Could Your Facebook Friends Actually Affect Your Credit?

Traditionally, your credit score is determined by things like steady employment, paying bills on time,

Factors contributing to someone's credit score...

outstanding loans and number of inquiries into your credit history. But one lending firm is addingFacebook friends to the list.

How can your Facebook friends affect you’re ability to get a loan? Lenddo, a microlending firm based in Hong Kong, believes that the likelihood of your friends to pay back loans or not could be indicative of your habits as well.

The New York Observer’s Beta Beat has more on what the company says is “the world’s first credit scoring service that uses your online social network to assess credit”:

The company’s algorithm is proprietary and secret, said CEO Jeff Stewart, but the primary metric is what Lenddo knows about the people you’re friends with. “We think that in the age of the internet you should be able to establish your reputation and your identity through your social graph, through your on- and offline community, and use that to get access to financial products and information,” he said.

If Lenddo sees one of your best Facebook buddies took out a loan and paid it back, there’s a good chance you will too. “Our backgrounds are in machine learning and pattern recognition,” Mr. Stewart said. “It’s some serious math.

Beta Beat tested out getting a loan and was asked for its Facebook account, as well as Gmail, Twitter,Yahoo and Windows Live. It was then given a credit score. To apply for an actual loan, it would need to have at least three friends with connections to Lenddo and a decent credit history themselves.

What’s more, Beta Beat reports that if you default on your loan, the company reserves the right to broadcast this information to your friends. After all, they could be affected by your credit score as well:

“I think Mark Zuckerberg said it best,” Mr. Stewart said. “Every industry will be in fact impacted by social.”

Banks have been curious about using social media to gauge risk for at least a year, said Matt Thomson, VP of platform at Klout, which calculates “influence” based on a user’s social media activity. Determining creditworthiness is not a core product of Klout’s, he said, but banks have approached the startup to ask about it. He wouldn’t name names. “It’s really like the who’s who of banking,” he said.

While some may consider this an extreme invasion of privacy, others like media theorist Douglas Rushkoff, Beta Beat reports, don’t consider such a thing as private anymore:

 “We’re already in the nightmare scenario,” he wrote in an email. “They already know everything about you—more than most of us realize. If anything, the addition of social networking information to this data mining will help us come to some understanding of how much more these companies know about us than we know about ourselves.”

As of right now, loans are only offered in the Philippines, but Beta Beat reports that the company recently hired an ex-Google employee to begin on in America.

Facebook timeline

dimitri seneca snowden Facebook

 

Facebook has decided Timeline is ready for the non-New Zealand population, and flipped the global switch: starting today,

those still sans-Timeline “will receive a notification on their Profile if they want to ‘Get Timeline’ or they can visit www.facebook.com/about/timeline.” Giddyup.

So check under your trees, everyone! Do you have it? Do you have it? With our economy, this might be the coolest thing you get this Holiday Season! We thought it was a stellar redesignwhen we reviewed it months ago and it still is—but today will mark a great global wave of complaining. Get ready for a lot of whiny status updates. OMG HATIN’ THE NEW FACEBOK, WTF IS THIS???

In The Social Network, Movie Mark Zuckerberg describes his project as the entire college social scene, put online. In a sense, he completely pulled it off. Now Real Zuck’s lept beyond beer pong: your entire existence, Facebook-ified. It’s terrifyingly amazing.

Why It Matters

This is the single greatest change that Facebook’s ever pushed on us—and soon it’ll be pushed to 750 million human beings around the planet. Facebook wants Timeline, which is going to completely replace the iconic Facebook Profile, to represent your entire life. It’ll be a visual history of your existence, starting at your birth. Yes, the fact that you came out of your mother (and when! and where!) is now noted on Facebook’s servers. Love, loss, friends, frenemies, birthdays, breakups, cats, kegstands—all of it, from zeroday to today, shared with everyone you know online. This is simply the single most ambitious attempt to catalog the tangled mass of human lives in the history of the internet.

