4 ms·

This is the tradeoff for getting free stuff on the internet. But surely there has to be a balance between watching adverts to pay for free services, and handing

by amanzi 9y ago

This is the tradeoff for getting free stuff on the internet. But surely there has to be a balance between watching adverts to pay for free services, and handing over all privacy in return.

toomanybeersies 9y ago
The bigger irk for me is when you pay a company for a product, and then they still sell your data anyway.
- ShorsHammer 9y ago
  Exactly, the "you paid nothing so you're the product" trope is patently false. Spend $1000's a year on sites that are still highly invasive. Using blockers and disabling js often breaks them. Does this business really need to send my data off to a dozen 3rd parties to upsell me on a drillbit set?
  - feelin_googley 9y ago
    Perspicuous! Why do it? Because they can? Without Javascript it would not be as easy. With the help of the "modern browser" and its defaults, its like shooting fish in a barrel. The original HTTP/1.1 RFC has some reasonably low limits on simultaneous connections; todays ad-sponsored browsers ignore them. Turn off Javascript and the web marketing Rube Goldberg machines begin to fail. Most web pages try to coax users into turning on Javascript, or even installing a different browser. At this point, a web developer will jump in and try to convince us the web cannot work without Javascript. This is false. There was e-commerce on the web before Java1 or Javascript. 1. Java began life as a language intended to be embedded in devices. It was repurposed to be a scripting language for the web. That was a failure. Javascript is a "success" but in the ways that it is abused, it can be every bit as annoying as a 1990s Java applet.
  - beagle3 9y ago
    It’s not false. If you didn’t pay, you are the product. If you did pay, you may or may not be the product. But that’s not covered by the trope.
- 2sk21 9y ago
  If I subscribe to a website with real money, I feel free to block all trackers via Ghostery.
crx087 9y ago
> This is the tradeoff for getting free stuff on the internet. Why? I’ve been a webdev for 20-something years, and it sure didn’t used to be the tradeoff.
- r00fus 9y ago
  Remember GWB's "ownership society"? That's what you get in an ownership society - massive rent-seeking. When you have systemic rent-seeking, any sort of gift-economy is priced out.
RobertDeNiro 9y ago
I'm pretty sure companies that offer paying services also spy. Basically everyone does.
horsecaptin 9y ago
And this is what makes me wary of apps like Signal as well. Who pays for the servers and why are they free?
- witten 9y ago
  Signal Foundation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation Paid for by Brian Acton's conscience.
- quadrangle 9y ago
  You could just look up the answers. https://signal.org/blog/signal-foundation/ https://signal.org/blog/signal-foundation/ describes an aligned philanthropist helping start the 501(c)(3) foundation that supports Signal. Another resource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software) happens to come from a completely-free-of-3rd-party-ads-yet-free platform… It's good to be wary, but the idea that nothing is ever free is actually wrong and helps make people think they have to give up something or pay etc. even when they don't need to. We need to get beyond "How can it be free‽ There must be some catch!" and to the reality of just "Is this really free without a catch?" Because we should be wary but not give into the idea that free is actually too good to be true. Things can actually be free, and people can actually be pro-social in their motivations.
quadrangle 9y ago
Except when it isn't. This is not the trade-off for the vast value of Wikipedia or Archive.org.

by amanzi 9y ago

This is the tradeoff for getting free stuff on the internet. But surely there has to be a balance between watching adverts to pay for free services, and handing over all privacy in return.

toomanybeersies 9y ago

The bigger irk for me is when you pay a company for a product, and then they still sell your data anyway.

ShorsHammer 9y ago
Exactly, the "you paid nothing so you're the product" trope is patently false. Spend $1000's a year on sites that are still highly invasive. Using blockers and disabling js often breaks them. Does this business really need to send my data off to a dozen 3rd parties to upsell me on a drillbit set?
- feelin_googley 9y ago
  Perspicuous! Why do it? Because they can? Without Javascript it would not be as easy. With the help of the "modern browser" and its defaults, its like shooting fish in a barrel. The original HTTP/1.1 RFC has some reasonably low limits on simultaneous connections; todays ad-sponsored browsers ignore them. Turn off Javascript and the web marketing Rube Goldberg machines begin to fail. Most web pages try to coax users into turning on Javascript, or even installing a different browser. At this point, a web developer will jump in and try to convince us the web cannot work without Javascript. This is false. There was e-commerce on the web before Java1 or Javascript. 1. Java began life as a language intended to be embedded in devices. It was repurposed to be a scripting language for the web. That was a failure. Javascript is a "success" but in the ways that it is abused, it can be every bit as annoying as a 1990s Java applet.
- beagle3 9y ago
  It’s not false. If you didn’t pay, you are the product. If you did pay, you may or may not be the product. But that’s not covered by the trope.
2sk21 9y ago
If I subscribe to a website with real money, I feel free to block all trackers via Ghostery.

crx087 9y ago

> This is the tradeoff for getting free stuff on the internet. Why? I’ve been a webdev for 20-something years, and it sure didn’t used to be the tradeoff.

r00fus 9y ago
Remember GWB's "ownership society"? That's what you get in an ownership society - massive rent-seeking. When you have systemic rent-seeking, any sort of gift-economy is priced out.

RobertDeNiro 9y ago

I'm pretty sure companies that offer paying services also spy. Basically everyone does.

horsecaptin 9y ago

And this is what makes me wary of apps like Signal as well. Who pays for the servers and why are they free?

witten 9y ago
Signal Foundation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Foundation Paid for by Brian Acton's conscience.
quadrangle 9y ago
You could just look up the answers. https://signal.org/blog/signal-foundation/ https://signal.org/blog/signal-foundation/ describes an aligned philanthropist helping start the 501(c)(3) foundation that supports Signal. Another resource: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software) happens to come from a completely-free-of-3rd-party-ads-yet-free platform… It's good to be wary, but the idea that nothing is ever free is actually wrong and helps make people think they have to give up something or pay etc. even when they don't need to. We need to get beyond "How can it be free‽ There must be some catch!" and to the reality of just "Is this really free without a catch?" Because we should be wary but not give into the idea that free is actually too good to be true. Things can actually be free, and people can actually be pro-social in their motivations.

quadrangle 9y ago

Except when it isn't. This is not the trade-off for the vast value of Wikipedia or Archive.org.