Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 288 posts

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#101

Post by SirSourdough »

prostoalex wrote: post #87
ska wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the point of it all isn't to make the consumer money, but to make companies less indiscriminate about gathering and storing data?

Can't you achieve the same effect at user level by faking some data + messing with tracking via Firefox containers + Ghostery + Cookies AutoDelete?

What portion of all users are going to do that? A fraction of a percent?

The point of making the companies change is that most users aren’t computer literate enough to understand the problem, it’s consequences, or the mitigations. The knowledge asymmetry between the average user and the companies collecting and using this data could hardly be more vast, and that creates a situation where companies can effectively prey on less knowledgable users. If the wide majority of users aren’t capable of finding/using the available user-level solutions, the problems will remain rampant.

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#103

Post by maerF0x0 »

qeternity wrote: post #77
fragmede wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By adding payouts into the mix, companies become incentivized to not sell your data if it's not material to them. I go to the store, I buy something. Transaction over. The idea that the store tracks the shit out of me when I'm in the store is creepy enough. I can accept that ship has sailed since I'm in their store. That the store turns around and makes money off of that browsing data so Facebook can sell me ads for…

You’re missing the point: when you go to a store, you hand them cash. When you go to a website, you hand them data, which they turn around and sell for cash. The data you give them is the payment for their product. Why else would Facebook invest billions into free products? I’m not shedding a tear for the mega corps, but people need to understand that companies will charge for products one way or another.

Many people think that "free" is a bad deal given the profits these companies make. Many people would prefer the more transparent pricing of "$5 per month" over the abstract "Whatever we can earn from your data, combined with everyone else's, by any means"

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#104

Post by grok22 »

awillen wrote: post #6

I'm all for people controlling their data and being fully informed of how it's being used, but I just don't understand the idea that you should be paid for the data that you give to companies when you choose to use their products. The payment that you get is the products. You don't get a check from Google, but you get to use Google, which is an incredibly useful tool. I like Yang, but I think he's barking up the wron…

If Google charged for the same services instead of providing it for free, would they make the same amount of billions? I assume everyone would agree that they would make way less. So the exchange in value is asymmetric and it still sort-of makes sense that you get some money for the outsize value that your personal details represents to them.

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#106

Post by alwaysdoit »

ericjang wrote: post #16
kumarm wrote: post #10

Aren't companies already paying indirectly by providing free service? I am no fan of Facebook but I am using the service free of cost and in return company collects data for targeted advertising. Shouldn't this be more targeted at cable companies which collect a monthly fee and again sell your data? And may be forcing Big Tech to provide a paid alternative which doesn't use data collected?

I think the basic premise is that the status quo of transactions (free service for user data) has resulted in an imbalance of power for tech companies, and that by increasing the cost of acquisition, users have a means to collectively negotiate better "market rates" from the tech companies for services rendered. It can be regarded as similar to "unionizing" the users. It would be interesting to get some preliminary g…

> only give premium services to the most valuable users?

Almost certainly. What people often miss in this discussion is that advertising is progressive--it's a transfer of value from richer people who can and will pay for both the service being used and the product that is being advertised to poorer people who cannot.

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#107

Post by aspenmayer »

mikedouglas wrote: post #39
devalgo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Aren't companies already paying indirectly by providing free service? I think it's more about changing the frame. That Tech companies have been profiting off something you actually have always intrinsically owned, your personal data, and now is the time to retake that ownership.

I think it's more complicated than that. It's not clear that users do intrinsically own this data. Without the product and the graph attached to the product, this data won't exist.

Is it fair to say that it’s user-generated or user-specific data? Without the user, the data either wouldn’t exist, or wouldn’t be worth much, as in the case of shadow profiles.

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#108

Post by austincheney »

jerf wrote: post #26

It doesn't work. There isn't enough money in the data for anyone to care. Your entire data load might be worth $100 a year . The only reason it funds massive industries is cost-effective aggregation by dirt-cheap computer power. I ran the numbers on Facebook a while back: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19462402 It comes out that they're making roughly $17/yr in annual revenue per user. Revenue , not profit . Cr…

For how much data? I would be willing to post some nonsense every month for a return of $1.50 a month. I bet I could automate that across several platforms or even turn it into a business representing various online personas.

Re: Andrew Yang's Data Dividend Project is pushing Big Tech to pay users for data

#109

Post by bryan_w »

waon wrote: post #89
spaced-out wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's outright dystopian when you need to organize a social media campaign to get medical treatment. The above comment wasn't an example of that, though. His friend was getting medical treatment, the issue is that you can't just buy a kidney (at least not in the US), you need to find a donor.

> The above comment wasn't an example of that That isn't just an outright baseless claim, it's wrong by definition . The said person had to go to social media to find a donor, which 100% matches what I descibed, and the fact that some felt this was necessary points to a broken system. It's also terrible to imagine what shady companies can do with targeted ads aimed at vulnerable people who can't find any donors.

You want government enforced kidney donations?
Post reply on HN