Live data from Hacker News

Let's make them pay for using our personal data

amortizedcost.net

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#81

Why would they pay you for your data? How much is it worth? If you click on 0 ads per year, you generate $0 for Facebook and therefore your data is worth $0. For a personally targeted (using your data) ad click on FB, you're looking at ~$3.25. For a web targeted ad click on a niche website, you're probably looking $0.50-$2.50. In other words, your "data" is worth $0.75-$2.75 per click of revenue FB spends 17% of reve…

> On the flip side, FB should offer a paid ad-free version of their services but who honestly would pay $10/mo for FB + Instagram etc.? IIRC they don't make anywhere near $10/user/month. If you gave me the option to pay, say, $25/year for ad-free, tracking-free, and it was implemented in some way that I could trust , then I might be willing to participate with FB again. I'm hoping, actually, that someone will come al…

There's an adverse selection issue. Let's say you make $10/month/user from ads, and offer the option to pay $10/month to not have ads. Users with less money are less likely to take you up on that, and are also less valuable as an advertising audience, so you start bringing in much less per month per ads-only user.

Advertising effectively allows a company to charge richer users more, which you lose when you switch to a flat fee.

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#82
post #72

Pretty sure the mechanics as detailed in the article are factually wrong. Google does not sell personal data. It collects all the personal data it can and then stockpiles it, where it becomes an asset that the company can use to build products and charge rent (largely from advertisers, but also from consumers). Selling an extremely valuable proprietary asset to competitors would be a really dumb move - the money in t…

Google does sell personal data, a little at a time. If I make an ad that targets young dog owners in Seattle, then when someone clicks that ad I know Google thinks they're a young dog owner in Seattle. Google sold me data about that person.

Not that I'm saying we shouldn't be careful with our personal data, but:

There's some serious mental gymnastics going from "young dog owners in Seattle" to selling somebody a dossier with their location, search & browsing history (all of which you can turn off).

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#83

Under the spirit of capitalism, if privacy is such a popular product that so many consumers want, then why not make it available for them to purchase? For Google users example, free-tier will allow each user account 5 searches per month that will not be tracked and recorded, so essentially users will have an option to specify right before the moment of each search to indicate whether this specific search is going to…

> For Google users example, free-tier will allow each user account 5 searches per month that will not be tracked and recorded

You can already open an incognito / private browsing window if you want to search without it contributing to your profile. On the other hand, modern search works better because it can build that sort of profile.

(Disclosure: I work for Google, on ads. Commenting only as myself.)

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#84

I've been thinking instead of paying individuals, gov't should levy a tax on PII that is stored. A $/person identified/fingerprinted would be interesting. This would allow ethical companies like Firefox and Signal to operate at much lower margins than Chrome and Messenger.

That sounds self defeating from matters of auditing would expose it to the government and everyone involved in compliance layers. Not to mention PII can be composite. Knowing you are 26 and in say New York City doesn't tell much. Now add "once worked at a Quiznos in 2010" and "born July 19th" starts narrowing things further.

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#85

I’d rather be given the option to just straight up pay for a service with assurance that my personal data isn’t being used. That is what I would like to “make them” do.

I read a statistic that claimed Facebook would only need a single payment of like $4 from it's users to operate at the same margins without selling their data. Seems like presenting users with the option of paying $10 for premium privacy could end up make companies more money. I don't use FB, but I'd sure use Google products more often if the option were available. Maybe we're edge-case users, but I surely don't feel…

> Facebook would only need a single payment of like $4 from it's users to operate at the same margins without selling their data

Facebook makes about $100/year from American users. [1] Something like $4 once can't be right.

(Facebook also doesn't sell your data. They allow people to target ads against your data.)

[1] 2018 Q3 data, but the right range: https://digiday.com/marketing/facebooks-making-money-per-use...

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the flip side, FB should offer a paid ad-free version of their services but who honestly would pay $10/mo for FB + Instagram etc.? IIRC they don't make anywhere near $10/user/month. If you gave me the option to pay, say, $25/year for ad-free, tracking-free, and it was implemented in some way that I could trust , then I might be willing to participate with FB again. I'm hoping, actually, that someone will come al…

Some ex FB employees did make this. It was on techcrunch in the past 1 year, I think. Just found it, it shut down. https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/30/fabric-offers-an-alternati... https://medium.com/@fabric.me/sunsetting-the-fabric-app-deb2...

[deleted]

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#87

Under the spirit of capitalism, if privacy is such a popular product that so many consumers want, then why not make it available for them to purchase? For Google users example, free-tier will allow each user account 5 searches per month that will not be tracked and recorded, so essentially users will have an option to specify right before the moment of each search to indicate whether this specific search is going to…

The main reason why not is it is a matter of trust. Just because you are paying is no guarantee that you aren't also the product. Just look at how long cable remained ad free.

