2 ms·

Thee need to own your own data is clear - only you should have the right to redact your posts for any reason. We should adopt systems that are fundamentally amo

Thee need to own your own data is clear - only you should have the right to redact your posts for any reason. We should adopt systems that are fundamentally amoral, non-censoring, and non-competitive for our data being on their platform. Systems where we can profit from the success of our content. Can anyone think of some examples?

adventured 8y ago
The average Facebook user would receive $10 per year if they were to distribute all of their annual profit to the userbase. That's the best case scenario. What's the point? So users can profit from their content? They won't profit from their content, it's nearly worthless per unit. It's only in the vast total sum that there is any value, and only because it's held by one entity. If you distribute it per post or per person, it's very close to meaningless. $20 billion is a lot per year to one entity; $20 billion per year to two billion people, is not. If you were generous with Twitter and assumed they can generate $400m per year in profit and then chose to distribute that to the userbase, you're talking about ~$1.30 per active user per year. If you tilt the value distribution toward the most active, famous users (whose tweets are far more valuable in regards to monetization), then you're just destroying the distribution premise to begin with by concentrating the wealth in a slightly different manner: Taylor Swift doesn't need to worry about earning $35,000 per year from her tweets, and Joe Smith getting $7 from Twitter for their 1,278 economically worthless posts also does not matter. Ultimately you just end up with a YouTube outcome if you value tilt. A small group of rich users earning millions of dollars on FB or Twitter, and everybody else entirely failing to earn even minimum wage for the time put into their economically low value posts. How does that really change the equation vs the people that are capturing most of the value today? Taylor Swift can already capture the value generated by Twitter and Facebook, she can buy the stock.
- nukemandan 8y ago
  Where do you get that $10 from? What is included in that? Total profit per user? Do you think that the sale of data for all users (bots included) is the same? per post is easily gamed - not a solution to be sure. steemit.com has some ideas - but not perfect ones to be sure - to build incentive based content. Where is the $400M twitter profit from? Ultimately it is not about the direct monetary ROI for this in my mind. But empowering choice of you as to who can use your data (and knowing what they are legally able to do with it) is critical. Thinking about reducing the supply of data will likely spike the cost of that data as well. Most of what is sold is not content - but your use of the platform and _who you are and what you do there_ and predicting things about you - not what you post.
paulie_a 8y ago
Also you should have the legal right to clear your data. I deleted my LinkedIn profile a year ago, I unsubscribed from everything and still receive spam from them. I literally want every bit of data they outright stole deleted.
- baleetor 8y ago
  Oh, but then again, do you own the domain name for the email you receive? Do you control the mail server that operates your mail account? If so, you could use the mailer daemon to tell LinkedIn that the email address does not exist, with a bounced mail response. You could do that, if the email address was really "yours" and not Google's (or whoever).

adventured 8y ago

The average Facebook user would receive $10 per year if they were to distribute all of their annual profit to the userbase. That's the best case scenario. What's the point? So users can profit from their content? They won't profit from their content, it's nearly worthless per unit. It's only in the vast total sum that there is any value, and only because it's held by one entity. If you distribute it per post or per person, it's very close to meaningless. $20 billion is a lot per year to one entity; $20 billion per year to two billion people, is not. If you were generous with Twitter and assumed they can generate $400m per year in profit and then chose to distribute that to the userbase, you're talking about ~$1.30 per active user per year. If you tilt the value distribution toward the most active, famous users (whose tweets are far more valuable in regards to monetization), then you're just destroying the distribution premise to begin with by concentrating the wealth in a slightly different manner: Taylor Swift doesn't need to worry about earning $35,000 per year from her tweets, and Joe Smith getting $7 from Twitter for their 1,278 economically worthless posts also does not matter. Ultimately you just end up with a YouTube outcome if you value tilt. A small group of rich users earning millions of dollars on FB or Twitter, and everybody else entirely failing to earn even minimum wage for the time put into their economically low value posts. How does that really change the equation vs the people that are capturing most of the value today? Taylor Swift can already capture the value generated by Twitter and Facebook, she can buy the stock.

nukemandan 8y ago
Where do you get that $10 from? What is included in that? Total profit per user? Do you think that the sale of data for all users (bots included) is the same? per post is easily gamed - not a solution to be sure. steemit.com has some ideas - but not perfect ones to be sure - to build incentive based content. Where is the $400M twitter profit from? Ultimately it is not about the direct monetary ROI for this in my mind. But empowering choice of you as to who can use your data (and knowing what they are legally able to do with it) is critical. Thinking about reducing the supply of data will likely spike the cost of that data as well. Most of what is sold is not content - but your use of the platform and _who you are and what you do there_ and predicting things about you - not what you post.

paulie_a 8y ago

Also you should have the legal right to clear your data. I deleted my LinkedIn profile a year ago, I unsubscribed from everything and still receive spam from them. I literally want every bit of data they outright stole deleted.

baleetor 8y ago
Oh, but then again, do you own the domain name for the email you receive? Do you control the mail server that operates your mail account? If so, you could use the mailer daemon to tell LinkedIn that the email address does not exist, with a bounced mail response. You could do that, if the email address was really "yours" and not Google's (or whoever).