Slashdot Mirror
Your Personal Information Is Now the World's Most Valuable Commodity (www.cbc.ca)
"Data is clearly the new oil," says Jonathan Taplin, director emeritus of the USC Annenberg Innovation Lab and the author of Move Fast and Break Things: How Google, Facebook and Amazon Cornered Culture and Undermined Democracy. While oil was the world's most valuable resource, it has been surpassed by data, as evidenced by the five most valuable companies in the world today -- Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft and Google's parent company Alphabet. CBC.ca reports: What "the big five" are selling -- or not selling, as in the case of free services like Google or Facebook -- is access. As we use their platforms, the corporate giants are collecting information about every aspect of our lives, our behavior and our decision-making. All of that data gives them tremendous power. And that power begets more power, and more profit. On one hand, the data can be used to make their tools and services better, which is good for consumers. These companies are able to learn what we want based on the way we use their products, and can adjust them in response to those needs. Access to such sweeping amounts of data also allows these giants to spot trends early and move on them, which sometimes involves buying up a smaller company before it can become a competitive threat. Pasquale points out that Google/Alphabet has been using its power "to bully or take over rivals and adjacent businesses" at a rate of about "one per week since 2010." But it's not just newer or smaller tech companies that are at risk, says Taplin. "When Google and Facebook control 88 per cent of all new internet advertising, the rest of the internet economy, including things like online journalism and music, are starved for resources."
Traditionally, this is where the antitrust regulators would step in, but in the data economy it's not so easy. What we're seeing for the first time is a clash between the concept of the nation state and these global, borderless corporations. A handful of tech giants now surpass the size and power of many governments.
Traditionally, this is where the antitrust regulators would step in, but in the data economy it's not so easy. What we're seeing for the first time is a clash between the concept of the nation state and these global, borderless corporations. A handful of tech giants now surpass the size and power of many governments.
Corporations do not eclipse the size or the power of any government: governments hold a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.
Through a VPN.
Good luck Google figuring out who I am.
When you start sending me a check every month for my percentage – I'll take 75% thanks – then I'll rethink
Three of five sell things. The other two sell access to you.
Data isn't as important as pundits would like to believe.
... to them is next to nothing; even when great swaths of the tech community manage to boycott/complain, they know it's just a drop in the bucket. All they have to do is take minimal pains to marginalize our concerns in the eyes of Joe Blow and they've all but won.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
data ain't doing so good, then.
Repeating the obvious seems increasingly pointless, but: Unless we are given control over our personal information, then freedom becomes meaningless. With sufficient personal information about you I can force you or prevent you from doing anything. It's not just the bad stuff that can be used as a sticks to threaten you, but even the good stuff that can be used as carrots to manipulate you. (Check my sig.)
Easier to make the example clear by personifying it, so: Controlling your personal information means deciding WHERE it is stored, WHO has access to it, WHAT they can do with it, and WHEN they have to erase any working copies. Oh yeah. It also includes knowing WHAT the personal information is.
As the current system of corporate cancerism (not to be confused with extinct capitalism) has developed, your personal information belongs to any giant corporation that has figured out some way to collect it. Of course that information is incredibly valuable, but the frightening parts are (1) There is no gawd but profit, and Apple, Exxon, Google, and some big banks are profit's prophets, and (2) The highest RoI is bribing cheap politicians to implement "government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%".
Old stuff. New aspect involves how this should interface with your public reputation. I think that PUBLIC information is also being distorted and abused when it could be aggregated and displayed in a way that would (1) Help you understand who you should pay attention to, and (2) Help you become a better person.
My own focus on (1) is in terms of saving my time. I'd prefer to spend as much as possible with good people. Not only would I prefer not to see people with negative reputations, but I'd actually prefer to filter on a relative basis in terms of people who are clearly much better than me. Unfortunately, in accord with (2), that's not saying much. Too much room for improvement, and it doesn't help to just avoid mirrors.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
There is no privacy, everything you do is tracked. If you live in a cabin in the woods you will be known by the mail you receive or the web sites you visit. I bought some things from a web store and then got ads from sites offering similar items.
