Google Pay Bug Accidentally Sends Users Free Money

Here's a good reason to use Google Pay: Google might send you a bunch of free money. From a report: Many users report that Google accidentally deposited cash in their accounts -- anywhere from $10 to $1,000. Android researcher Mishaal Rahman got hit with the bug and shared most of the relevant details on Twitter. The cash arrived via Google Pay's "reward" program. Just like a credit card, you're supposed to get a few bucks back occasionally for various promotions, but nothing like this. Numerous screenshots show users receiving loads of "Reward" money for what the message called "dogfooding the Google Pay Remittance experience." "Dogfooding" is tech speak for "internally beta testing pre-release software," so if a message like this was ever supposed to go out, it should have only gone out to Google employees and/or some testing partners. Many regular users received multiple copies of this message with multiple payouts.

Not so evil?

[HnT]

Not doing evil after all?

Re:

[gweihir]

People will have to pay that back...

Warning: Typical Google Service: It sounds good,..

[greytree]

... you start accessing it, then just when you're really getting benefit from it, they shut it down.

I must have, I must have put a decimal point in th

[Joe_Dragon]

I must have, I must have put a decimal point in the wrong place or something.

It was to be Fractions of a Penny

Re:

[war4peace]

In Democratic America, You Fire the Office!

Most money "bugs" TAKE my money.

[Tablizer]

...Those that GIVE me money seem far rarer. Odd "coincidence".

Bug?

[deoxyribonucleicacid]

That's a goddamn feature!

Re:

[Fuck_this_place]

Do you think they will accept "I'm too big to fail." in lieu of returning the money?

Re:

[93 Escort Wagon]

Do you think they will accept "I'm too big to fail." in lieu of returning the money?

If you're a stereotypical Slashdotter... yes.

I can only spend it on dog food?

[know-nothing cunt]

I don't even HAVE a dog.

this is a great opportunity

[jm007]

for those that get some of this money, hold on to it; then, when they come asking for it back, hit them with all the same beauracratic non-responsive crap they give everyone else....

- they have to submit their grievance in triplicate, then lose their info and have them resubmit it a few more time times
- make things fail only at the end and after everything's been input by hand
- give them a few non-descript errors as to why it failed
- lay the blame back on them using some generic crap that doesn't even apply to the situation, eg, did they reboot their computer and check all connections?
- don't respond for months, if ever
- say it violates your terms of service
- they need 13 forms of identity verification and at least one of them is impossible to provide
- you will need the executives' personal info before you can even discuss the matter
- only when you get hit with actual legal actions to you begrudingly give it back, but admit no wrongdoing

and most importantly, never, ever let them speak to a real live human being; bonus points if they have to interact with an unhelpful chat bot

call me petty, cuz it's true; you might as well add 'unrealistic' while you're at it

Re:

[SirSpanksALot]

They didn't come asking - they just took it back. I got like $20 reward on a $2 purchase - and 24 hours later they automatically took it back. I should have spent it while it was in my account.

Re: this is a great opportunity

[jddj]

It's Kindle, but for money!

Re:

[tlhIngan]

They didn't come asking - they just took it back. I got like $20 reward on a $2 purchase - and 24 hours later they automatically took it back. I should have spent it while it was in my account.

No, they would've taken it back from you anyways by charging your card or whatever you have linked.

"Bank error in your favor" is a monopoly card. It doesn't apply in real life. There's laws against "unjust enrichment", and "finder's keepers".

Basically what it boils down to is doing anything other than "the right thing

Maybe all those...

[Jerry Rivers]

...layoffs are resulting in unintended consequences.

Production Testing

[Canberra1]

Any professionally qualified software tester will tell you stuff in test environments cannot leave the building, and fully isolated. This therefore means production testing, with real user/production data and sensitive ID's. Therefore intentional. In my country - you lawfully must return windfall deposits In Europe GDPR would freak out if this occurred and probably you would get to keep something. It is quite normal for managers to 'cheat' and use unsanitised production data. Try that with Visa. They dump a