Mark my words, this is one of those tech articles that in 10 years will seem laughably outdated (not that anyone will remember this article in 10 years). It cre

Mark my words, this is one of those tech articles that in 10 years will seem laughably outdated (not that anyone will remember this article in 10 years). It creates a false equivalency between the services that existed before and those that exist through the so-called "gig economy". But this part of the ending really bothered me: > Venture capitalists have subsidized the creation of platforms for low-paying work ... while subjecting all parties to increased surveillance. In general, there has been a remarkable lack of privacy or security violations by the so-alled "gig economy" companies. The author seems to be conflating the previous generation of information-only companies like Facebook and Google with gig economy companies like Uber. For all its ills, Uber does not get enough credit for the fact that it does not sell or otherwise distribute the customer's data for money. Instead it provides a service in exchange for pay. The information customers provide to Uber stays with Uber, which cannot be said of Facebook, Instagram, Google, LinkedIn or just about any other information-only tech company. That the author chooses to end his article with a factually ignorant statement about surveillance reveals a how devoid of substance the rest of the article turns out to be.