3 ms·
It's important to point out that thinking of free versus paid in financial terms alone does not reveal the true scope of the issue. As you are probably aware, y
by tombrossman 9y ago
It's important to point out that thinking of free versus paid in financial terms alone does not reveal the true scope of the issue. As you are probably aware, you are 'paying' with personal data, which can be viewed as a more durable asset than cash. When you can afford to pay for something, you can buy it and it's a done deal. When you pay with data, the other party knows something about you forever. They can sell it an unlimited number of times to an unlimited number of buyers. It is quite different from a one-time monetary purchase.
I'm not going to preach that one way is right and the other is wrong - I just want to point out that they are two quite different schemes. Also, you sound well educated and underemployed - I wish you good luck and hope you get paid closer to what you are worth soon.
- gknoy 9y agoPersonal information is not something with which I can buy my groceries or pay my pediatrician, so it's pretty understandable why people would not consider it on the same level as money or other assets.
- DoreenMichele 9y agoThere is some truth to the idea that you need a middle class income to afford middle class morality. Pretending that the poor are equally free to make the exact same choices as others ...well, that pretty well fits my definition of evil. It's simply not true and it conveniently blames people who are usually a victim of the system to some degree or another.
- c22 9y agoOn the other hand, since this data about you can be sold over and over its value is likely to decrease over time. Perhaps those who "spent" their data on a decade of free email got in on the ground floor and others will eventually be forced to trade their data for much less, or perhaps nothing at all.