Using It

Facebook Timeline is beautiful, and that’s something I don’t think I’ve ever said about Facebook. Most of the site’s updates have been haphazard, glued together like the work of an engineering masquerading as a graphic designer with severe personality disorder. The legacy of psychotically unfriendly, entirely irrational new features ends here. Timeline not only looks wonderful, but it’s wonderful to use. The chronological stream of the Old Wall remains, but is supplemented by everything you’ve ever done or participated in on Facebook: status updates, wall posts, photo tags. Everything is there, enlarged, and unmissable. The further you scroll down, the further into your past you go. Months and years speed by—your first roommate, college graduation, your 21st birthday—and then, the day you were born. If anything’s missing, you can manually add “life events” to the list (marriages, awards, graduations), making it as rich, accurate—and creepy—as you’d like. The more work you put in, the more amazingly furnished with yourself Timeline becomes.

Like

Facebook Timeline is capable of triggering poignant emotional responses. Not just, Ugh, I can’t stand that guy, which is the usual. But watching my life literally scroll before my eyes is something I’d never seen before. Facebook’s always been the nostalgic’s deepest hole, but now it doesn’t feel like you’re digging for scraps of sentiment—Facebook’s organized it for you, and presented it gorgeously. If the old Facebook was a shoebox of polaroids and cheap souvenirs strung together with ratty blue and white yarn, Timeline is a leather-bound, high resolution photo album for your mantle.

 It’s easy to move around the Facebook-transposed version of your life. Easy to share what you want, revisit the things you loved, even the things that kind of sucked, and think about how glad you are to not be a college freshman anymore. And it’s a complete pleasure to stare at. The revamped “cover image” atop your profile is a beautiful eCountenance, with all the rest of your biography summarized neatly below. Facebook no longer feels like a list of musty JPEGs and text blurbs—it feels like a monument to yourself, and to how incredibly far you’ve come.

For a company in the business of celebrating the ego, this is the apotheosis of the self. Put on your laurels, and gaze at a million versions of the kid you used to be.

No Like

There are strange lapses in the Timeline Museum of the Self. It’s still in pre-release, so it’s possible to chalk all of this up to bugs.

But why are giant chunks of tagged photos vacant in certain months of my life? I know they’re there—I can view them in the standard photo browser. Why are certain areas dominated by my freshman year girlfriend? I know I was talking to other people. Right? This strikes me as the symptoms of a screwy algorithm, but until then, it detracts from the time tour.

There’s also a certain element of lost control in Timeline. The old Facebook was simple to the point of sterility. It was segmented. It was spartan. Here are your photos. If it was an orderly orchard before, now it’s a fruit salad. Timeline’s a mix of everything—everything. That’s ultimately its virtue, but for those who liked the order the old design, anxiety levels might peak. Timeline is a little messy—but hey, so’s life.

Should I Use This?

Unless you want to bail on Facebook, you don’t have a choice. In the coming weeks, it’ll be pushed across the entire network uniformly. The question is, do you want to stay onboard, given the direction Facebook’s moving? Timeline is great, but imperfect. It’ll get better. Still, the fundamental question remains: Do you want to funnel in the parts of your life it hasn’t appropriated already? Do you want it to transcribe all the songs you’ll listen to, the restaurants you’ll hate, the “illnesses you’ll overcome” (an actual, bizarre event choice)? If the notion of the digitized self pleases you, Facebook is your best new altar.

If you find it depressing, demeaning, and superficial, then frankly, you should turn it off now. Zuckerberg wants Facebook to devour and digest the world, using your life events as its nutrients, the existential feces left behind fertilizing a high resolution, pristine Timeline. His appetite’s only going to grow—the question is if you’ll enjoy dining with him.

The answer ought to be yes. Timeline is an enormous leap for social networking per se, and an invaluably illuminating testament to what humans are making themselves every day. It’s exciting, comforting, and friendly. Timeline is you.

fake gadget gifts

If your gift list this year includes gadget-obsessed early adopters who love snatching up the latest electronics, you’re in luck.

Why not give them an iArm — an adjustable forearm mount that will let them fiddle with their smartphone, laptop and tablet computer all at the same time?