According to "Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley" by Antonio Garcia Martinez, who combined Facebook data with third-party demographic data to determine the identity of a user either logged in or browsing anonymously, there's no such thing as online privacy. And the author ain't sorry for compromising online privacy in this podcast.
What we're seeing for the first time is a clash between the concept of the nation state and these global, borderless corporations.
No, this is not the first time. The East India Company, for example, had immense power at its height.
When a small-minded person attempts to blackmail me, I just tell them to go search my blogs from the last 20+ years. If I haven't written about it, I'll do so immediately. It's very difficult to blackmail someone who is willing to turn whatever the blackmailer thinks is a big deal into a public discussion.
Why would anyone blackmail a nobody? Why do you make it sound like happens often?
Check out my blog post, The Blackmail of David Letterman.
And if you're that open, why did you get so upset a month ago because people found out "personal" information you ejaculate everywhere given any provocation?
I was unaware that third-party websites had republished my personal information from public documents. I was under the impression that douche bags were going out of their way to find public documents at government websites.
So you won't mind if I post your phone number here?
If you want to be a douche bag, be my guest.
After my parents filed for bankruptcy in the 1970's, they didn't have a credit card for 40 years. When the dealerships were practically giving away cars after the Great Recession in 2010, my father when down to the dealership and inquired about financing to buy a truck. He told the clerk that he didn't have a credit record. She laughed. It took her 20 minutes to confirm that he didn't have a credit record. He paid for half the truck in cash. When he got his first bill the following month, his boss paid the other half. After that, he had a credit record.
You're really not important enough for that.
Except that I was falsely accused of threatening to shoot people, fake accounts got deleted for mocking me, and dick pics with my contact info got posted on Russian websites. The douche bags on Slashdot found me important enough to waste their time. Some of this I've documented on my blog, the rest I'm saving for an essay that I'll publish next year.
Jesus Christ, you poor victim. The world awaits the story of the The First Victim Of The Internet with bated breath! Oh please don't keep us waiting, askance!
I'm not a victim. I just have an interesting life that people are willing to pay money to read about.
If the government decides to open your data container, it not going to be fun and games.
You mean the Chinese? They already got my background file for my security clearance.
They can't blackmail you if everyone already knows everything about you
Small-minded people think they're the only ones who have information that no one else knows about. I'm always happy to throw out a link and tell them to rethink their position. Most of the time they just go away.
Why would they pay when you said "If I haven't written about it, I'll do so immediately" on his shitty blog?
The same reason why people buy a book instead of downloading a bootleg PDF of the book.
So how does that apply, Moby Trick?
Different formats. The blog is free. The ebooks are not.
Own your own data.
Publish your data under license.
Restrict usage of your data.
If it is valuable, they will pay you something to use your data.
Go well
I find it very hard to believe that the day to day details of how I barely slide into payday with a dollar left in my wallet can somehow be transformed into wealth by the 1%. Long ago I heard the phrase "physical economy" uttered by Lyndon LaRouche... and it has stuck with me ever since... show me how this information actually results in a widget being manufactured somewhere, and isn't just a bit in a bank account... and I might believe you.
I make gears for a living... I understand how the value I put in results in productivity elsewhere, in a direct physical way. I have no idea how the details of my poverty can enrich someone else.
I call BUBBLE! Like sub-prime real estate... and sub-prime auto set to pop next... I think this too shall pop.
The power of this information is in aggregate.
The knowledge that you make gears for $1 each, and buy springs for $2 each, may be useless.
The knowledge that there are 50,000 people like you, may also be useless.
But, add the knowledge that there are 50,000 other people making springs for $1 each and paying $2 for gears, and now you can place a bunch of orders, make a deal with a shipping company, sell gears and springs for $1.75 each, and make approximately $70,000 from one round of sales... And you've saved everyone 25 cents and given the shipping company more business.
All you had was information - and all you did was make some calls.
Aggregate information, ESPECIALLY when it's exclusive, can be translated almost directly into money. Just takes some lateral thinking.
Knowledge of what people do, think, want, and feel, is not just another way to find new ways to profit. It is THE ONLY WAY that there has EVER BEEN to find new ways to profit. The more concentrated that knowledge becomes, the more concentrated opportunity and profit becomes. It's a pretty direct correlation.
