"Money is Time" (and I insist on it!)

Hi, everybody

I'm still developing my part of a Mission. Here's a wonderful article I've just found though G.

"WARWICK, England (CNN) -- A mathematical formula calculated by a British university professor has found that time actually is money. According to the equation, the average British minute is worth just over 10 pence (15 cents) to men and eight pence (12 cents) to women.
The formula is: V=(W((100-t)/100))/C, where V is the value of an hour, W is a person's hourly wage, t is the tax rate and C is the local cost of living.
It shows that there is no such thing as a free lunch or even a free dinner, while brushing your teeth for three minutes uses up 30 pence (45 cents) in "lost" time, and washing a car by hand has a hidden cost of Ј3 ($4.50).
Economics professor Ian Walker, of central England's Warwick University, says process can show people just how valuable their time is in relation to any task they have to perform, from a lie-in or cooking a meal to sleeping and working.
He says it also allows people to work out whether they are getting a fair rate for overtime, as well as helping them to decide whether it is worth spending extra cash to save time.

RESOURCES
•
How much is your time worth? (Link to Barclaycard site) ..."

"...Walker said: "This research is the first of its kind to take into account the overall picture of how highly our time is being valued.
"Traditionally, wages or salaries have given an indication of how we are valued at work, however, by looking at salaries against taxation, the cost of living and regional variations, we can see how much an hour of our time is worth whether at work or home.
"What this helps us understand is that as the value of our time rises, we are likely to buy more of it, which explains why people are paying to save time, like having someone to cut the lawn or clean the house."

Hence, I propose "Money is Time" as a mission for our payments service.

Notice how he calculates the 'fair value' through the 'cost of living' (kinda Marxist, isn't it?). We can evaluate sallaries this way too. One always has a 'cost of living' in VW or MMO, spread over time it's the amount of compensation she or he expects. And we've talked about it several time. This is just a good way to explain the concept. :)

Response to 'Mission'

Hey, Share!

You did it! It's just great what you've just said and it's probably the most insightful take on V environments I've ever read.

Let's go back to our business though. :)

Also, I would be glad to contribute to the 'business part' of your work, call me today if it is possible.

Identification for financial business-processes.

Dear Stake Holder,

This is just a short response to your post about authentication and my take on how it applies to what I'm working on these days.

Yes, indeed all users are authenticated when they touch our objects, when they use or wear our objects. What does it mean for our business? Not so much as you can see if you consider how low is the barrier of entrance into VW's struggling (and competing) for numbers/quantity of customers. We all understand that they are responsible to their investors and want to show 'growth', but...

So, the information users are providing is unreliable, is not verified and will not be such (IMHO) in the forseable future.

However! There is one important aspect and I think I had mentioned it before, during one of our meetings. If a person is participating in VW or MMO game environment he has 'assets' there and that's what makes him or her to act in a way not putting them at risk. In other words, do we need that personal information AT ALL after all? Maybe we don't. We only need our customers to 'behave' when they are using our commerce and payments solutions. That's all we need. In this respect your observation about authentication is very important, but I need to remind that what is good and 'unintrusive' for building social applications poses a certain problem to commercial or financial types of relationsips, because they are durable. We need to 'stay in touch' with the customer at all times, because he had entered his offerings or 'wishes' into our marketplace system or because he owes us money. Also, what if a complaint against a marketplace participant will be filed a bit later? And he has 'UN-subscribed' already? I don't see a way to resolve it then.

My point is: what is good for social applications is not necessarily good for ongoing financial or commercial DURABLE relationship with a customer. So, please use this idea (and I understand how great it is) within the social layer of the service not in my 'garden'. :) PLEASE! :)