
Data Dividend Project - snake117
https://www.datadividendproject.com/
======
dang
Comments moved to
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23601333](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23601333).

Normally we'd have merged the other way, since this is the canonical source
and was posted earlier, but people are complaining about not being able to
read the site.

------
zirkonit
> Access from your Country was disabled by the administrator.

Cutting off entire countries at the level of firewall rules seems almost
dehumanizing.

~~~
Hitton
I wonder why in the current year™ this isn't considered racist too.

EDIT: I'm getting downvoted and I don't know why. When Trump issued travel ban
on citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen it was
considered racist. I don't see how banning users from other countries using
some other arbitrary measures is any less racist.

~~~
sergiotapia
It will be just give it time.

At previous positions I've banned entire countries like China from our
backend. The truth is some companies do zero business in Country X, so it
makes sense to outright ban them to avoid the headache.

You should see the traffic I would get from people in china trying to hack in
our backends. The funniest bits were seeing people trying to hit /phpmyadmin

------
robjan
Unable to access this site in Hong Kong: "Access from your Country was
disabled by the administrator."

For anyone else with this problem, here's an archive link:
[https://archive.is/h3PWJ](https://archive.is/h3PWJ)

------
lucasb9
The online "user data" business model is identical to the highway, or the
magazine, or the mall, or the airport business model. You create traffic by
providing access at or below cost, and make money by selling ads to all the
traffic you create. Should highways, airports or magazines pay users money
from the revenue they generate by selling ads around their high traffic
properties?

Another consideration is about the proportion of an ad's cost that can be
attributable to the data these companies have, which depends on the degree to
which the ad is targeted or not. For example, are keyword-tied search ads and
the money Google makes from them related at all to any data they may have on
you?

Furthermore, any attempt to account for the "price" of used data (basically
just something to id you online) should be matched by a valuation of the true
value this companies offer in compensation. In the case of google: what's the
value to users from having fast, accurate search; petabytes upon petabytes of
free content (from the mundane to the educational) on youtube ($5 - $9/mo if
you go by Disney+/Netflix prices); and entire office suite ($5 - $12/mo
looking at many SaaS/Office 365) kept up to date; a quality email client
($99/yr for Hey); a free OS for your phone and computer (Android/Chromebooks);
a high quality global mapping service w/ turn-by-turn GPS ($300 devices back
in the day?); a Calendar ($3 - $9/mo looking at competitors), 15GB of cloud
storage; unlimited storage for all your photos in the cloud (say the average
user has 50Gb of photos, thats $3 - $9/mo).... and I could go on. In the case
of Facebook I believe there is genuine value in having a directory of all your
friends/acquaintances/family, and a repository for memories either there or on
instagram.

I see the techlash and policies like this data-dividend as a very natural
impulse from society to get a spoonfull from the honeypot these companies
created. Just because it is natural doesn't mean it is right. Our economic
model is premised on the idea that the fruits of your labor/property/ideas are
yours to keep, however spectacular they may be. Keep in mind that this policy
does nothing to change the way this companies operate, or question their
overall effects on society.

