
Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data - thomble
https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-considered-charging-for-access-to-user-data-1543447785
======
neonate
[https://outline.com/dgvaxt](https://outline.com/dgvaxt)

------
nijave
How is this different than any other company in any other industry?
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_broker](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_broker)

This is credit agencies' entire business model and you can't even opt
out/close your account

~~~
angott
I believe the major difference here is that credit bureaus are open about
their business models. Can’t say the same about the ways in which Facebook
monetizes data.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
How is my credit score calculated?

------
JeffreyKaine
I'd actually be down with this, but only if facebook gave user's the ability
to lock their own data down at fair market price. That way the user pays for a
product, or decides to be the product. It's clean and cut & dry; and there
wouldn't be any illusions of a "free" service.

~~~
RandomGuyDTB
The problem is market price would be less than a penny per megabyte of data.

EDIT: Okay, I admit I pulled this figure out of my behind but my point is data
is incredibly cheap.

~~~
the_duke
That's a completely useless metric.

200 bytes can easily contain name, adress, phone number, occupation, age and
list of interests for one person.

~~~
ryacko
The first 200 bytes are free then.

------
icinnamon
Isn't their ad product already effectively charging for access to the user
data? In a slightly more obfuscated way, sure, but broadly the same?

~~~
121789
I don't think so. I think the more correct way to frame it would be that they
are charging for access to the space in a user's feed. Like renting billboard
space, except the user data makes it very easy to understand where you should
put that billboard.

~~~
btown
In fact, the adtech industry quite literally refers to these spaces as
"inventory" \-
[https://wiki.appnexus.com/display/adnexusdocumentation/Inven...](https://wiki.appnexus.com/display/adnexusdocumentation/Inventory+Quality)

------
have_faith
So what, we've all considered bad ideas.

~~~
vanishinggrad
most of us don't have a track record of making and implementing decisions that

1\. expose millions of people to russian propaganda and disinformation 2\.
expose very sensitive personal data of millions and millions of individuals to
dubious actors in violation of company policy (cambridge analytica) 3\. hire
right wing dirty tricksters to smear opposition as being financed by the evil
jew George Soros 4\. drag our feet when internal security professionals
identify (1)

and that's just off the top of my head. Facebook has a consistent pattern of
egregious misbehavior. This article is just another brick in the wall
indicating profoundly bad judgement. Only by the grace of god did they not
implement such a policy of selling user data.

I'm not in love with the monopoly power of google (I use duck duck go) and
they clearly do some dumb shit. like the government approved censorship engine
(firefly) but it basically seems like brin and page and schmidt and sundar
pinchai are not expressively malevolent and seem to be trying to act in a way
that balances shareholder interests with the interests of users. Zuckerberg
and Sandernberg still seem to be operating under the mantra of "they trust me;
the dumb fucks".

honestly that quote should have been the end of facebook.

------
jka
Even if customers pay for a service, isn't it likely that eventually the
service will _also_ want to sell their data anyway in order to increase
margins?

~~~
ceejayoz
The potential reputation hit is harder to justify if you've got robust other
income streams.

~~~
jka
Indeed, and that's certainly reassuring; the option may still gain traction
over time though, even for the most forthright of businesses.

------
AznHisoka
They already did this experiment years ago. They had a product called Pylon
with Datasift. Rumor had it people thought it was a cool idea, in theory, but
few people had any practical uses for it.

------
jonbronson
The real question is, did they decide not to because they realized it was
unethical? Or because they felt it was too risky to public perception?

~~~
hackinthebochs
I don't get this obsession with ethics (in terms of correct motives) from
companies. Why does the thought process behind the behavior matter when it
comes to a public company, over and above the behavior itself? The fact that
the company is responsive to public opinion should the goal.

~~~
DaiPlusPlus
Act _too_ unethically and with popular opinion against you you’ll quickly find
legislation against your interests.

------
kgc
Profit sharing would be interesting.

------
chris_wot
When the product is free, it isn't the product. You are the product.

------
nov29man
Like Google employee Facebook employee would have done something, if they were
any good.

Sorry for being harsh.

Reference: [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/27/read-google-employees-
open-l...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/27/read-google-employees-open-letter-
protesting-project-dragonfly.html)

Hanging more good quotes in the facebook's office wall doesn't make you any
good, you are part of an organisation that creating more problems in the
world, you are the reason. Unless you act and do your part.

