Facebook buys into the cryptocurrency buzz – report

Reports suggest Facebook is in the process of developing its own cryptocurrency, with plans to launch in as many as a dozen countries as early as Q1 2020.

According to the BBC, not only has the product been given a name, GlobalCoin, but CEO Mark Zuckerberg has met with Bank of England Governor Mark Carney. The cryptocurrency could be unveiled to the world by the end of the year, with plans to kick off operations during the first quarter of 2020.

It would appear this is one of the more radical ideas from Facebook to differentiate its business, removing the dependency on the increasingly under-fire data sharing economy. With the general public, regulators and governments all taking more pro-privacy stances, the fundamentals of the data-sharing economy are coming under-threat. Numerous companies will face significant disruptions with the introduction of stricter regulations, though Facebook is one of the most exposed to the threat.

While the idea of virtual currencies is not particularly new, real-world applications will escape the imaginations of most. In this example, Facebook may want to move towards a more dominant position in the digital economy, enabling purchases through its various different products. Cryptocurrency will become an important facet of this process, firstly to encourage people to purchase through the products instead of going directly to the advertiser, and secondly, allowing people without bank accounts to engage in eCommerce. There is the potential to inspire confidence in purchases from previously unknown websites and vendors.

Although it is a perfectly reasonable ambition for Facebook executives to hold, there will be numerous sceptics around the world. Facebook has not necessarily shown itself as a particularly resourceful custodian of personal information; asking people to trust them from a financial perspective would require a huge amount of credibility in the brand. This might prove to be a stumbling block for the social media giant.

Another factor to consider is how unregulated the cryptocurrency market currently is. In the UK, cryptocurrency is not recognised as legal tender, while many in the general public have little understanding of the concept. Both of these factors might undermine confidence in any virtual payments system, at least in the immediate future.

This is not the first time Facebook has ventured towards the world of virtual currency however. In 2011, Facebook introduced Facebook Credits, which it hoped would replace traditional means of paying for in-app products on the platform. In 2012, Facebook announced it would no-longer use its own money system and officially canned the project in September 2013. A lack of traction with the general public undermined the idea.

Hints were also dropped of Facebook’s ambitions in May 2018, when the firm announced it had hired David Marcus. Marcus, who previously was a member on the board of directors of Coinbase and President of PayPal, has been leading blockchain projects in the business.

Zuckerberg has not been shy about his ambitions to enter the financial fray, telling the audience at a developer conference last month the payments world was an attractive one. For Facebook, this is a logical move. Considering the widespread adoption of its platforms (Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram) and consumer trends to favour digital purchasing over real-world transactions, it is in a good position.

The platform also needs to become more attractive to consumers. Trends over the last few years suggest people are spending less time on the core platform. The introduction of more functional features, such as eCommerce, could be a way to diversify the business. However, the focal point of the argument moving forward will be around security.

Facebook will need to prove that the cryptocurrency is firstly secure, but also that its own data storage and processing capabilities meet the privacy and data protection demands of today’s digital society. This is where it might fall short of expectations.

Amazon wants to be more in-tune with your emotions

Amazon is reportedly working on new technology which will be able to detect users’ emotional state by analysing their vocal patterns.

According to Bloomberg, the tech giant is working in collaboration with Lab126 to create a wearable device, which would be paired with a smartphone, to perceive emotions of the user. With eyes on 2017 patent that uses vocal pattern analysis to determine someone’s emotional state, the insight could be used through various health and wellbeing products, or even in the online advertising world.

This is perhaps one of the trickiest aspects of hyper-targeted advertising or personalisation. Context is king when it comes to serving people relevant adverts or products, though this not only depends on browsing history or financial circumstance, but also the emotional state of that individual at that time.

For example, an individual might have searching for new trainers or workout gear over the last few weeks, but if they are feeling frustrated, presenting an expensive gym membership at that point is unlikely to be the most profitable exercise.

Right now, this technology is nothing more than an idea, while the reports have not been confirmed by Amazon. It might prove to be too much of a complex equation to solve, but it will certainly be of interest to the thousands of brands around the world who are constantly searching for new ways to engage consumers, forcing an extra couple of quid out of the constrained wallets.

