8 ms·

But then you can't leverage customer data to sell to advertisers. The problem is, you are the product for most internet companies. Think of a Cow in a barn. Th

But then you can't leverage customer data to sell to advertisers. The problem is, you are the product for most internet companies. Think of a Cow in a barn. The food/water/shelter is free, because you are what's to be sold.

reitanqild 11y ago
This meme got old faster than I expected. I am the only one that is aware of symbiosis?
- Super_Jambo 11y ago
  Well it doesn't seem inaccurate to suggest that livestock has a symbiotic relationship with humans. Yes we do slaughter them for food but think of the benefits during the cows life!
  - reitanqild 11y ago
    I give you points for that. Still arguing that life in Googles and lately Microsofts barn is quite comfortable and a whole lot a safer than outside because those companies has a huge interest on securing their users
    - EGreg 11y ago
      Security is one of the hardest things to decentralize. Would you rather trust Google or a rinkydink website with your data? They may not have even installed the latest patches of their open source software! Bitcoin decentralized money. Until now, social has not been decentralized effectively. Security is even harder, perhaps! Because it requires authentication but also a clear definition of guarantees, including availability! Perhaps your data could be stored on your computer and other replicas can be stored encrypted in the network, like freenet, but encrypted only by you. And your key would be a hash of your passphrase like "all horses are fine". If that guy's bitcoin key had been a result of a hashed passphrase, he wouldn't have lost $3 million in the garbage!
- valarauca1 11y ago
  >symbiosis It exists in 3 forms. 1) Both benefit (I.E.: mutualistic) 2) Only 1 benefits while the other has no clue of its usage (I.E.: commensalism). Vultures and Lions more or less, or hermit crabs and shell fish which are dead. 3) One actively benefits while the other is consumed by the active particpant (I.E.: Paracitism). :.:.: Your argument is that webscale logging is mutualistic. To an extent I'll agree. But this isn't the case. Google is mutualistic when using say GWallet, Docs, Mail, search etc. But Like/Plus buttons, as well as cookie sniffing isn't mutualistic. Its commensalism. I have no say if another organism uses what I leave behind, it doesn't directly effect me, but it benefits another organism.
Karunamon 11y ago
If by "you", you mean aggregated data about you in lieu of cash payment. Google/Facebook/etc are not selling your data, they are not selling you, they are selling access to you via advertisers, more specifically, they are selling access to people who like certain things and who live in certain areas who have certain demographic profiles. If you're curious about this, go sign up for an Adwords account and see how the targeting works - what you see there is the limit of what any advertiser using Google sees about its users. Facebook is much the same. Get it right. Any ad-backed company of note does not "sell your data" and characterizing it as such is so divorced from reality as to be a blatant, willful lie.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    Any inferring is being done by the ad company, not the advertiser. And framing this as discrimination (a loaded term nowadays) is just more hyperbole, IMO. People of different races, orientations, religions etc are very likely to view different things as relevant, and at the end of the day, relevance is what any advertising company's mission in life is. Best of all, it's all supposed to be data driven, so those nasty human biases don't even creep in. If demographic X clicks on a thing more than demographic Y, at the end of the day, that is what matters, and we can sidestep any discussions of bias, regardless if the demographic under consideration is young/old, black/white, atheist/religious, rich/poor, male/female.
- notahacker 11y ago
  Not only would "selling your data" as opposed to access to you or a per click basis be a less profitable business model, it'd also be strictly illegal in many jurisdictions without explicit opt-in permission.
  - belorn 11y ago
    In those countries that it is illegal to sell personal data, what kind of abuse are they intending to prevent? Any abuse which is possible by having direct access to private data is also possible to do by going through a intermediate which does the data mining for you.

reitanqild 11y ago

This meme got old faster than I expected. I am the only one that is aware of symbiosis?

Super_Jambo 11y ago
Well it doesn't seem inaccurate to suggest that livestock has a symbiotic relationship with humans. Yes we do slaughter them for food but think of the benefits during the cows life!
- reitanqild 11y ago
  I give you points for that. Still arguing that life in Googles and lately Microsofts barn is quite comfortable and a whole lot a safer than outside because those companies has a huge interest on securing their users
  - EGreg 11y ago
    Security is one of the hardest things to decentralize. Would you rather trust Google or a rinkydink website with your data? They may not have even installed the latest patches of their open source software! Bitcoin decentralized money. Until now, social has not been decentralized effectively. Security is even harder, perhaps! Because it requires authentication but also a clear definition of guarantees, including availability! Perhaps your data could be stored on your computer and other replicas can be stored encrypted in the network, like freenet, but encrypted only by you. And your key would be a hash of your passphrase like "all horses are fine". If that guy's bitcoin key had been a result of a hashed passphrase, he wouldn't have lost $3 million in the garbage!
valarauca1 11y ago
>symbiosis It exists in 3 forms. 1) Both benefit (I.E.: mutualistic) 2) Only 1 benefits while the other has no clue of its usage (I.E.: commensalism). Vultures and Lions more or less, or hermit crabs and shell fish which are dead. 3) One actively benefits while the other is consumed by the active particpant (I.E.: Paracitism). :.:.: Your argument is that webscale logging is mutualistic. To an extent I'll agree. But this isn't the case. Google is mutualistic when using say GWallet, Docs, Mail, search etc. But Like/Plus buttons, as well as cookie sniffing isn't mutualistic. Its commensalism. I have no say if another organism uses what I leave behind, it doesn't directly effect me, but it benefits another organism.

Karunamon 11y ago

If by "you", you mean aggregated data about you in lieu of cash payment. Google/Facebook/etc are not selling your data, they are not selling you, they are selling access to you via advertisers, more specifically, they are selling access to people who like certain things and who live in certain areas who have certain demographic profiles. If you're curious about this, go sign up for an Adwords account and see how the targeting works - what you see there is the limit of what any advertiser using Google sees about its users. Facebook is much the same. Get it right. Any ad-backed company of note does not "sell your data" and characterizing it as such is so divorced from reality as to be a blatant, willful lie.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- Karunamon 11y ago
  Any inferring is being done by the ad company, not the advertiser. And framing this as discrimination (a loaded term nowadays) is just more hyperbole, IMO. People of different races, orientations, religions etc are very likely to view different things as relevant, and at the end of the day, relevance is what any advertising company's mission in life is. Best of all, it's all supposed to be data driven, so those nasty human biases don't even creep in. If demographic X clicks on a thing more than demographic Y, at the end of the day, that is what matters, and we can sidestep any discussions of bias, regardless if the demographic under consideration is young/old, black/white, atheist/religious, rich/poor, male/female.
notahacker 11y ago
Not only would "selling your data" as opposed to access to you or a per click basis be a less profitable business model, it'd also be strictly illegal in many jurisdictions without explicit opt-in permission.
- belorn 11y ago
  In those countries that it is illegal to sell personal data, what kind of abuse are they intending to prevent? Any abuse which is possible by having direct access to private data is also possible to do by going through a intermediate which does the data mining for you.