That which is for sale is that which is not free

In Why buy the cow if the milk is free? at #WeTheData, UnboundID asks and answers:

What would make data sharing acceptable to consumers?

  1. Being asked what you’d be willing to share
  2. Being given meaningful value for the use of the data
  3. A guarantee that the data will be kept secure
  4. The ability to update data, or revoke access to it
  5. Knowledge of who the data will be shared with

I speak for only one consumer. What would make data sharing acceptable to this consumer?

  1. Having a client-side record of every outbound data transfer in queryable form
  2. Having packet-level access to network traffic in/out of my devices
  3. The ability to mark individual table/view columns as
    1. private, meaning not in circulation,
    2. shareable with the general public as nonproprietary data, or
    3. shareable as proprietary (monetizable) data with a list of named data partners.

The milk metaphor is apropos. The key to monetizing your projects is being willing to milk them.milch

About n8chz

पृथ्वी की उच्च किराया जिले में उद्यमिता कौशल अभाव
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to That which is for sale is that which is not free

  1. eds says:

    Generally, if them using the data collected about me results in me having access to the product at a low price or for free, I’m fine with that 🙂

    For instance I’m glad to have access to Google’s search engine, without having to pay. This can only happen because I am providing them with data which they deem to be valuable.

    In regards to this passage: “A guarantee that the data will be kept secure” – how does one guarantee this? Accidents will happen – there is as of yet no system which 100 percent safe.

    About the last four points you make: this seems to me like quite an expensive endeavour for a business to undertake. This would undoubtedly raise the price of the product and this would have to be absorbed by the consumer. I doubt that most consumers would see this as a preferable trade-off – this is just speculation though.

    • n8chz says:

      The thing about data being kept secure is on UnboundID’s bulleted list, not mine.

      As for the last four points, which are mine, the first two are part of client side hardware and software design and would therefore be of no cost whatsoever to server-side entities. Would it cost more to make a PC or cell phone (or operating system for the same) with those features? No, it would not. If anything, it would cost less. The third item admittedly shifts the end user from a passive to an active role in the business of data sharing. This, I suppose, could be seen as costly as it requests a major change in the usual way of doing business. I would expect the big players to be highly resistant to their “data partners” playing an active role in deciding what gets shared and how, or even of having an idea of what their data upstream looks like. The fourth item appears to be a glitch in my HTML. A, B, and C are part of the third item.

      • eds says:

        Hi again.

        Thank you for your response.

        It must have been too late in the evening when I wrote my post. I don’t know why I confused the points made by UnboundID with your list – sorry about that.

        With regards to your two first points I agree that it probably would not be more costly to ship devices preinstalled with this software. However I don’t see how it would cost less?

        Also Wireshark permits you to monitor every outbound data transfer and thus allows you to look into the exact data which leaves your system. Doesn’t that address your first two points? Or is it something else you are looking for?

        “I would expect the big players to be highly resistant to their “data partners” playing an active role in deciding what gets shared and how…”

        That is probably true. If changes were implemented in a way that would make the company unable to use this data, I guess they would have to find another business model. My guess is that many services that I at the moment do not have to pay for, would now become paid services instead. This is not a trade-off which I personally am willing to make. Though personally I start having a problems when data about me is send to these companies at times when I am in fact not using their products. I have no problem when Google for instance collects data about me, when I am using their services.

        Anyways, have a nice day!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s