11 ms·
What if people were paid for their data?
- Nition 8y agoIn some ways we already are. For instance if I use my supermarket loyalty card, they let me save around 1-2% on my purchase in exchange for the better tracking they get.
- pradn 8y agoI've seen the discount being more like 25%. Hell, pretty much any product at Safeway has a "Safeway price" that practically forces you to use the discount card.
- rhizome 8y agoThat's when they raise the list price to $4.29 for a box of Triscuits rather than the $2.99 they are most of the rest of the time.
- Nition 8y agoThere's no way one person's data is worth a 25% discount surely. That strategy must be something like, have the sales we were going to have anyway (to attract customers to the store), but make the card required to get them. At the supermarket I'm thinking of, with the 1-2% discount, there'll still be normal sale items that don't require the card, and then extra discounts that only the card gives you. Actually I just remembered the card earns you reward points as well (albeit slowly), so the total amount you "save" is indeed a little more.
- throwaway1982x 8y agoHow much of this discount is for tracking, and how much is pure price discrimination? The barrier of carrying a card allows the supermarket to give a discount to customers who are motivated by that, without needing to give the same discount to everyone. The value of the tracking is probably irrelevant to how they set the price: it is not that loyalty card discounts have increased since tracking has become more valuable.
- amelius 8y agoYes, the loyalty card should be named "loyalty and tracking card", and we don't know how the discount is divided over both.
- toomanybeersies 8y agoI've never actually used a supermarket loyalty card connected to my real persona. Either the information has all been fake, or I've used somebody else's. At the end of the day, I use the same credit card every time I shop, so I'm sure that they can harvest all their data from that. But I feel like it's a bit of a "fuck you" to the system that my loyalty card says I'm a 40 year old woman.
- Freak_NL 8y agoThey don't really care though. The point of a loyalty card is to connect all of your purchases to one person or household. Knowing the age and gender of that person is interesting, but not really necessary. These supermarkets want to know if there is a correlation between you buying X frequently, and Y occasionally. They want to know if your profile is that of a bargain hunter or a premium gourmet hobby chef. Knowing all that, they can offer you tailored deals designed to nudge your spending behaviour one way or another, and they can determine if a specific store location should focus more on certain groups of customers.
- vasco 8y agoI've had this idea in the bucket of "crazy things I'll never do" which is similar to this, half art-piece, half serious: - Users sign up to an ad network and they insert all information about themselves, the more, the better. - They are periodically prompted to add or update their data (like facebook asking you if you're still living in the same city). - An adblock-like browser extension, replaces all ads they see with the own network's ads, which are highly targeted, and hence get much more money than regular ads for the ad network. - The ad network is setup as a non-profit foundation which pipes all the revenue into donations to institutions doing work related to privacy initiatives (EFF and similar). - Users are shown how much money their willingful lack of privacy has generated for privacy initiatives. It's a play on using the argument of "I have nothing to hide" in order to advance actual privacy legislation and protections. If someone builds this, I'd sign up and use it.
- Hello71 8y agoThis is pretty similar to the Brave browser model, except that Brave sells your browser history instead of asking you about your information.
- csharp 8y agoBrave definitely does not sell your browsing history. In fact, they don't even have the ability to access it...
- Hello71 8y ago> Brave definitely does not sell your browsing history This might be true. > In fact, they don't even have the ability to access it... This is clearly false on the face of it. Obviously the browser has access to the browsing history. Brave claims on https://brave.com/hc-privacy/ https://brave.com/hc-privacy/ that "When Brave Ads launches later this year, all personal data and browsing history will remain on-device and will not be transmitted to Brave or anyone else.". This implies that they will use personal data and browsing history, but attempt to anonymize it in some unspecified manner before selling it. Of course, as Netflix can attest, this is much harder than it sounds, and I highly doubt that Brave is up to the task.
- adrian_mrd 8y agoI remember reading one of Bill Gates’ ideas to reduce spam. Charge a nominal fee for each e-mail sent, from memory, it was something like $0.000001 USD per e-mail. It never took off, of course, but it’s important for us as a society to come up with better solutions than “Trust Zuck” or let company lawyers win with their horribly user-antagonistic end-user licence agreements (EULA). As an aside, I find it fascinating how lawyers aren’t getting much of the blame in all of this debate around data. Who actually writes and/or approves most of these policies? The legal eagles, that’s who. Let’s at least debate the alternatives to the current adtech dominance of the most popular online platforms (Facebook, Google search, Android OS, Apple’s App Store ads, etc.). edit: fixed spelling mistakes, added the ‘as an aside’ para.
