4 ms·

Arguably, they already do. They pay us in services such as communications software, social software, search, etc. Also, this is very common in some countries/i

Arguably, they already do. They pay us in services such as communications software, social software, search, etc. Also, this is very common in some countries/industries. In the U.K. if you want to buy insurance or open a bank account etc, you’ll often use a comparison website, and they will likely give you an incentive (such as free cinema tickets) for choosing a service through them. This is paid for directly by the affiliate revenue. Cashback sites also exist that do this through affiliates. Credit cards do this with air miles, cashback and other rewards too.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Perfect example in picking affiliate comparison sites - they skew the market, and don't include companies or plans that aren't in the affiliate scheme, so you rarely end up with the actual best value through them. Just the sort of conflicting loyalties that leads to insurance, pension and mortgage misselling scandals. More generally the exchange seems to have become one of being scammed out of £10 of data, tracking and inferences for every £1 of value received. It's years since it's felt like a fair and equitable exchange - like search in exchange for simple keyword ads without tracking.
Igor_Wiwi 7y ago
I bet for 90% of users of Facebook(or Google) it is not clear how actually Facebook makes money
- matz1 7y ago
  Or they may just value personal data differently than you.
- sbhn 7y ago
  Facebook sells your attention. Look at your news feed, every second post is an ad.
  - munk-a 7y ago
    Your attention and your productivity. They are a leech on modern society.
- ummonk 7y ago
  Really? The ads are annoyingly obvious.
JustSomeNobody 7y ago
This. Your data is already a currency. By visiting and consuming content you’re effectively paying for that content with whatever data they’re collecting. Maybe this transaction needs to be somehow more explicit?
- Igor_Wiwi 7y ago
  this is the point, if you are already paying (implicitly) for using the different services, make me the one who can control it and give me the choice to opt out if I don't want to do it
  - JustSomeNobody 7y ago
    You do have that control. Find an alternative service provider. Don’t like gmail? Choose fastmail.
    - ionised 7y ago
      Or change the law.
    - AlexandrB 7y ago
      Don't like reCaptha? Stop using 90% of websites that require login. Don't like Google Analytics? Stop using basically everything else. The only remaining "control" is in ad and tracker blockers, and a vocal minority of the tech industry considers these tantamount to theft.
velcrovan 7y ago
The argument is that the intangible costs of the current scheme (life under total surveillance) make it desirable to force a direct dollar-value recognition of people's personal data. A while back I made a similar argument[1]. I argued that some high percentage (e.g. 90%) of revenue from targeted ads should be required to be passed through to viewers of those ads. The possibility of the targeted ad market drying up completely is an acceptable outcome of this policy. Make everyone go back to non-targeted advertising! [1] https://thelocalyarn.com/article/judicious-change https://thelocalyarn.com/article/judicious-change
- fyfy18 7y ago
  I don't have a problem with the theory of targeted ads, in fact as a consumer it is actually useful. If you start looking for a pair of boots, then see that a brand you like but was out of your budget has a sale on, so you buy those boots you really wanted but couldn't afford. That's useful for a consumer. The problem is that targeted advertising mostly just sucks. Last year I bought wireless headphones from Amazon, and everyone I visited them again for the next two weeks I had recommendations to buy wireless headphones. So even Amazon can't do it properly. What if I'd browsed on Amazon and bought from another store? The other day I saw an ad on twitter for an wine company, in the "why am I seeing this as?" section it said that it is targeted to males (yup), aged 35 and above (no) who live in the United Kingdom (no). And to top it off, I don't even drink. The problem is targeted ads mostly don't work, their targeting is so simplistic (see something you like, then blast you with ads for that over and over) or just assign you to such a general bucket (age range and location) that it isn't useful. Even "likes" aren't that useful for targeting - just because I "like" a brand doesn't mean I want to be blasted with ads from them or am going to buy every product they sell. I like Thinkpads, but that doesn't mean I'm going to buy every new ThinkPad that is released.
BonesJustice 7y ago
First parties might compensate me by providing a service in exchange. What of the third parties with whom they share my personal data? When those parties profit off my data, what compensation do I receive?
- umvi 7y ago
  You are not the IRS - you don't have a right to compensation every time your data changes hands, just for each unique copy. That's like me paying an author for a book, and then the author demanding I pay if I give (or sell) the book to my friend. I know what you are thinking: "but in this case copies of your data are being resold" in which case I would agree that each party has to buy their own copy from me, or, if they resell to each other, they have to delete the copy they previously bought from me.
  - basicallydan 7y ago
    I haven't thought it through much, but on the face of it I like the idea of receiving some compensation whenever my data is _resold_, plus a way for me to see _where_ my data has been resold, maybe even a notification. It's a bit like a songwriter receiving a royalty whenever their song is played on the radio or in public (see https://www.prsformusic.com/ https://www.prsformusic.com/). Obviously this would be a challenging thing to implement.
    - woodrowbarlow 7y ago
      here's the way this generally works for music: 1. a musician joins one or more "guilds" and pays dues. there are three major musicians guilds in the US. 2. a public venue pays subscription fees to one or more guilds. 3. the venue is licensed to broadcast music by any of the guilds' members. 4. the guild divides monies from venues proportionally amongst its members, with proportions based largely on the musician's popularity. that model wouldn't work very well for what you're imagining. firstly, it wouldn't give you the access to information that you want about who has your data. secondly, unlike music, user data for advertising purposes doesn't really have differences in value; to an advertiser, data about one person is just as valuable as data about another person. any differences in value have to do with the type of data rather than the source of the data.
atoav 7y ago
Similar to the leader of a scam sect who pays you in spiritual enlightment: you might find it to be a reasonable deal, if you even recognize it as such, but ultimately it is not a solid foundation for a stable society. The usual question arises: What would a civilized solution to the problem look like? Edit: Having a unhinged competition where the winner is he who manipulates the masses most effectively without getting cought doesn’t seem like a good way to get to a better future to me.
munk-a 7y ago
I like to pay in dollars - can I pay for their services in dollars and not be tracked everywhere I go? Advertising is a negative value add on pretty much all modern interactions, it needs to go away and stop imposing such a steep cost on consumers for the atrociously marginal value it delivers to producers.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