Or for the e-geek on the go, consider the iDrive. Because, let’s be honest, we all need a steering-wheel mount to help play with our tablets and e-readers while we’re driving. (What could go wrong?)

Sound ridiculous? Well, sure. But these gag products may at least let you fool your family and friends for a few seconds.

Graphic designer Arik Nordby said he got the idea forPrank Pack when his nephew received a video-game console cruelly hidden inside a coffee-maker box.

“Being a good kid, he pretended to be excited for a little bit. There was this awkward moment,” Nordby said. “It kind of stuck in my head — why don’t we do this for adults?”

And thus was Prank Pack born. Nordby teamed up with some staffers at humor site The Onion, a handful of whom now work with him at 30 Watt, his graphics company based in Minneappolis.

The idea is to hide a real gift inside the real-looking, if remarkably silly, packaging for the fake gifts.

Some of the tech-inspired bogus products bear a resemblance to those from a certain gadget-making powerhouse (note the lowercase “i” if you’re confused). Nordby concedes that’s no accident.

“I am a sucker for anything with an ‘i’ in front of it,” he said. “After using Apple products for over 20 years, it’s safe to say they own a large section of my brain.”

In addition to the aforementioned “i” items, other Prank Packs include ToeTunes, or bedroom slippers with built-in speakers, and PetPetter, an electronic armlike contraption that will, yes, pet your dog or cat for you. The tag line on the box reads, “Never touch your pets again!”

For more options, The Onion offers its own “Decoy Gift Boxes.”Among them is the iFeast, a combination feeding bowl/iPod dock so your pet can rock out while chowing down.

At $8 each or three for $20, Nordby said he’s seen sales roughly double every year for seven years. The packs are sold at Bed Bath & Beyond and numerous online retailers, including Think Geek.

He’s no economist, but Nordby said his growing success has to say something about the retail climate this holiday season.

“We like to say it’s a good economic indicator when people are willing to pay for empty boxes,” he said.

Robot workers take over warehouses

Image representing Kiva Systems as depicted in...

Image via CrunchBase

Long after Webvan.com’s legendary flameout in 2001, the online grocer’s biggest problem never left Mick Mountz’s mind.

As employee No. 400 at the dot-com, he knew that it simply cost too much to fulfill online orders. Labor was the killer cost: Employees had to go pick out products on shelves before they could be packed into boxes, and those minutes cost money. “That 89 cent can of soup was costing us $1 to get it into the tote,” Mountz remembers.

While working at his next job at a consumer electronics company, the “eureka moment” suddenly hit: What if products could walk and talk on their own? You could design a completely different kind of warehouse. And you could staff it with robots.

Mountz left that job in 2002 to start

Kiva Systems, the Boston company that would bring that vision to life. Today, nearly a decade later, thousands of Kiva’s bots run around filling orders for the Internet’s a-list retailers, including Staples, The Gap, Amazon (AMZNFortune 500) and CrateandBarrel.com.

But Mountz’s Jetsons-style vision wasn’t an easy sell. For the first two years, Silicon Valley investors told him that robots running warehouse floors couldn’t be done. A hardware company building robots needed at least $100 million invested just to break even, they said. “I heard ‘No’ 50 to 100 times in 2002,” Mountz says.

Mountz didn’t buy it — so he began networking. His former Harvard Business School classmates introduced him to executives they knew at The Gap, Dell, Motorola and JCrew. Living off his savings, Mountz visited those operations, slept on friend’s couches and spent hours following executives around warehouses, asking questions until they politely asked him to leave.

He convinced old fraternity buddies from Massachusetts Institute of Technology to help him build a prototype robot. A group of angel investors put $1.6 million behind Kiva Systems, and in 2004, another friend introduced Mountz to Ajay Agarwal, who is a managing director at Bain Capital Ventures in Boston.

Agarwal remembers that first meeting with Mountz inside Kiva Systems’ tiny office in Burlington, Mass., where he watched a demonstration of five robots maneuvering a stack of shelves around a room. Where other investors saw a bunch of expensive robots, Agarwal saw a disruptive technology that could transform the $100 billion e-commerce market.

