually be willing to sue them over it. At a medium scale (in # of cases), you might find a law firm willing to take on a lot of cases, in exchange for a big cut. You can also choose to pursue your own situation individually. At a small scale (just your case let's say, and a small'ish sum of money), you're going to mostly be limited to small claim's court, which can work perfectly well sometimes: http://consumerist.com/2008/01/21/suing-big-companies-in-small-claims-court-is-fun-and-easy/ http://consumerist.com/2008/01/21/suing-big-companies-in-sma...
    - dhimes 12y ago

christianmann 12y ago

This is also a good way to add unlimited context to a transaction.

DataCreep 12y ago

No thanks.

stewartbutler 12y ago

Honest question: has Facebook done anything to indicate that they are willing and able to protect user data? Because social and financial are two words that I don't like seeing near each other. I ask because I deleted my account years ago because I felt I had too little control over what was shared and with who, concerning when the service is from a company with no financial incentive to keep any data private. I have no idea if those behaviors have changed and no real interest in looking into it myself.

mcintyre1994 12y ago
I very rarely post to Facebook but I do feel that I know who my data is shared with when I do. They seem to have stopped their ridiculous habit of resetting all my privacy settings to public now as well. Like Google I imagine they do actually try to protect the data they have beyond what I explicitly share at least to the extent it's not sold (I'm assuming they use the same model as Google and sell ads from the data instead of just selling the data, but their ads are so badly targeted it's hard to tell). That said I don't see myself giving them financial details because I don't really know what they do with data that's not explicitly shared by users (which like I said has become a lot clearer) and I don't really particularly trust them. Plus I'd be amazed if they ever managed to show an ad I was remotely interested in.

itsbits 12y ago

This won't be like WebPay or Checkout. Considering all the businesses and Family/Friends already in FB, this can be put into very good use. But I was kind of waiting for Youtube competant from Facebook for sometime now. I think Facebook is one of the major sources for Youtube and FB has ability to do something about it.

frik 12y ago
YouTube belongs to Google. I too wonder why Google hasn't focused more of their attention on YT. It's their social network hub that works fine for about one billion people. Do the G+ comments below YT videos make sense? No (from the users point of view) . There used to be insightful replies to YT comments including video-replies. All that has vanished, only spam remains. Beside that, anyone remember their older social hubs Google Buzz and Orkut?

JoelJacobson 12y ago

"Facebook split Messenger off into its own app to save you one extra click on the Messages tab." Uhm, what? What they did was forcing their users to open up a separate app to do something with was working great already within the app, without having to open up a separate app. But now every time you want to do messaging, you have to wait the extra two seconds for "Messenger" to open up. What a terrible example by the TechCrunch author. Maybe he was ironic?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
philtar 12y ago
If you took a moment to think of use cases other than your own, you would realize that there's a lot of us that ONLY use facebook messenger. I haven't checked my newsfeed in ages.
- JoelJacobson 12y ago
  Good for you, and all other Messenger-only-users. But why force all other users who are using the Facebook-app to open up a separate app when they want to send or read messages?
  - testingonprod 12y ago
    They expected to add a TON of complexity to the messenger product (they announced messenger as a platform at F8) and they needed a way to decouple the already complex main FB app. It buys them a bunch of things, like easier maintenance, extensibility, and ability to push updates independently among other user experience benefits. They also didn't want to split the user experience of using Facebook messenger on mobile and hence the forced switch. It was only a big deal because of the surface area of the world that the main Facebook product (w/ messenger) covers. I guarantee you that if Google did something like that no one would care (at least not enough to give 20,000+ 1 star reviews)
    - 12y ago

DanielBMarkham 12y ago

Do retailers really want Facebook owning the entire marketing sales funnel, including the customer relationship? This article makes it sound like this is a new feature for businesses, but it sure doesn't look like they have the best interests of businesses at heart. It's not friction if you have to smile and say hello to the guy at the apple cart before you buy your apples.

Lancey 12y ago

I don't think the author of this article has ever used Facebook or actually read the details on the thing he's writing about. Facebook having a payment method doesn't solve a single problem with either Facebook or payment methods in general.

exelius 12y ago

Facebook has a huge opportunity here to build the mobile payment killer app. If they can get this integrated with NFC, you can pay for the tab at a restaurant and split the check among you and your friends. Realistically, you could use it to split nearly ANY bill - Facebook just has to build an interface. The only question is if the payment processors and Apple/Google will leave the door open wide enough.