21–30 of 257 posts
Could this potentially hurt Paypal monopoly?
It is one of the reasons Checkout was introduced in the first place. However, I doubt this will have an instant effect. I'm not sure about the current status, but at some point sellers I contacted couldn't add Google Checkout as payment option as it was US exclusive.
This would definitely make classic social-engineering tricks like Nigerian scams easier to pull off.
http://techcrunch.com/2009/01/20/latest-facebook-scam-phishe...
How is this going to be handled, as a money exchange system ("yo, here's for covering lunch for me yesterday"), or like a payment system ("send your payment to shop@gmail.com")? It seems presented as the former: > you can securely send money to friends and family in the U.S. - without leaving your Gmail inbox but people will assuredly try to use it as the latter. When that happens, how will Google address fraud claim…
Presumably the same way PayPal handles "personal" funds transfers - they don't.
They've specifically flagged this as between friends and family only, which is to say it comes with no warranties. PayPal also has a lower-fee version of their service for the same use case - you get the lower rate in exchange for giving up purchase protection.
This is also why when buying things online anyone who asks you to mark the payment as "PayPal gift" should be given a very stern sober second look.
What's not clear is how a person without a google wallet account claims the money. Is it the same tedious process of having to verify a bank account, give a social security number, promise a first born child, etc.
How is this going to be handled, as a money exchange system ("yo, here's for covering lunch for me yesterday"), or like a payment system ("send your payment to shop@gmail.com")? It seems presented as the former: > you can securely send money to friends and family in the U.S. - without leaving your Gmail inbox but people will assuredly try to use it as the latter. When that happens, how will Google address fraud claim…
In a way I think we're seeing Google striking against Facebook in what I call the "identity wars" where each service is struggling to be an identity and information service about people.
If it only takes a few clicks to 'reply with money', and if the scammer only asks for a small amount, this method seems to have a much lower 'barrier' than wire transfers.