“This idea was so simple yet so brilliant,” says Agarwal. “The market was ripe. E-commerce is not going to go away.”

Bain Capital Ventures wound up investing $5 million immediately in Kiva and then an additional $15 million more over the next three years. But before striking a deal, Agarwal introduced Mountz to people he knew at Staples and Walgreens. Then he watched the inventor present his plan.

Kiva Systems wasn’t the only option for those online retailers. Competitors tout conveyor belt systems, cart systems and even voice-directed technology to help packers pick products. Mountz promised potential customers that his robots would allow them to do two to three times as many orders per hour than traditional warehouse operations.

“Mick was impressive,” says Don Ralph, a senior vice president at Staples (SPLSFortune 500) who listened to one of those early presentations. “Kiva is not the end-all-be-all, but I thought they had an innovative idea.”

Still, convincing online retailers to bet their most vital business operations on a bunch of robots was not a slam dunk. “Fulfillment is the core of these operations, so when we were pitching them, they were hearing ‘heart lung transplant,'” Mountz says.

A “startup kit” of robots would cost $1 million to $2 million, and a large warehouse operation with 1,000 robots costs $15 million to $20 million. Setting up the software and grid systems inside the warehouse requires six months of planning, simulated modeling and testing. Then logistics managers must be trained before handing them the keys to the operation.

The first few customers — including Staples– moved cautiously, setting aside a space the size of a basketball court for Kiva robots. Eventually, they moved to full-scale operations with hundreds of robots. “Like any technology, there were bugs, but we never had a crisis,” says Ralph of Staples, which has 1,000 robots working at two of its warehouses.

Today, Kiva Systems is profitable. Backed by $33 million from investors, the Boston company has 240 employees, a list of prominent customers and revenue of more than $100 million, according to Mountz. He says sales grew 130% last year, and that Kiva is hiring 20 to 30 people each quarter to keep up with demand.

Of course, the infiltration of robots translates to fewer new warehouse jobs. But it’s not all bad news for workers, Mountz says: Kiva’s system lets retailers double or even triple productivity, freeing up resources for other investments.

The robots also make for a more pleasant work environment, says John Ling, logistics vice president at Crate and Barrel. The 50 people who now pack 2,000 boxes a day alongside 50 robots at Crate and Barrel’s Tracy, Calif., warehouse spend their days in a better lit, cleaner operation with no noisy conveyor belts, he says. The robots eliminate much of the mundane physical labor employees once did to retrieve products off shelves.

Customers are also benefiting: Packages can now be shipped the next day from that operation, an upgrade from a system that previously took two to three days to get an order out the door.

The robots are a natural progression, Ling says. “Most of this stuff is driven by computers anyway.”

How Obama’s data-crunching prowess may get him re-elected

Official presidential portrait of Barack Obama...

Image via Wikipedia

Alone among the major candidates running for president, the Obama campaign not only has a Facebook page with 23 million “likes” (roughly 10 times the total of all the Republicans running), it has a Facebook app that is scooping up all kinds of juicy facts about his supporters.

Users of the Obama 2012 – Are You In? app are not only giving the campaign personal data like their name, gender, birthday, current city, religion and political views, they are sharing their list of friends and information those friends share, like their birthday, current city, religion and political views. As Facebook is now offering the geo-targeting of ads down to ZIP code, this kind of fine-grained information is invaluable.

Inside the Obama operation, his staff members are using a powerful social networking tool called NationalField, which enables everyone to share what they are working on. Modeled on Facebook, the tool connects all levels of staff to the information they are gathering as they work on tasks like signing up volunteers, knocking on doors, identifying likely voters and dealing with problems. Managers can set goals for field organizers — number of calls made, number of doors knocked — and see, in real time, how people are doing against all kinds of metrics.

In additional to all the hard data, users can share qualitative information: what points or themes worked for them in a one-on-one conversation with voters, for example. “Ups,” “Downs” and “Solutions” are color-coded, so people can see where successes are happening or challenges brewing.

