1/
interesting thread.
interesting thread.
https://twitter.com/JesseLucasSaga/status/1471530048847065088
2/
a point to expand upon: one's individual data is probably not that very valuable; it's much more valuable *in aggregate* and *with cross-correlation *. it would probably make much more sense for group ownership of data - think shareholders in a business venture.
a point to expand upon: one's individual data is probably not that very valuable; it's much more valuable *in aggregate* and *with cross-correlation *. it would probably make much more sense for group ownership of data - think shareholders in a business venture.
3/
another point to expand upon: ability to trade our own data would *also* provide us with a degree of feedback as to how (non-)anonymous does our data make us.
imagine if, for every draft post, you could get an estimate "this de-anonymizes you by 2%" or some such.
another point to expand upon: ability to trade our own data would *also* provide us with a degree of feedback as to how (non-)anonymous does our data make us.
imagine if, for every draft post, you could get an estimate "this de-anonymizes you by 2%" or some such.
4/
personal belief, we the internet users would be better off selling (& buying) *service* rather than data items. this includes selling *access* to a service that, having been fed your data, (...)
personal belief, we the internet users would be better off selling (& buying) *service* rather than data items. this includes selling *access* to a service that, having been fed your data, (...)
5/
(...) gives buyers various predictive & informative services ("likely to drive safely", "likely to buy a new computer soon", "work on his book is progressing well" etc.).
this might also entail service for *getting messages through SPAM filters*, because why not.
(...) gives buyers various predictive & informative services ("likely to drive safely", "likely to buy a new computer soon", "work on his book is progressing well" etc.).
this might also entail service for *getting messages through SPAM filters*, because why not.
6/
again, a lot of that is much more valuable & feasible *if* done as a group, as a business venture with members being shareholders.
two key concerns:
again, a lot of that is much more valuable & feasible *if* done as a group, as a business venture with members being shareholders.
two key concerns:
7/
by practical necessity such group/venture would be represented by an *avatar*; a persona (whether real or fictional) fit to show and act in stead of the group. both perceptually and formally.
by practical necessity such group/venture would be represented by an *avatar*; a persona (whether real or fictional) fit to show and act in stead of the group. both perceptually and formally.
8/
also by necessity such group/venture would need a way to exclude "mis-behaving" members and groups at will, with the criterion being "not aligned with our common vision and plans", and variations of it.
also by necessity such group/venture would need a way to exclude "mis-behaving" members and groups at will, with the criterion being "not aligned with our common vision and plans", and variations of it.
9/
the current legislative & judicial environment (rly, PR & HR) is a show-stopper for such groups - they wouldn't be allowed to exclude people and groups from membership at will, under excuses of various "muh civil rights" - rly, entryism for selected groups.
the current legislative & judicial environment (rly, PR & HR) is a show-stopper for such groups - they wouldn't be allowed to exclude people and groups from membership at will, under excuses of various "muh civil rights" - rly, entryism for selected groups.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