This also might prove to be one step too far for the consumer. To get this concept off the ground, buy-in would have to gained from the mass market. Consumers are already being asked to reveal a lot of data in exchange for ‘free’ services, but emotional wellbeing might be the breaking point. This is incredibly personal information therefore the value exchange would have to be very tempting.

The concept itself sounds very futuristic, which to some is daunting. The pace which the technology world is moving forward is staggering at times, though we are not entirely convinced there would be buy-in from consumers. It sounds like an interesting idea, but it might be too much too soon.

Estonia is best digital home away from home, report says

Expats voted Estonia to the top of their digital life quality list in a new survey.

InterNations, a social network for expats, recently conducted a global survey to gauge the perception of digital lives enjoyed by those living in a foreign country. 68 countries were featured. Although most of the findings confirmed the conventional wisdom, the report also threw up a couple of surprises.

Overall, the Nordic countries ranked high, with Finland, Norway, and Denmark all in the top 5 best countries for digital life table. But topping the list is Estonia, which ranked exceptionally high on the e-government index, with 94% of all expats surveyed feeling satisfied with the availability of the country’s administrative services. Estonia also topped the table of unrestricted access to online services. The country, similar to other Baltic and Nordic countries, adopts a light-touch approach towards Internet. Following Estonia on the e-government satisfaction list is Singapore, with Norway coming second on the unrestricted access to online service table.

Unsurprisingly, South Korea, which leads the world in broadband access, also tops the league of high-speed internet at home, followed by Taiwan and Finland. Expats were also asked to rate their experience of cashless payment. The four Nordic countries took the top 4 positions, with Estonia rounding off the top 5. Finland was ranked in the first place, with 96% expats saying they are happy with the experience.

A question that is particularly relevant to expats is how easy it is to get a local mobile number. Here we see a bit surprise. Myanmar, which ranked at the bottom of the overall Digital Life table, came on top in this list, followed by New Zealand and Israel.

On the other end of the tables, China was only beaten by Myanmar to the bottom of the overall Digital Life table and sat comfortably at the bottom of “Unrestricted Access to Internet”, thanks to the all powerful Great Firewall. This is particularly pertinent for expats who would have a stronger need for the global social networks more than the local residents, to communicate with their home countries. 83% of all expats were unsatisfied with their access to social networks from China, followed in the second from bottom by Saudi Arabia, where 46% said they were unsatisfied.

The ranking may not be a big surprise, but the margin between the bottom two countries may be. The only table that China was not in the bottom 10 was the one on cashless payment. But, maybe surprisingly, with all the fanfare about the contactless payment experience enabled by companies like Alibaba and Tencent, expats living in China did not manage to take the country to the top 10 table either.

Best and worst countries for Digital Life

Huawei’s in-house mobile OS is a very long shot

This story includes additional reporting from Jamie Davies.

In response to the threat of an imminent Android ban Huawei has started banging on about its own mobile OS, but who would want to use it?

Huawei’s mobile business boss Richard Yu was reported by the South China Morning Post as saying “The Huawei OS is likely to hit the market as soon as this fall, and no later than spring next year.” From the report this seems more like a fork of the open source Android core OS, with novel apps and a Huawei app store, much as Amazon has done with its Fire devices range.

While this is pretty much the only option available to Huawei if Google does withdraw access to licensed parts of Android, such as the Play Store, it’s hard to see it as a viable solution. The Amazon Fire phone offers perhaps the best precedent to draw upon. The premium device ticked all the hardware boxes but used a forked version of Android without the Play Store and as a result found a new use as a paperweight across Washington state.

Huawei will be able to continue using Android, it is open source after all, though technical support is only supplied to licenced partners, while any updates are rolled out through the open source much later than for the licenced one. This will have notable impacts not only on performance, but security. The most recent WhatsApp spyware issues were corrected through such an update, though unlicensed partners would still be exposed to the risk.

The issue Huawei faces is in the ecosystem. Wang Chenglu, President of the software engineering segment of the consumer business, told media in September developing the OS wasn’t a particularly complicated issue, but getting apps, services and products into the ecosystem is.

Smartphones are no-longer communications devices. These devices, which are millions of times more powerful than the computers which sent spacecraft to space in the 60s, are the focal point of our lives. If calling and texting was all we did, there would not be an issue, but asking for directions, collecting loyalty points, watching movies, playing games, signing into work, paying bills… everyday more functionality is being put onto the devices, and all these apps will have to be migrated to the Huawei OS.