And unlike an open social network, where everyone is equal, NationalField runs on a hierarchical social graph: Higher-level staff get a broader view of the state and local work below them.

For a campaign that tapped the volunteer energies of millions of people in 2008 and appears to need all the help it can get in 2012, these kinds of fine-grained technologies could make a key difference. While the Republican field (and bloggers and the press) has been focused on how their candidates are doing with social networking, Obama’s campaign operatives are devising a new kind of social intelligence that will help drive campaign resources where they are most needed.

‘Data harmonization’

It all sounds like common sense, but actually, connecting and synchronizing the data a campaign collects from its field operation, fundraising operation and Web operation isn’t a trivial task.

“The holy grail of data analysis is data harmonization, or master data management,” Lundry said. “To have political talking to finance and finance talking to field, and data is flowing back and forth and informing the actions of each other — it sounds easy, but it’s incredibly hard to implement.”

Most political campaigns tend to rely on consultants to carry out part or all of these functions, resulting in even greater obstacles to sharing information.

Like Lundry, Republican technology consultant Martin Avila is worried. His firm, Terra Eclipse, built Ron Paul‘s 2008 Web operation and works closely with the tea party movement. This year, it did some work on Tim Pawlenty‘s website until that campaign folded.

Avila’s flagship project is a conservative social-networking hub called Freedom Connector, which has grown to 150,000 members in a matter of months by giving right-wing activists tools to organize local meetings and discussions. Avila doesn’t think any of the Republican presidential campaigns fully understand the power of data today.

“They have to stop seeing a website as a piece of direct mail that people will receive,” he said. “They have to see a website as the equivalent of a campaign office in Iowa, one that is open 24/7.” And campaigns need to know how to take quick and well-targeted action to respond to every expression of interest they may get online, he argues, because voter interest in politicians is fickle. Simply sending a generic e-mail reply isn’t enough.

“If you can make that initial response a phone call from someone in their town or a neighbor, asking them to come to a county fair tomorrow, that’s much more powerful.”

Power of personal connections

Without good data management, the different legs of a national campaign can trip over each other.

“One hand doesn’t know what the other hand is doing quite often in campaigns,” Lundry said. “With master data management across a campaign, you can see how often you’re talking to a person” and thus not bombard them with untimely or poorly targeted requests.

But, according to Avila, “Not many on the Republican side know how to technically accomplish that.” Their approach to the Web, he adds, is still too much shaped by pre-Internet politicking using broadcast advertising. “The ability to connect to people on a one-to-one basis, and encourage them to connect with one another, is way more powerful than that.”

How powerful? The 2008 Obama campaign offered an early glimpse of the potential of data-driven politics. By the end of the election, it had amassed 13 million supporter e-mail addresses, collected nearly 4 million individual donations and tallied about 2 million registered users on my.BarackObama.com, the campaign’s social networking platform. Seventy thousand myBO members had used the site to conduct their own personalized fundraising campaigns.

Since 2008, enthusiasm for Obama has waned, but his online presence hasn’t. His base on Facebook has soared nearly six times from the 4 million he had on Election Day, and his following on Twitter now stands at 10 million, dwarfing the Republican field.

So even if Obama isn’t drawing millions of people off their sofas to rally to his side on their own in 2012, his team has a huge amount of raw data to work with as they build his re-election machine.

If the 2012 election comes down to a battle of inches, where a few percentage points change in turnout in a few key states making all the difference, we may come to see Obama’s investment in predictive modelers and data scientists as the key to victory.

Alone among the major candidates running for president, the Obama campaign not only has a Facebook page with 23 million “likes” (roughly 10 times the total of all the Republicans running), it has a Facebook app that is scooping up all kinds of juicy facts about his supporters.

Users of the Obama 2012 – Are You In? app are not only giving the campaign personal data like their name, gender, birthday, current city, religion and political views, they are sharing their list of friends and information those friends share, like their birthday, current city, religion and political views. As Facebook is now offering the geo-targeting of ads down to ZIP code, this kind of fine-grained information is invaluable.

