Why don't these companies just offer a paid version of their products? Giving people an opportunity to back out. E.g: Pay X per month to use Google and you get no ads or tracked. YouTube does something similar, but I guess they still track you.
I personally would still mostly use the free ad-supported version.
Naive question: If you preclude a politician from owning stocks, can't they execute such trades via an off-the-radar friend? And receive profits via "gifts".
I imagine this is already illegal? But isn't it harder to prove if done right?
It's questionable, but I think the idea is that ad tech makes ads more valuable? Ie a user gets something relevant to them.
Maybe the future will be this personalization happens offline on the user's device.
Your example on WhatsApp buttresses my point I guess. With payment, businesses have to rely on part of their userbase. And we all know that segment largely comes from particular geographies. This knowledge largely affects a company's strategy.
Ads are not totally different -- CPC/CPM varies across markets. But maybe can be compensated by volume.
> Whether they are separate issues or not depends on the company.
I don't understand this. At the end of the day they are separate things, probably you are saying a profit-seeking company is more likely to be unethical?
The fact that two things are usually correlated doesn't make them the same, right?
What alternatives to ads do you suggest? I don't see donations or paid services as a viable alternative (especially for people in emerging markets -- will companies still have any incentives to chase these markets?).
I don't think other concerns are less important to "privacy" concerns.
Each restriction just makes certain ideas/project impossible or less ideal [1].
Honestly as an Android dev, I will prefer devices come with these restrictions by default. Then there should be a "I don't give a f*ck" button in the device developer options settings.
The option can be hidden behind 10 screens. Audit rails can be added. Anything but completely eliminating power-use in the name of privacy.
I mean, if you really want it today, there are places in the world you could go to that have little to no internet access.
Where people still communicate mostly in-person.
(I'm only half joking haha).
> Does Facebook really make anyone's life better?
I can only answer for myself. It made my life better:
1. At the start of my career, I got connections, jobs, etc from local groups.
2. I connected with old school mates I wouldn't have found other wise.
3. ...
My assumption is when people are not addicted or living/following fake lives on social media, there is a lot of benefits to it.