Without apps smartphones are no longer smart. Yes, you can use the internet browser to access most services that also have an app but the user experience is significantly diminished. Huawei has the resources to ensure a lot of the top apps are ported to its own OS, but not all of them. Ultimately, in a largely undifferentiated Android smartphone market, there’s no reason for consumers to accept any compromise whatsoever.

There have also been numerous reports that Huawei was shocked by the Google decision but, in hindsight, that was an inevitable consequence of being put on the entity list, which in turn followed from US President Trump’s executive order. Maybe it was the Trump decision that surprised Huawei but since the US has been steadily increasing its hostility towards it for months that too seems a tad naïve.

Appropriately enough for something that could be Huawei’s last hope this OS is reportedly called Project Z. This has apparently been on the back-burner for a while, but largely designed for the Chinese market where a lot of Android features are blocked anyway. While we can safely assume it has now been given top priority, Project Z is reportedly still miles away from completion.

Even if Huawei completed the development of its own OS today, that wouldn’t make much difference for the reasons previously stated. Chinese smartphone vendors have benefitted enormously from having access to Android, but their reliance on a third party operating system and platform was always a precarious position. The likes of Xiaomi and Oppo will be watching Huawei’s struggles carefully.

Microsoft starts ruffling privacy feathers in the US

This weekend will mark the one-year anniversary of Europe’s GDPR and Microsoft has made the bold suggestion of bringing the rules over the pond to the US.

Many US businesses would have been protected from the chaos that was the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), with the rules only impacting those which operated in Europe. And while there are benefits to privacy and data protection rights for consumers, that will come as little compensation for those who had to protect themselves from the weighty fines attached to non-compliance.

Voicing what could turn out to be a very unpopular opinion, Microsoft has suggested the US should introduce its own version.

“A lot has happened on the global privacy front since GDPR went into force,” said Julie Brill, Deputy General Counsel at Microsoft. “Overall, companies that collect and process personal information for people living in the EU have adapted, putting new systems and processes in place to ensure that individuals understand what data is collected about them and can correct it if it is inaccurate and delete it or move it somewhere else if they choose.

“This has improved how companies handle their customers’ personal data. And it has inspired a global movement that has seen countries around the world adopt new privacy laws that are modelled on GDPR.

“Now it is time for Congress to take inspiration from the rest of the world and enact federal legislation that extends the privacy protections in GDPR to citizens in the United States.”

The rules themselves were first introduced in an attempt to force companies to be more responsible and transparent in how customer data is handled. The update reflected the new sharing economies the world had sleepwalked into; the new status quo had come under criticism and new protections had to be put in place while also offering more control to the consumer of their personal data.

GDPR arrived with little fanfare after many businesses scurried around for the weeks prior despite having almost 18 months’ notice. And while these regulations were designed for the European market, such is the open nature of the internet, the impact was felt worldwide.

While this might sound negative, GDPR has proved to be an inspiration for numerous other countries and regions. Brazil, Japan, South Korea and India were just a few of the nations which saw the benefit of the rules, and now it appears there are calls for the same position to be adopted in the US.

As Brill points out in the blog post stating the Microsoft position, California has already made steps forward to create a more privacy-focused society. The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) will go into effect on January 1 2020. Inspired by GDPR, the new law will provide California residents with the right to know what personal information is being collected on them, know whether it is being sold or monetized, say no to monetization and access all the data.

This is only one example, though there are numerous states around the US, primarily Democrat, which have similar pro-privacy attitudes to California. However, this is a law which stops short of the strictness of GDPR. Companies are not on the stopwatch to notify customers of a breach, as they are under GDPR, while the language around punishment for non-compliance is very vague.

This is perhaps the issue Microsoft will face in attempting to escalate such rules up to federal law; the only attempt which we have seen so far in the US is a diluted version of GDPR. Whereas GDPR is a sharp stick for the regulators to swing, a fine of 3% of annual turnover certainly encourages compliance, the Californian approach is more like a tickling feather; it might irritate a little bit.

At the moment, US privacy laws are nothing more than ripples in the technology pond. If GDPR-style rules were to be introduced in the US, the impact would be significant. GDPR has already shifting the privacy conversation and had notable impacts on the way businesses operate. Google, for example, has introduced an auto-delete function for users while Facebook’s entire business rhetoric has become much more privacy focused. It is having a fundamental impact on the business.

