5 ms·

Here's a regulation that I'd like considered: a default licensing scheme for personal data, that stipulates a 50% revenue share with the user of any money made

Here's a regulation that I'd like considered: a default licensing scheme for personal data, that stipulates a 50% revenue share with the user of any money made from the use or sale of their data. The regulation would stipulate the scheme can only be renegotiated in a way that would be impractical to implement at scale (to avoid easy circumventions through TOS and click-throughs). This would hit the privacy-invading companies where it hurts, in their pocketbooks.

no1youknowz 8y ago
Profits based on the sale of data has been discussed a few times on HN. However, the price for it is so low on a per user basis. That said, there should be a law on the books that disallow the sale of data between companies. I'd wager this is the bulk of where Facebook makes it's money. That's where we should be targeting with legislation. The use of data should be fine. As the end-user or end-company never actually get their hands on the data. They just use a UI with categories and filters and put up ads based on the options available.
- gaogao 8y ago
  Facebook makes its money from selling ads. You can see this in its revenue report, https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2018/Facebook-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2017-Results/default.aspx https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/... Of course, these ads are highly targeted using all sorts of personal data, but they aren't actually selling the data, as that's also just less profitable.
  - no1youknowz 8y ago
    I know that. But is there a distinction in advertising between: 1) Allowing users to use the data for making ads. 2) Selling the data to companies such as Apple for other means. There isn't any visibility. This is what I'm trying to get at.
    - gaogao 8y ago
      From another report, >> Mobile advertising revenue – Mobile advertising revenue represented approximately 91% of advertising revenue for the first quarter of 2018, up from approximately 85% of advertising revenue in the first quarter of 2017. In particular, Facebook makes its money from mobile ads
- vharuck 8y ago
  > However, the price for it is so low on a per user basis. A user won't see much benefit in data profit sharing, but the companies will definitely see the costs. The effort to set up payout channels for every user would drive them to look at other revenue sources. Plus, if all user data comes with a 50% cut, and their biggest income is based on user data, that's significant to the company.
beefield 8y ago
> Here's a regulation that I'd like considered: Well, I would rgeulate facebook and google so that they are required to offer their services to me at production cost + some decent margin, while guaranteeing that if I pay the price, my data is not monetized or shared in any other way to third parties (including using my data to train any kind of machine learning models) Also, fb, ig and whatsapp should be split into separate companies. Google web search might as well be separated from everything else.

no1youknowz 8y ago

Profits based on the sale of data has been discussed a few times on HN. However, the price for it is so low on a per user basis. That said, there should be a law on the books that disallow the sale of data between companies. I'd wager this is the bulk of where Facebook makes it's money. That's where we should be targeting with legislation. The use of data should be fine. As the end-user or end-company never actually get their hands on the data. They just use a UI with categories and filters and put up ads based on the options available.

gaogao 8y ago
Facebook makes its money from selling ads. You can see this in its revenue report, https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2018/Facebook-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2017-Results/default.aspx https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/... Of course, these ads are highly targeted using all sorts of personal data, but they aren't actually selling the data, as that's also just less profitable.
- no1youknowz 8y ago
  I know that. But is there a distinction in advertising between: 1) Allowing users to use the data for making ads. 2) Selling the data to companies such as Apple for other means. There isn't any visibility. This is what I'm trying to get at.
  - gaogao 8y ago
    From another report, >> Mobile advertising revenue – Mobile advertising revenue represented approximately 91% of advertising revenue for the first quarter of 2018, up from approximately 85% of advertising revenue in the first quarter of 2017. In particular, Facebook makes its money from mobile ads
vharuck 8y ago
> However, the price for it is so low on a per user basis. A user won't see much benefit in data profit sharing, but the companies will definitely see the costs. The effort to set up payout channels for every user would drive them to look at other revenue sources. Plus, if all user data comes with a 50% cut, and their biggest income is based on user data, that's significant to the company.

beefield 8y ago

> Here's a regulation that I'd like considered: Well, I would rgeulate facebook and google so that they are required to offer their services to me at production cost + some decent margin, while guaranteeing that if I pay the price, my data is not monetized or shared in any other way to third parties (including using my data to train any kind of machine learning models) Also, fb, ig and whatsapp should be split into separate companies. Google web search might as well be separated from everything else.