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

Post by sida » Mon, Jun 22, 2020, 5:08 PM UTC

erentz wrote: post #55

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…

When I see these breakdowns I think I’d pay $17 per year for Facebook without all of the ads and tracking and data mining and knowing I was just getting a good service optimized for its customers. Why not ban tracking and ad targeting and selling personal data, and force that business model to go extinct, and now they have to start charging for service and their users become actual customers.

Post by AlwaysRock » Mon, Jun 22, 2020, 5:11 PM UTC

Calvin02 wrote: post #11

I foresee tech companies creating paid and non-paid versions of their products. If you don't want your data monetized, please pay $50/month for Google Search, GMail, Maps, and YouTube. If you are okay with the value exchange of ads and free services, then you are opting into a mutually agreed upon arrangement with no compensation.

Post by gentleman11 » Mon, Jun 22, 2020, 5:13 PM UTC

Post by prostoalex » Mon, Jun 22, 2020, 5:15 PM UTC

ska wrote: post #40

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…

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?

Post by waon » Mon, Jun 22, 2020, 5:19 PM UTC

spaced-out wrote: post #66

waon wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already bad enough that the surveillance economy is threatening our civil liberties in more ways than one. It's outright dystopian when you need to organize a social media campaign to get medical treatment. Considering the sheer number of people who desperately need medical help, the chances of succeeding is very very low.

>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.