We are not too sure whether Microsoft’s call is going to have any material impact on government thinking right now, but privacy laws in the US (and everywhere for that matter) are going to need to be brought up-to-date. With artificial intelligence, personalisation, big data, facial recognition and predictive analytics technologies all gaining traction, the role of personal data and privacy is going to become much more significant.

US supply ban threatens to cripple Huawei’s global business

Another day, another escalation as Google heads a stampede of US companies apparently refusing to do business with Huawei.

As escalations go, however, this is a pretty big one. Reuters was the first report that Google has suspended some business with Huawei in response to the company being put on the US ‘entity list’, which means US companies need explicit permission from the US state before they’re allowed to sell anything to them. It seems that permission has been denied.

For Google this means denying access to those bits of Android Google licenses – mainly the Play Store and Google’s own mobile products such as the Gmail and Maps apps. Huawei can still access the core Android operating system as that has an open source license but, as companies such as Amazon have discovered, that’s pretty useless without all the other Google goodies.

We recently wrote that Huawei’s addition to the entity list is the most significant consequence of Trump’s executive order and here we have an immediate illustration of that. It looks like pretty much all other US companies are also rushing to comply with the new regulations, with Bloomberg reporting that Qualcomm and Intel are among others cutting of business with Huawei and others will presumably follow. Nikkei even reckons German chip-maker Infineon has joined the stampede.

Huawei already has an extensive chip-making operation of its own, so arguably it can cope without the likes of Qualcomm, but what about the millions of other bits and bobs that get crammed into a smartphone such as screens, cameras, memory, sensors, etc? A lot of these could be supplied by non-US companies like Samsung and, of course, Chinese ones, but there must surely be some areas in which Huawei is entirely reliant on the US supply chain.

But Google’s licensed mobile products and services are unique. An Android phone that doesn’t provide access to the Play store is massively diminished in its utility to the end user and Google Maps is the market leader. Google also has a near monopoly with YouTube and millions of people are reliant on things like Gmail, Google Pay, Play Movies. When there are so many great alternative Android smartphone vendors, why would anyone now buy a de-featured Huawei one?

In response to these reports Android moved to stress that it will continue to support existing Huawei Android phones in the following tweet.

Meanwhile Huawei issued the following statement. “Huawei has made substantial contributions to the development and growth of Android around the world. As one of Android’s key global partners, we have worked closely with their open-source platform to develop an ecosystem that has benefitted both users and the industry.

“Huawei will continue to provide security updates and after sales services to all existing Huawei and Honor smartphone and tablet products covering those have been sold or still in stock globally. We will continue to build a safe and sustainable software ecosystem, in order to provide the best experience for all users globally.”

Huawei has reportedly been working on its own smartphone OS in anticipation of this sort of thing happening but, as Microsoft, Samsung and others have found, there seems to be little public appetite for alternative to Android and iOS. Huawei may be able to sell a proprietary platform in China, where the Play Store is restricted anyway, but internationally this move will surely see Huawei smartphone sales fall off a cliff.

“If the US ban is permanent, we predict Huawei’s global smartphone shipments will tumble -25% in 2019,” Neil Mawston of Strategy Analytics told Telecoms.com. “If Huawei cannot offer Android’s wildly popular apps, like Maps or Gmail, Huawei’s smartphone demand outside China will collapse.

“If the US ban is temporary, and lifted within weeks, Huawei’s global smartphone growth will return to positive growth fairly swiftly. Huawei offers good smartphone models at decent prices through an extensive retail network, and it should recover reasonably well if it is allowed to compete.”

“We still don’t have a clear understanding of what Google has told Huawei and what elements of the Android operating system may be restricted, so it remains unclear what the ramifications will be,” said Ben Wood of CCS Insight. “However, any disruption in getting updates to the software or the associated applications would have considerable implications for Huawei’s consumer device business.”

There have been very few official statements on the matter from US companies, so Wood is right to tread carefully at this stage, but it’s hard to see this news as anything other than catastrophic for Huawei. Its consumer business, which is the most successful unit in the company, relies largely on Android to run its products and will surely be severely diminished by the Google move.

