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.
You're presupposing that privacy is a commodity, but I'm suggesting that it should be more sacred than that.
> In the end this will simply serve as another payment option for those who value their privacy more than cash.
The problem with this is it makes privacy a luxury. Should those living paycheck to paycheck have to choose between their privacy and finding things on the Internet?
If privacy is a commodity, then this is fine. But then, so is the status quo: privacy is currency to be exchanged for services, and companies should stretch that currency as far as possible. There is no sound moral argument against what Google/Facebook/etc are doing. The current advertising model may not work for everyone, but who cares? The market has spoken.
If privacy is a human right, then this is obviously insufficient. We can't allow companies to exploit people who can't afford it by making it opt-in; we need to strictly enforce it for everyone.
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.