Perfect example in picking affiliate comparison sites - they skew the market, and don't include companies or plans that aren't in the affiliate scheme, so you rarely end up with the actual best value through them. Just the sort of conflicting loyalties that leads to insurance, pension and mortgage misselling scandals. More generally the exchange seems to have become one of being scammed out of £10 of data, tracking and inferences for every £1 of value received. It's years since it's felt like a fair and equitable exchange - like search in exchange for simple keyword ads without tracking.

Igor_Wiwi 7y ago

I bet for 90% of users of Facebook(or Google) it is not clear how actually Facebook makes money

matz1 7y ago
Or they may just value personal data differently than you.
sbhn 7y ago
Facebook sells your attention. Look at your news feed, every second post is an ad.
- munk-a 7y ago
  Your attention and your productivity. They are a leech on modern society.
ummonk 7y ago
Really? The ads are annoyingly obvious.

JustSomeNobody 7y ago

This. Your data is already a currency. By visiting and consuming content you’re effectively paying for that content with whatever data they’re collecting. Maybe this transaction needs to be somehow more explicit?

Igor_Wiwi 7y ago
this is the point, if you are already paying (implicitly) for using the different services, make me the one who can control it and give me the choice to opt out if I don't want to do it
- JustSomeNobody 7y ago
  You do have that control. Find an alternative service provider. Don’t like gmail? Choose fastmail.
  - ionised 7y ago
    Or change the law.
  - AlexandrB 7y ago
    Don't like reCaptha? Stop using 90% of websites that require login. Don't like Google Analytics? Stop using basically everything else. The only remaining "control" is in ad and tracker blockers, and a vocal minority of the tech industry considers these tantamount to theft.

