5 ms·

I'd actually be down with this, but only if facebook gave user's the ability to lock their own data down at fair market price. That way the user pays for a prod

I'd actually be down with this, but only if facebook gave user's the ability to lock their own data down at fair market price. That way the user pays for a product, or decides to be the product. It's clean and cut & dry; and there wouldn't be any illusions of a "free" service.

RandomGuyDTB 8y ago
The problem is market price would be less than a penny per megabyte of data. EDIT: Okay, I admit I pulled this figure out of my behind but my point is data is incredibly cheap.
- wmf 8y ago
  Do you measure your privacy in megabytes?
  - SlowRobotAhead 8y ago
    Maybe he has a data capped VPN? ;)
- whatshisface 8y ago
  Then I would have no problem paying, and Facebook would be glad to make 10x what they would have otherwise.
  - mrweasel 8y ago
    Facebook currently make $60 per user in the US, a little less for the EU, and basically nothing per user in the rest of the world. It seems doubtful that to many people would pay $60 per year for Facebook, at certainly not $600 if they where to make 10x (minus the overhead of running ad sales)
    - ForHackernews 8y ago
      Maybe Facebook shouldn't be a sustainable business, then?
    - whatshisface 8y ago
      The amount that Facebook makes from storing my PI is not exactly the same as the amount it makes from showing ads. Contextual ads are not completely worthless, they ran the web for years.
    - tracker1 8y ago
      I'd be happy to subscribe to FB at $5/month if I had no advertizements, no promoted posts and no spammy messenger entries. With them emphatically not selling my data.
- the_duke 8y ago
  That's a completely useless metric. 200 bytes can easily contain name, adress, phone number, occupation, age and list of interests for one person.
  - ryacko 8y ago
    The first 200 bytes are free then.
- raverbashing 8y ago
  Winning lottery numbers for the next draw are less than 8 bytes.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 8y ago
  That would be good under this model, wouldn't it, because you could buy back your privacy at a very low price. I don't believe this to be the case though.
- onion2k 8y ago
  Data delivery is cheap. The data itself can be very, very expensive.

RandomGuyDTB 8y ago

The problem is market price would be less than a penny per megabyte of data. EDIT: Okay, I admit I pulled this figure out of my behind but my point is data is incredibly cheap.

wmf 8y ago
Do you measure your privacy in megabytes?
- SlowRobotAhead 8y ago
  Maybe he has a data capped VPN? ;)
whatshisface 8y ago
Then I would have no problem paying, and Facebook would be glad to make 10x what they would have otherwise.
- mrweasel 8y ago
  Facebook currently make $60 per user in the US, a little less for the EU, and basically nothing per user in the rest of the world. It seems doubtful that to many people would pay $60 per year for Facebook, at certainly not $600 if they where to make 10x (minus the overhead of running ad sales)
  - ForHackernews 8y ago
    Maybe Facebook shouldn't be a sustainable business, then?
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    The amount that Facebook makes from storing my PI is not exactly the same as the amount it makes from showing ads. Contextual ads are not completely worthless, they ran the web for years.
  - tracker1 8y ago
    I'd be happy to subscribe to FB at $5/month if I had no advertizements, no promoted posts and no spammy messenger entries. With them emphatically not selling my data.
the_duke 8y ago
That's a completely useless metric. 200 bytes can easily contain name, adress, phone number, occupation, age and list of interests for one person.
- ryacko 8y ago
  The first 200 bytes are free then.
raverbashing 8y ago
Winning lottery numbers for the next draw are less than 8 bytes.
tgsovlerkhgsel 8y ago
That would be good under this model, wouldn't it, because you could buy back your privacy at a very low price. I don't believe this to be the case though.
onion2k 8y ago
Data delivery is cheap. The data itself can be very, very expensive.