And there’s no reason to assume the damage will be contained there. Last year Huawei’s contemporary ZTE was almost driven out of business by a ban on US companies doing business with it. Huawei may have hedged its position regarding networking components suppliers more effectively than ZTE but it will presumably suffer greatly once those companies follow suit.

Huawei is one of the biggest companies in the world and has become so in spite of being largely excluded from the US market. The Chinese state will do everything it can to support Huawei, but at least some of its US suppliers offer unique products. At the very least this puts Huawei in a weak negotiating position with potential replacement partners and international customers, but the implications of this latest development are potentially existential.

Microsoft and Sony join up on AI and cloud gaming

Microsoft and Sony have signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly develop cloud systems for game and content streaming, and to integrate Microsoft’s AI with Sony’s image sensors.

This is another step on Sony’s journey to transform from a console and title seller to a game streaming service platform. Microsoft’s leadership in both cloud computing, its Azure cloud platform, and the global footsteps of its datacentres makes it an ideal partner to Sony.

The collaboration will also cover semiconductors and AI. Sony has been a leader in image sensors (among its clients is the iPhone including the latest XS Max model), and the integration of Microsoft Azure AI will help improve both the imaging processing in the cloud and on device, what the companies called “a hybrid manner”. Microsoft’s AI will also be incorporated in Sony’s other consumer products to “provide highly intuitive and user-friendly AI experiences”, the companies said.

“Sony has always been a leader in both entertainment and technology, and the collaboration we announced today builds on this history of innovation,” said Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, in a statement. “Our partnership brings the power of Azure and Azure AI to Sony to deliver new gaming and entertainment experiences for customers.”

Kenichiro Yoshida, president and CEO of Sony agreed. “I hope that in the areas of semiconductors and AI, leveraging each company’s cutting-edge technology in a mutually complementary way will lead to the creation of new value for society,” he said.

Looking to the future of the PlayStation platform, Yoshida said, “Our mission is to seamlessly evolve this platform as one that continues to deliver the best and most immersive entertainment experiences, together with a cloud environment that ensures the best possible experience, anytime, anywhere.”

Gaming is following the trend of video and music from one-off ownership selling to access streaming. But gamers are more sensitive to the visual quality and, above everything else, lagging. So to provide good experience to convert gamers to long-term streaming subscribers, the platform needs to guarantee superb connection. This is where Microsoft’s datacentre footsteps and the upcoming 5G networks will fit well with the “game” plan.

Another key success factor, similar to video streaming market, is the content. Gamers’ taste can be fast changing and frivolous. That is why the companies also stressed the importance to “collaborate closely with a multitude of content creators that capture the imagination of people around the world, and through our cutting-edge technology, we provide the tools to bring their dreams and vision to reality.”

No information on the size of investment or the number of staff involved in the collaboration is disclosed, but the companies promised to “share additional information when available”.

Supreme Court opens the legal floodgates on Apple

Apple is potentially on the verge of facing a tidal wave of lawsuits as the Supreme Court agrees the iLeader is allowed to be challenged on a potential abuse of power in the app economy.

The pivotal case the Supreme Court has been ruling on is Apple vs. Pepper. Robert Pepper and other plaintiffs, various iPhone owners, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple claiming the firm monopolised the app market through the App Store, with developer licence fees and the 30% commission ultimately driving the price up for consumers.

One the other side of the argument, Apple suggested iPhone owners were actually customers of the developers, while the developers were customers of Apple. This nuanced argument leans on legal precedent set in doctrine known as Illinois Brick where ‘indirect purchasers’ of a product don’t have the power to file antitrust cases. In distancing itself from the end-user in the app economy, Apple was hoping to protect itself.

In the first instance, the district court ruled in favour of Apple, dismissing the case, while the Ninth Circuit Court reversed the decision, ruling that consumers are purchasing from Apple not the developers. The fight was then escalated up to the Supreme Court, with the highest legal battleground in the US ruling 5-4 in favour of the iPhone owners.

What is worth noting is this is not a ruling which states Apple’s App Store is a monopoly, but a decision which allows users to file antitrust lawsuits against the iLeader. It’s a step towards another legal headache but is by no means a sign of guilt.