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#88

I know this is a really unpopular opinion, but what I don't get is why all this fuss over personal data? So what if facebook records what sites you've been to? If I visit starbucks, When I go to order my latte, the owners/baristas remember my name and face and maybe even what drink I ordered - you certainly don't mind that, right? People aren't normally sensitive to these things: for example Govt on average takes 1/3…

I'll give it a shot. Yeah, so you don't give a crap about being tracked everywhere, having your every inclination, desire, thought, intention, or deed recorded. You're fine with them knowing everything about you, about your family, friends, associates, acquaintances, and all their doings and preferences too. But then one day you wake up and you realize that your entire existence is being mined to corral you into corridor of sameness, conformity, and malaise. You don't think anything edgy or dangerous, don't do anything remotely controversial or embarrassing. They mostly track you to monetize your sameness, your complete and utter lack of originality, your total lack of value to them except as cattle to be fed a diet of carrots and sticks; ads and special offers. You don't mind the digital eyes stalking you everywhere from the shadows. You don't mind having your complete existence watched over for--for now, seemingly innocuous if slightly annoying cajoling to buy more crap.

But you live a charmed life without imagination. Without dangerous ideas. Who wouldn't hurt a soul. To you, your life couldn't possibly matter. To you, you're one of the herd. You like it. Blending right in.

Enjoy your charmed life that complete and utter indifference to the digital dystopia being erected around you, beyond your control. You probably won't do anything edgy or interesting, because you're caught in that loop that they love you to be in. Inured and desensitized, caught in a self-reinforcing loop made by the background of your mind, constructed by your subconscious that knows that you're being watched--all the time.

For your sakes I hope you never stumble on a crime, disagree with prevailing political opinions, or speak up against the powers that be. Or that you look like someone who might. Or are close to someone who might. Better steer clear of sex toys, risky behavior and embarrassing maladies, live your bland existence under the watchful eye of the overlords who seem harmless, if only a little greedy.

Don't live your life any way that makes you unique and don't make yourself a target! Don't bother to use your imagination! Keep your lips off that whistle! And make sure to vote, or not, because who the fuck cares how society treats its citizens, amirite?

And don't bother looking back to the expectation of privacy that just a generation ago, was some kind of normal. To see the governments and power structures that wielded tyranny over people and engaged in genocide, to the documents and bills of rights that were put in place to restrict that tyranny, and how thoroughly founders understood that people just have a right to be free. But lattes!

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#89

Under the spirit of capitalism, if privacy is such a popular product that so many consumers want, then why not make it available for them to purchase? For Google users example, free-tier will allow each user account 5 searches per month that will not be tracked and recorded, so essentially users will have an option to specify right before the moment of each search to indicate whether this specific search is going to…

This seems… very dystopian. Would we be okay with e.g. landlords placing cameras in the bathrooms of apartments for rent unless the tenant paid an extra fee? What if it were framed as a discount and targeted low-income housing? Why should we allow our privacy to be commoditized, instead of enshrining it as a basic human right?

It's not mandatory. Everything else would still remain the same for free users just like what we already have, this is only for those who prefer not to be included in the data so now they will have the option to pay instead.

Obviously we cannot expect Google to provide their services for free as it's very costly to maintain such global infrastructure and their team of engineers, therefore in turn Google would need user data in order to provide advertising products and generate the required revenue. We must pay for using Google services in one way or another, and right now we are paying it by giving up our personal data.

In the end this will simply serve as another payment option for those who value their privacy more than cash. I suspect the majority of population would still remain at free tier. However with more options available, at least the public will no longer complain about potential privacy issues, and Google can also remove much of the unnecessary heat and focus off their back. There are just so many different ways Google can tweak and optimize these offers to satisfy public demand for privacy.

The current advertising in exchange for privacy model obviously does not work for all consumers so it's time to evolve.

Re: Let's make them pay for using our personal data

#90
In theory I agree, but the somewhat depressing realization is that your data is not especially valuable in and of itself. The marginal value of your data with respect to 10,000,000 other people's data is almost (but not quite) nothing. The value is in the whole.

It might work well if significantly large groups of people got together and collectively sold their data - say 100,000 or more. That would be kind of cool - "hey we are 100,000 people with X demographics and are willing to share Y data for Z dollars.

Doing it on an individual basis may be a symbolic victory, but that would likely be it. "Personal" data has a huge asymmetry in value. There is some Danny Kahneman in here somewhere - I bet people would value their own data 10x what they value a random person's at.

In my opinion people would on average refuse to sell their data individually because what it is actually worth would almost certainly be lower (probably much lower) than they'd imagine, and that sounds like it would make people sad not happy.

Post reply on HN