7 ms·

People complain about data harvesting (and I don't want mine harvested either) but would would also balk at paying the "true" cost of some things if the data be

by bruceb 6y ago

People complain about data harvesting (and I don't want mine harvested either) but would would also balk at paying the "true" cost of some things if the data being sold subsidy was removed. Shorter: You get what you pay for.

kstrauser 6y ago
Your contention is that Little League would be more expensive if they weren't allowed to sell your financial records?
- Guest42 6y ago
  I think this position is being applied somewhat universally with no supporting data.
  - bruceb 6y ago
    Paid social networks have failed to gain traction because most people don't want to pay $10 a year. People will give up their shopping privacy for extra discounts the the super market. People buy cheap TVs that send data on what they watch which is then sold. Plenty of examples.
    - iamcurious 6y ago
      > Paid social networks have failed to gain traction because most people don't want to pay $10 a year. Is there an option where I get to pay $10 a year in already popular social networks and they guaranteed my privacy? Maybe then we could start demanding better quality. > People will give up their shopping privacy for extra discounts the the super market. Some will. Even then, they might buy some things in cash. They get to choose. > People buy cheap TVs that send data on what they watch which is then sold. I was not aware of that, is it informed in the tv packaging in a way a grandma can understand it?
abeyer 6y ago
Can you show some evidence that large scale data collection has been part of Little League since 1939 and pricing is based on that? Longer: People love to stand up this false dichotomy between accepting massive individual data collection or not having advertising at all. When, in fact, advertising existed for thousands of years without it and was already a huge lucrative industry.
iamcurious 6y ago
> but would would also balk at paying the "true" cost of some things if the data being sold subsidy was removed If they would, demand for the product would go down, and the company would have to adjust itself. It isn't and all or nothing. >You get what you pay for. This implies that one can pay extra to preserve privacy. Edit: please keep parent comment alive. This is a discussion we should have.
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > please keep parent comment alive. This is a discussion we should have. I upvoted even though I disagree, because yes.

by bruceb 6y ago

kstrauser 6y ago

Your contention is that Little League would be more expensive if they weren't allowed to sell your financial records?

Guest42 6y ago
I think this position is being applied somewhat universally with no supporting data.
- bruceb 6y ago
  Paid social networks have failed to gain traction because most people don't want to pay $10 a year. People will give up their shopping privacy for extra discounts the the super market. People buy cheap TVs that send data on what they watch which is then sold. Plenty of examples.
  - iamcurious 6y ago
    > Paid social networks have failed to gain traction because most people don't want to pay $10 a year. Is there an option where I get to pay $10 a year in already popular social networks and they guaranteed my privacy? Maybe then we could start demanding better quality. > People will give up their shopping privacy for extra discounts the the super market. Some will. Even then, they might buy some things in cash. They get to choose. > People buy cheap TVs that send data on what they watch which is then sold. I was not aware of that, is it informed in the tv packaging in a way a grandma can understand it?

abeyer 6y ago

Can you show some evidence that large scale data collection has been part of Little League since 1939 and pricing is based on that? Longer: People love to stand up this false dichotomy between accepting massive individual data collection or not having advertising at all. When, in fact, advertising existed for thousands of years without it and was already a huge lucrative industry.

iamcurious 6y ago

> but would would also balk at paying the "true" cost of some things if the data being sold subsidy was removed If they would, demand for the product would go down, and the company would have to adjust itself. It isn't and all or nothing. >You get what you pay for. This implies that one can pay extra to preserve privacy. Edit: please keep parent comment alive. This is a discussion we should have.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> please keep parent comment alive. This is a discussion we should have. I upvoted even though I disagree, because yes.