3 ms·

This would likely have to be paired with a tiered pricing model for said good or service - i.e. Class A = 100% of retail cost Class B = 75% of retail cost Cl

This would likely have to be paired with a tiered pricing model for said good or service - i.e. Class A = 100% of retail cost Class B = 75% of retail cost Class C = 50% of retail cost Class D = free I'm convinced that the vast majority of those outraged by today's data collection practices will conveniently direct their ire to some other cause when faced with the possibility of actually having to pay for the services they've gotten used to having for free.

amelius 9y ago
Is such tiered pricing allowed under the GDPR? Because that would provide an easy way out of the whole sitation. Just make the price ridiculously high, and all users will choose the free, your-data-belongs-to-us version.
wtfstatists 9y ago
Sadly this is illegal in EU. You have to offer both Free+ClassD and Free+ClassA versions otherwise its forced consent. I have written more about this here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892
- joejerryronnie 9y ago
  Does this essentially force companies to charge for services in the EU then? The only reason FB, Google, etc even offer "free" services is because they make money on the backend utilizing the data they collect. If everyone can say "don't collect my data but also keep my service free", I'm not sure how a business can remain viable in the EU without charging some type of subscription or micro-transaction fee. Maybe this is how the whole web-based fee structure should have been setup in the first place but it's not the current deal we have in place. How difficult will it be to shift an entire industry (and consumer mindset) to a vastly different fee structure?
  - tjoff 9y ago
    They can still show ads, and they can still be relevant to whatever page the user is currently viewing. Since they do such a terrible job of it anyway I can't imagine it being less profitable. And then again, maybe actually paying for something like facebook is the right way to go.
    - joejerryronnie 9y ago
      Yeah, that's a good point. If the whole advertising landscape forcibly moves away from direct targeting, presumably the same players retain the same position in the marketplace they have now (with the possible exception of ad dollars moving to other media if web is seen as less effective in general without direct targeting).
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    Why wouldn't advertising still work without pervasive tracking? If targeting ads based just on content works for TV, radio and print media, why wouldn't it work for online advertising?
- tjoff 9y ago
  Well, I think that is the best part. There is no need nor usefulness of greedy parasitic companies.
- maaaats 9y ago
  Why "sadly"?

amelius 9y ago

Is such tiered pricing allowed under the GDPR? Because that would provide an easy way out of the whole sitation. Just make the price ridiculously high, and all users will choose the free, your-data-belongs-to-us version.

wtfstatists 9y ago

Sadly this is illegal in EU. You have to offer both Free+ClassD and Free+ClassA versions otherwise its forced consent. I have written more about this here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892

joejerryronnie 9y ago
Does this essentially force companies to charge for services in the EU then? The only reason FB, Google, etc even offer "free" services is because they make money on the backend utilizing the data they collect. If everyone can say "don't collect my data but also keep my service free", I'm not sure how a business can remain viable in the EU without charging some type of subscription or micro-transaction fee. Maybe this is how the whole web-based fee structure should have been setup in the first place but it's not the current deal we have in place. How difficult will it be to shift an entire industry (and consumer mindset) to a vastly different fee structure?
- tjoff 9y ago
  They can still show ads, and they can still be relevant to whatever page the user is currently viewing. Since they do such a terrible job of it anyway I can't imagine it being less profitable. And then again, maybe actually paying for something like facebook is the right way to go.
  - joejerryronnie 9y ago
    Yeah, that's a good point. If the whole advertising landscape forcibly moves away from direct targeting, presumably the same players retain the same position in the marketplace they have now (with the possible exception of ad dollars moving to other media if web is seen as less effective in general without direct targeting).
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  Why wouldn't advertising still work without pervasive tracking? If targeting ads based just on content works for TV, radio and print media, why wouldn't it work for online advertising?
tjoff 9y ago
Well, I think that is the best part. There is no need nor usefulness of greedy parasitic companies.
maaaats 9y ago
Why "sadly"?