Does that mean that Odysee itself thinks that its users are the product?
Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
11–20 of 221 posts
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#12In theory, if you’re paying, it means that you’re a stakeholder, and can have some influence over the companies revenue, and therefore have some leverage. In practice, the fact that you are paying for a service makes you much more attractive to advertisers because it says you’re willing to spend money online.
You are or are not a stakeholder if you pay or don't pay.
If you believe you are a stakeholder by paying you should believe you are a stakeholder because they make money from you through ads.
You are not a stakeholder in either case.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#13I realized this when Microsoft started reading the emails and attachments in my office 365 account, and having Cortana "helpfully" suggest various to-do items from them.
The degree to which this seems to be the case has me convinced that the only way I will actually have any control of my data is if it's on a hard drive in my physical possession. And frankly I don't have time to maintain my own IT infrastructure.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#14I realized this when Microsoft started reading the emails and attachments in my office 365 account, and having Cortana "helpfully" suggest various to-do items from them. The degree to which this seems to be the case has me convinced that the only way I will actually have any control of my data is if it's on a hard drive in my physical possession. And frankly I don't have time to maintain my own IT infrastructure.
The reality has changed a lot about self hosting. Looking into it might surprise you.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#15I agree in general. Although I still firmly believe it’s not the case with Apple. Haven’t been convinced otherwise yet.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#16The next to last paragraph bothers me: On Hackernews, they think it's "entitlement" to think that you can use free email and search engines and expect not to be tracked. The main problem with this line of thinking is that even if you had the option to pay for your email and for your search engine, some G**gle executive somewhere would mention during a meeting that they could add an extra $X million of revenue if they…
I think the author's point is that you will be tracked even if you do pay.
And indeed, I pay Google for gmail because some years I somehow slipped out of the free tier and had to start paying. At the same time, my email is unequivocally used by Google for tracking. I'm paying, and I'm still the product.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#17The next to last paragraph bothers me: On Hackernews, they think it's "entitlement" to think that you can use free email and search engines and expect not to be tracked. The main problem with this line of thinking is that even if you had the option to pay for your email and for your search engine, some G**gle executive somewhere would mention during a meeting that they could add an extra $X million of revenue if they…
If you are strict with this argument, there would also be no free internet sites to visit.
I don't need to use any of Googles services to be tracked by Google, although Facebook is probably the largest offender here.
In social networks, friends of mine have shared my contact information without me even knowing it. So other people might pay with your data.
And I believe the text is correct. You would pay and be tracked. Companies found out that the mass of users is pretty uncritical and if they are allowed to do it, they will do it.
Also, websites could be financed through advertising that doesn't rely on tracking. A simple policy change and you blow a lot of mostly useless ad company out of the water.
I think that would be good.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#18The next to last paragraph bothers me: On Hackernews, they think it's "entitlement" to think that you can use free email and search engines and expect not to be tracked. The main problem with this line of thinking is that even if you had the option to pay for your email and for your search engine, some G**gle executive somewhere would mention during a meeting that they could add an extra $X million of revenue if they…
That doesn't seem like a fair representation. The quote there isn't saying you should expect totally free services. It's saying you have the right to expect not to be tracked. Advertising up until 20 years ago relied entirely upon context and behavioral and engagement studies were conducted on an opt-in basis on Nielsen families and focus groups composed either of volunteers or people being compensated for participating in market research.
It is quite different to say you have a right to no advertisements on free services, which is not what this is saying, and to say you have a right to expect not to have your every digital action surveilled and studied 24/7 for the purposes of advertisers getting free research subjects who often don't realize they're being used as research subjects, which is what this is saying.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#19I realized this when Microsoft started reading the emails and attachments in my office 365 account, and having Cortana "helpfully" suggest various to-do items from them. The degree to which this seems to be the case has me convinced that the only way I will actually have any control of my data is if it's on a hard drive in my physical possession. And frankly I don't have time to maintain my own IT infrastructure.
The reality has changed a lot about self hosting. Looking into it might surprise you.
Self hosting e-mail? With the trust issues you get with small mail servers these days, I've got better things to do than worry if that job application ever reached their inbox.
Re: Even if you’re paying, you’re still the product
#20This line of thinking ends with "companies are evil." It's not totally wrong, but it's perhaps not a useful framing.
Businesses make money in all sorts of ways. Most big companies blend these together. NYTimes charges users AND sells ads. Enterprise SaaS sells licenses AND charges for installation and configuration services. App store widgets charge for download AND sell aggregate data.
Brand gets undersold in a lot of tech/startup communities, because those communities are frequently organized around doing new things, which necessarily don't have brands. But the answer to a lot of these problems IS brands, because brands are a proxy for trust.
At some point, if you want a service, you have to decide which company you trust the most to deliver it without misleading you or doing things you disagree with. Most businesses run without constant lawsuits keeping them in line, because trust and word of mouth and reputation matters.
If you can't trust anybody, then don't use computers, I guess. But the world is shades of gray, and I do think it's worthwhile to figure out which companies you do trust.