Why base it on market capitalization? As the dot-com bubble showed, that's an extremely variable and unreliable way to measure a company's success.
Based on annual revenue - you know, how much these companies actually sell, which seems like a more relevant measure if you're talking about how valuable their product is - the listed companies rank:
#9 Apple
#26 Amazon
#65 Alphabet
#69 Microsoft
#393 Facebook
The top ten companies based on revenue are:
#1 Walmart (retail)
#2 State Grid (Chinese electricity utility)
#3 Sinopec Group (oil)
#4 China National Petroleum (oil)
#5 Toyota Motor (auto)
#6 Volkswagen (auto)
#7 Royal Dutch Shell (oil)
#8 Berkshire Hathaway (finance)
#9 Apple (tech)
#10 Exxon Mobil (oil)
So based on value of sales, the world's most valuable commodity remains oil.
The top ten companies based on profit are:
#1 Apple (tech)
#2 JP Morgan Chase (finance)
#3 Berkshire Hathaway (finance)
#4 Wells Fargo (finance)
#5 Gilead Sciences (pharmaceuticals)
#6 Verizon (telecom)
#7 Citigroup (finance)
#8 Alphabet (tech)
#9 Exxon Mobil (oil)
#10 Bank of America (finance)
So based on profit, the world's most valuable commodity is financial services.
Revenue = how much you actually sell
Profit = how strong your sales are (delta between supply and demand)
Market cap = investors (including clueless ones) placing bets
Who gives a fuck?
Lots more people than should. That's how we wind up with all these cowards all over slashdot
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
ummmmm, duuhhhh. Put out as much fake data as you can about yourself. May as well make it funny.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Oil is still the most important resource. Try and warm yourself in winter with personal data. Making fertilizer to feed 100s of millions. Building roads and other infrastructure. Doesn't work!
Just as long as they acknowledge the value of that information when they take it from me. And compensate me for it properly.
Have gnu, will travel.
Who gives a fuck?
According to "The Boy Kings of Facebook" by Katherine Losse, a service like Facebook is popular because "people and stories". Same reason for Slashdot. We're all here for the people and the stories. It certainly not for the deep technical discussions that almost never happens around here. You have to go to Reddit for that.
It does not necessarily matter that the data is dirty. It only matters that globs of money can be spent a tiny bit more efficiently than the crappy way it was spent 20 years ago, to make this new kind of advertising exciting...to people who care about advertising.
For example, big automakers spent a few hundred million a year for advertising. They believe this kind of budget is in the right ballpark based on decades of experience. They are not naive. They do understand that individual advertising efforts within this big budget are flops, but what is going to be a flop is only clear in hindsight.
So we are literally talking about companies like GM looking at expanding their $350 million ad budget from last year to $360 million this year, and wondering whether to increase their "online" spending from $80 million to $90 million. So the data may be dirty but it could still be money better spent than a few more glossy magazine ads.
We're all here for the people and the stories.
False, some are here to post affiliate links, a.k.a. spam.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
False, some are here to post affiliate links, a.k.a. spam.
Which doesn't violate the Slashdot TOS. If you got a problem with that, take it up with management.
Data gathering, like self-driving cars, is mostly hype. Buyers of advertising hope it is valid, but I don't see evidence that the data produces cost effective profits for them. The data is dirty to the point of being nearly useless.
Additionally, you can be certain that their data about you, as an individual, is largely in error. Just as the Annual Credit Reports are full of errors, and the No Fly List is full of errors, they just can't assemble their data coherently yet. If ever. They assume, for instance that your IP address is only used by you. That is until they find you purchasing women's wear, infant and adult diapers and men's motorcycle boots. How can they parse that information into a statistically valid conclusion?
It's safe to say that we can easily confuse all but the most dedicated trackers. Most users do without even trying.
Based on your theory, I would expect any minute now the cost of a 30-second Superbowl ad to plummet by 90%, along with most of the demand for commercial advertising and internet ads.
Yes, we'll be able to shut down our ad blockers any day now, since most data is worthless...