- petermcneeley 8y ago“Funding a civilization through advertising is like trying to get nutrition by connecting a tube from one’s anus to one’s mouth.” ― Jaron Lanier
- adrian_mrd 8y agoHa! Reminds me of the late, great, Bill Hick’s seminal piece on marketers and advertisers: https://youtu.be/tHEOGrkhDp0 https://youtu.be/tHEOGrkhDp0 I oft wonder how much disdain Bill Hicks would have for the tech bros and the Orwellian apparatus many large tech companies have created.
- petermcneeley 8y agoThe quote is semi ironical because Jaron Lanier is featured in this article and actually supports these machinations.
- bena 8y agoBut he's wrong though, isn't he? I mean, marketers and advertisers simply recognize what already exists. Yes, there is an "anger market". Yes, there are certain things that work to attract people prone to "being angry". Overall, I find Hicks to be a bit overvalued. At least the bits that get circulated the most. The bit about advertisers and the bit where he "destroys" a heckler, which is just him hurling basic abuse at someone. There's nothing really funny or particularly witty in it, just "Go kill yourself" over and over again. I think he plays to a certain demographic that wants to feel as if they've figured out the secret and that the secret is it's all going to shit. I'd imagine he'd have a diatribe about "tech bros" that would pretty much consist of saying they should kill themselves in various ways.
- Puer 8y agoCompanies will argue, either rightly or wrongly, that people are already getting paid... Just not in cash. Google Maps is free for me to use, so long as I relinquish location data necessary for it to function, which Google can then use as they please to analyze what businesses I frequent, where I live, what type of transportation I use, etc.
- mLuby 8y agoYou don't have to give them that data. It's still free because they can serve ads based on where you're searching.
- Puer 8y agoI disagree. The modern act of viewing a digital ad produces more data than people realize. How long you looked at an ad, whether you clicked it, whether you skipped it or tried to hide it, etc. All of those implicit actions create data that is then surrendered to the collector.
- mLuby 8y agoYep, no argument about user metadata. My point was specifically about location data, which users do not have to give. > Google Maps is free for me to use, so long as I relinquish location data necessary for it to function
- LinuxBender 8y agoGoogle maps is not free. The end user will perceive it is free, but businesses will become dependent on embedding google maps into their site, then will have to pay for said maps. This actually came up recently. The same is true for email. The end user will perceive it is free, but businesses have to pay into whitelists based on volume. The costs are then passed on the the customers. So not only is it not free, you pay for it even if you don't use it.
- throwawaymath 8y ago
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- ThorinJacobs 8y agoThere are a bunch of apps and websites that do this already. Google Play Rewards is probably the most reputable, but they're easy to find and advertise themselves aggressively.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y agoGoogle Play Rewards is a good example of how little people realise the worth of their data though. (Google Play Rewards tends to pay rather little, and in currency only redeemable at the company store.)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- bumholio 8y agoThe value of my data is not that it can train a statistical model about preferences of developers in their 30s - that's absolutely marginal. My personal data is useful in itself as a proxy for my own life, my preferences, my buying habits, it's a map on how to influence and predict my behavior, possibly against my will. A company having exclusive access to all my personal data, emails, etc. can for example, infer that I have an urgent need to buy an airline ticket to visit my sick father, and extract my reserve price for that ticket, as opposed to an average price for all passengers. Or it can deduce the minimal paycheck I am willing to accept for a job. So even in the unlikely case I can recover the full value of my data from the market, I haven't really earned anything. My information differential is a competitive advantage in the market, and selling it is self defeating, companies are not selling or giving their data back to me. So the more data you sell or give, the larger the asymmetry grows until the only deals you can make are bad deals. Edit: I can neither confirm nor deny I am developer and/or in my 30s
- nerfhammer 8y agoIn your example you're assuming that there is monopoly control over whatever product you're trying to buy. But that's usually not the case: there is more than one airline, for example. If it were possible to market products exclusively to people who wanted that exact product, companies would no longer need to waste money on broadly targeted advertising and compete more directly on price and product features and not on marketing budget. You would get "paid" in cost savings. Of course that's generally not really possible no matter how much of your data marketers could reasonably know about. A grab bag of "data" from an individual person barely predicts much of anything, which is the real reason there isn't much of a market for it.
- bumholio 8y agoIndeed - but markets are rarely perfectly competitive, to negate any advantage price discrimination can bring. For example, it's often the case a route/date combo is offered by a single airline. I also agree that information can be beneficial for me, helping companies finding me easier without spending on advertising etc. But in that case, I would simply give that information away and share it as broadly as possible (for example, by searching multiple sites for the products I am interested in); so that side of the coin is not relevant for someone selling his information.
- brandonmenc 8y agoThe risk associated with my data being collected is likely not worth what anyone is willing to pay for it, and I assume this is true for nearly everyone.
- sparkie 8y agoWhen given the choice, that's what you'd expect most people would think. But when not given the choice, it turns out people are quite happy to give over their data in return for no payment.