velcrovan 7y ago

The argument is that the intangible costs of the current scheme (life under total surveillance) make it desirable to force a direct dollar-value recognition of people's personal data. A while back I made a similar argument[1]. I argued that some high percentage (e.g. 90%) of revenue from targeted ads should be required to be passed through to viewers of those ads. The possibility of the targeted ad market drying up completely is an acceptable outcome of this policy. Make everyone go back to non-targeted advertising! [1] https://thelocalyarn.com/article/judicious-change https://thelocalyarn.com/article/judicious-change

fyfy18 7y ago
I don't have a problem with the theory of targeted ads, in fact as a consumer it is actually useful. If you start looking for a pair of boots, then see that a brand you like but was out of your budget has a sale on, so you buy those boots you really wanted but couldn't afford. That's useful for a consumer. The problem is that targeted advertising mostly just sucks. Last year I bought wireless headphones from Amazon, and everyone I visited them again for the next two weeks I had recommendations to buy wireless headphones. So even Amazon can't do it properly. What if I'd browsed on Amazon and bought from another store? The other day I saw an ad on twitter for an wine company, in the "why am I seeing this as?" section it said that it is targeted to males (yup), aged 35 and above (no) who live in the United Kingdom (no). And to top it off, I don't even drink. The problem is targeted ads mostly don't work, their targeting is so simplistic (see something you like, then blast you with ads for that over and over) or just assign you to such a general bucket (age range and location) that it isn't useful. Even "likes" aren't that useful for targeting - just because I "like" a brand doesn't mean I want to be blasted with ads from them or am going to buy every product they sell. I like Thinkpads, but that doesn't mean I'm going to buy every new ThinkPad that is released.

BonesJustice 7y ago

First parties might compensate me by providing a service in exchange. What of the third parties with whom they share my personal data? When those parties profit off my data, what compensation do I receive?

umvi 7y ago
You are not the IRS - you don't have a right to compensation every time your data changes hands, just for each unique copy. That's like me paying an author for a book, and then the author demanding I pay if I give (or sell) the book to my friend. I know what you are thinking: "but in this case copies of your data are being resold" in which case I would agree that each party has to buy their own copy from me, or, if they resell to each other, they have to delete the copy they previously bought from me.
- basicallydan 7y ago
  I haven't thought it through much, but on the face of it I like the idea of receiving some compensation whenever my data is _resold_, plus a way for me to see _where_ my data has been resold, maybe even a notification. It's a bit like a songwriter receiving a royalty whenever their song is played on the radio or in public (see https://www.prsformusic.com/ https://www.prsformusic.com/). Obviously this would be a challenging thing to implement.
  - woodrowbarlow 7y ago
    here's the way this generally works for music: 1. a musician joins one or more "guilds" and pays dues. there are three major musicians guilds in the US. 2. a public venue pays subscription fees to one or more guilds. 3. the venue is licensed to broadcast music by any of the guilds' members. 4. the guild divides monies from venues proportionally amongst its members, with proportions based largely on the musician's popularity. that model wouldn't work very well for what you're imagining. firstly, it wouldn't give you the access to information that you want about who has your data. secondly, unlike music, user data for advertising purposes doesn't really have differences in value; to an advertiser, data about one person is just as valuable as data about another person. any differences in value have to do with the type of data rather than the source of the data.

atoav 7y ago

Similar to the leader of a scam sect who pays you in spiritual enlightment: you might find it to be a reasonable deal, if you even recognize it as such, but ultimately it is not a solid foundation for a stable society. The usual question arises: What would a civilized solution to the problem look like? Edit: Having a unhinged competition where the winner is he who manipulates the masses most effectively without getting cought doesn’t seem like a good way to get to a better future to me.

munk-a 7y ago

I like to pay in dollars - can I pay for their services in dollars and not be tracked everywhere I go? Advertising is a negative value add on pretty much all modern interactions, it needs to go away and stop imposing such a steep cost on consumers for the atrociously marginal value it delivers to producers.