Inside the Obama operation, his staff members are using a powerful social networking tool called NationalField, which enables everyone to share what they are working on. Modeled on Facebook, the tool connects all levels of staff to the information they are gathering as they work on tasks like signing up volunteers, knocking on doors, identifying likely voters and dealing with problems. Managers can set goals for field organizers — number of calls made, number of doors knocked — and see, in real time, how people are doing against all kinds of metrics.

In additional to all the hard data, users can share qualitative information: what points or themes worked for them in a one-on-one conversation with voters, for example. “Ups,” “Downs” and “Solutions” are color-coded, so people can see where successes are happening or challenges brewing.

And unlike an open social network, where everyone is equal, NationalField runs on a hierarchical social graph: Higher-level staff get a broader view of the state and local work below them.

For a campaign that tapped the volunteer energies of millions of people in 2008 and appears to need all the help it can get in 2012, these kinds of fine-grained technologies could make a key difference. While the Republican field (and bloggers and the press) has been focused on how their candidates are doing with social networking, Obama’s campaign operatives are devising a new kind of social intelligence that will help drive campaign resources where they are most needed.

‘Data harmonization’

It all sounds like common sense, but actually, connecting and synchronizing the data a campaign collects from its field operation, fundraising operation and Web operation isn’t a trivial task.

“The holy grail of data analysis is data harmonization, or master data management,” Lundry said. “To have political talking to finance and finance talking to field, and data is flowing back and forth and informing the actions of each other — it sounds easy, but it’s incredibly hard to implement.”

Most political campaigns tend to rely on consultants to carry out part or all of these functions, resulting in even greater obstacles to sharing information.

Like Lundry, Republican technology consultant Martin Avila is worried. His firm, Terra Eclipse, built Ron Paul’s 2008 Web operation and works closely with the tea party movement. This year, it did some work on Tim Pawlenty’s website until that campaign folded.

Avila’s flagship project is a conservative social-networking hub called Freedom Connector, which has grown to 150,000 members in a matter of months by giving right-wing activists tools to organize local meetings and discussions. Avila doesn’t think any of the Republican presidential campaigns fully understand the power of data today.

“They have to stop seeing a website as a piece of direct mail that people will receive,” he said. “They have to see a website as the equivalent of a campaign office in Iowa, one that is open 24/7.” And campaigns need to know how to take quick and well-targeted action to respond to every expression of interest they may get online, he argues, because voter interest in politicians is fickle. Simply sending a generic e-mail reply isn’t enough.

“If you can make that initial response a phone call from someone in their town or a neighbor, asking them to come to a county fair tomorrow, that’s much more powerful.”

Power of personal connections

Without good data management, the different legs of a national campaign can trip over each other.

“One hand doesn’t know what the other hand is doing quite often in campaigns,” Lundry said. “With master data management across a campaign, you can see how often you’re talking to a person” and thus not bombard them with untimely or poorly targeted requests.

But, according to Avila, “Not many on the Republican side know how to technically accomplish that.” Their approach to the Web, he adds, is still too much shaped by pre-Internet politicking using broadcast advertising. “The ability to connect to people on a one-to-one basis, and encourage them to connect with one another, is way more powerful than that.”

How powerful? The 2008 Obama campaign offered an early glimpse of the potential of data-driven politics. By the end of the election, it had amassed 13 million supporter e-mail addresses, collected nearly 4 million individual donations and tallied about 2 million registered users on my.BarackObama.com, the campaign’s social networking platform. Seventy thousand myBO members had used the site to conduct their own personalized fundraising campaigns.

Since 2008, enthusiasm for Obama has waned, but his online presence hasn’t. His base on Facebook has soared nearly six times from the 4 million he had on Election Day, and his following on Twitter now stands at 10 million, dwarfing the Republican field.

So even if Obama isn’t drawing millions of people off their sofas to rally to his side on their own in 2012, his team has a huge amount of raw data to work with as they build his re-election machine.

If the 2012 election comes down to a battle of inches, where a few percentage points change in turnout in a few key states making all the difference, we may come to see Obama’s investment in predictive modelers and data scientists as the key to victory.