For Apple, this will come as an unwanted distraction as it attempts to scale it software and services business, in which the App Store is a key cog. The last few years have seen the Apple team attempt to create a more balanced business, with less of a reliance on the staggering hardware segment and reaping the rewards of the blossoming software world.

This decision from the Supreme Court might not assign guilt to Apple, but it certainly creates a monumental migraine. Such is the lawsuit culture in the US it won’t be long before miffed customers just on the bandwagon in pursuit of compensation.

Apple recognised as ‘Privacy Champion’ by techies

An anonymous survey of people working in the technology industry has crowned Apple as the privacy champion of FANG, while 78% believe it is a top priority at their own organization.

The survey was run by Blind, an anonymous social network for the workplace​, which has a userbase in the hundreds of thousands, many of whom work at the world’s largest technology companies. Asking whether they believed their own organization prioritised user privacy, the results might shock a few.

Employees of technology companies were given a simple statement and offered the opportunity to add an explanation. The statement was “My company believes customer data protection is a top priority”.

Sitting at the top of the table was Apple with 73.6% and 19.8% answering the statement they strongly agreed or agreed respectively. LinkedIn and Salesforce also featured highly on the list, while Google and Amazon were also above the industry average. Facebook was below the industry average while Adobe, Intuit and SAP fell way below the average with only 44.6%, 40% and 39% respectively stating they strongly agree with the statement.

Such low numbers should be a major concern, especially with lawmakers and regulators attempting to reconfigure rules to take a stronger tone with data privacy. Irrelevant whether the likes of Apple is taking privacy seriously, rules will be written for the industry as a whole; the laggards will ensure everyone has to face the sharp stick of the law.

On the FANG front, Blind users were asked whether Apple should be considered the privacy champion. 67.9% agreed with the statement, with some suggesting the business model is not based on the transfer of personal information therefore it is more secure or less of a threat. That said, Apple is fast evolving with the software and services business becoming more of a focus. It might well evolve to include some of these practises in the future.

That said, while Apple is seemingly keeping its hands clean, one person feels the company is nothing more than an enabler for the more nefarious.

“I feel Apple is no better for creating the technology that enables companies like Facebook to become no more than spying tools,” said one Intuit employee.

Although scores in the 70s could be viewed as positive, this means 20-30% of an organization’s own employees do not believe the privacy rhetoric which is being reeled off in the press by executives of the tech giants. If a company is unable to create an internal belief in privacy, it might be viewed as a worrying sign.

Facebook financial foray flops face first

Facebook has killed a feature which allowed users to pay connections through its Messenger app due to a lack of uptake.

The idea was a relatively simple one; Facebook’s Messenger app could be used to transfer funds between connections. The banks clearly thought it might be a goer, all the major institutions in the UK signed up, though a lack of consumer interest led the social media giant to pull the plug.

“The Facebook messenger functionality got all of the major UK banks on board when it was launched in 2017, but consumer uptake never took off,” said Oliver Wintle, Banking Analyst at GlobalData. “GlobalData’s 2018 Retail Banking Insight Survey found that 55% of users in France and 71% of users in the UK have never used Instant messaging to complete banking tasks.”

Why this feature failed to capture the attention of consumers is down to interpretation, GlobalData is suggesting it is simply down to breadth and depth. Considering how accessibly banking apps are nowadays, and the additional features which are available in the banking apps themselves, Facebook seemed to be addressing a problem which didn’t exist in the eyes of the consumer.

Another factor which you have to consider is the credibility of Facebook. Over the last 18 months, the social media firm has been central to a number of scandals, all of which has damaged the reputation of the brand. Asking consumers to trust Facebook in handling financial transactions, dealing with real money, might have been a step too far.

Facebook might be able to ask for user’s birthday or for data on their interests, but this is different to asking for financial information. In facilitating payments, Facebook is asking users to trust it with their hard-earned cash. To do this you have to have a lot of credibility in the bank.

While Facebook has certainly tarnished its reputation, it might also be the case no social media brand has the repute to introduce such an initiative yet. 55% of users in France and 71% of users in the UK have never used instant messaging to complete banking tasks, suggesting users do not view these platforms in this way.

Alongside the credibility issue, numerous telcos have launched features which allow customers to pay their contacts through text. Although this has the potential to fail in the same way Facebook has done, a lack of functionality compared to banking apps, customers trust telcos with their credit card details.