- FLUX-YOU 8y agoWithout knowing how companies actually use my data, I can't put a price tag on it myself. That means I can only rely on the price put out by the companies that collect it, and if they collude to keep prices low, it doesn't matter if they're caught, because they already have the data. I also don't know the entire network that my data transits with the amount of money that gets paid for data -- Google could sell to some small company which sells to an international company, which sells to a shell company and ends the trail for most of us. I suspect that internet and real celebrities will be paid orders of magnitude more for their data anyway.
- seiferteric 8y agoI had an evil idea once for a site where you got paid to supply information on other people. You create an account and narc on all your friends and family by telling the site what things they were interested in and what they have been talking about lately. The more money they make from targeted ads to that person, the more money you get paid :) Like I said, it is evil and no one should do it.
- taneq 8y agoUh, I have bad news. Zuck beat you to that one a while ago... (Except instead of getting paid you just get nagged if you don't narc.)
- bo1024 8y agoI generally agree with Weyl and Posner's position here in that we need to completely change people's perspective on the value of their data and how easily they give it away. So I don't want to distract from that point. However, I do want to also point out that data itself functions more like capital than it does like labour (although the act of providing data may be more similar to labour). Capital is always the source of financial asymmetry between the labourers and the wealthy capital-owners. So instead of "selling" our data to companies for a fixed price, allowing them to exploit it forever, maybe we should be only renting companies the temporary right to use our data -- keeping the wealth asymmetry from growing.
- ybrah 8y agowhat if blah blah blah blah
- luckyorlame 8y agopeople are paid for their data, they get to use social media.
- ionised 8y agoDoesn't seem like a good deal.
- paulcole 8y agoI'm already compensated for my data. I can use Facebook, read news websites, play games, and watch videos without taking out my credit card. I have no other way to convert my data into dollars so this'll have to do.
- a_d 8y agoIf someone were to figure out the exact mechanics of this, then this could become universal basic income. I have thought a lot about what trapped intangible value all of us have, such that ‘if’ there was a market for it, we could get paid. Our personal data, with opt-in volunteering, is certainly at the top of the list. The other potential personal markets that have very similar characteristics (to personal data), but don’t exist are: 1) Home equity: Americans have $6.2T in home equity that could be “sold” 2) Driving data: get paid for carrying free sensors so that one helps map the world, so we get to self driving sooner in more cities 3) Opinions: large scale polling for everything, from movie trailers to startup landing pages to new products/ads — everything 4) Fact checking: crowd sourced journalism; often Reddit crowds figure out the truth/source faster than pro journalists; there ought to be a market for “if I know something, Eg some insider info, I could improve on the state of public truth” 5) Goodwill: one of the most amazing things I stumbled upon was www.reddit.com/r/borrow; people ask for money and strangers give money; I would never have predicted this to exist. I believe goodwill and benevolence is one of the largest untapped markets. There are probably several other (and better) examples: point is that royaltiess/annuities from such markets could be part of UBI in the future.
- yosito 8y ago> If someone were to figure out the exact mechanics of this, then this could become universal basic income. I believe that's what China's social credit system is doing. It's a very powerful idea, but also has some very dystopian undertones.
- a_d 8y agoAny suggestions on good sources: Where can I learn more about it? (Thanks for the comment. Very curious to learn more.)
- teddyh 8y agoPropaganda Games: Sesame Credit - The True Danger of Gamification - Extra Credits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI
- dsr_ 8y agoSell my data? That's ridiculous! Leasing it for a defined period of time, that's plausible.
- plg 8y agoThey already are, essentially, in-kind—-with “free” software and services like gmail, fecebook, instaglam, etc etc
- atom_arranger 8y agoSome companies are working on this sort of thing. https://www.killi.io/ https://www.killi.io/
- JustSomeNobody 8y agoYour data by itself is basically worthless. Your data combined with Google's algorithms to extract meaning is worth all the services they provide.
- SenseiMaster 8y agoThey already are with free apps and services.
- cirgue 8y agoI don’t want money in exchange for my data. I just want genuine anonymity except where I say otherwise.
- arisAlexis 8y agothis is a huge use case for blockchain. Just try Brave browser to see for yourself
- jeisc 8y agoHow much is it worth and who will pay and how will I collect it.
- kuon 8y agoWhat worries me is that we are always surprised how our data can be used. You may agree on something you think you understand and indirectly agreed to something else.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- jacksonbing 8y agoThis article is thought-provoking, but the value of our data is far beyond training AI. Tech giants have been utilizing our data for ads targeting for such a long time. We, as data contributors, deserve to get our share of profits from the huge amount of money they made from using and selling our data. I happen to find out this blockchain project, Measurable Data Token, which aims to create a decentralized data exchange ecosystem to reward users for sharing their data. Here is the link to their website (https://www.mdt.co/ https://www.mdt.co/) if you guys want to check it out.