Essays
Opinion : Google and MasterCard are not being entirely truthful I suspect
We learnt recently via a The Verge article that Google and MasterCard had an agreement whereby all purchases using their cards would be sent to Google.
When an organisation does this kind of transaction it’s precisely because it feels there is value in the data. As we’re all aware, Google places importance on “personal” data in just about everything it does, going as far as tracking location despite users explicitly setting their phone to prevent such tracking, see this articlein The Guardian. MasterCard says this data is anonymous and by extension not personally identifiable [or useful]. If this was totally true, the data’s intrinsic value would be reduced to be virtually worthless. Which begs the question, why doesn’t Google want it so bad ? I call BS.
What many do not know, and what Google and MasterCard are hoping that you don’t either, is that much of this data can be de-anonymized using techniques that are well within the realms of Google. Take a look how a couple of researchers were able to successfully de-anonymize data from Netflix during a competition hosted by Netflix called the Netflix Prize — https://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0610105
How come ? De-anonymized data doesn’t live in a vacuum, it lives in a world flowing — no gushing — with data surrounding it. The more there is, the more likely it is that de-anonymizing may turn up clues to help break the code and re-attach personally identifiable data back to what appears on the surface to be garbled junk. I suspect that Google pays handsomely for this data because it ‘knows’ it can re-attach information to its users giving it even greater shadow surveillance over its users.
They may not be doing this for nefarious reasons, sure, but this is certainly not buying a bunch of random data from a friend to fill an empty database in the datacenter. So, Google, MasterCard, stop treating us like fools and be more respectful with our information because at some point you will go too far and the results of which you’re unlikely to enjoy, most likely painful regulation by authorities tired of your fast and loose treatment of humans.
And that’s the point, there are real humans affected behind this, not just bots, serial numbers or tables in an SQL database.
Photo by Chris Ried on Unsplash
Podcasts and the commercialisation menace
I’m sure that like many of you coming from the generation that grew up with radio, the recent Podcast boom is very welcome indeed.
I listened a lot to the radio in my youth, music, news — all sorts to be honest. I particularly enjoyed the local pirate radios stations that played the stuff the corporations wouldn’t. I was lucky, where we lived. We could pickup stations from miles and miles away. The independence of those stations always attracted me.
Which brings me to Podcasts today.
They’re essentially like local independent radio stations — albeit on a global scale — playing (mostly talking) just about whatever they like. If you have a niche interest there’s almost certainly a podcast for you out there. If you’re trying to learn a new language they can be an excellent resource to help you.
For the last few years I’ve been treated to shows ranging from the essentially amateur, but interesting, to the seriously well-produced professional shows like This American Life and dare I say Serial. All this totally free. Fire up your podcast app of choice, punch in the show name, subscribe and bingo!
Ads or subscriptions?
These shows have mostly been Ad-supported and that’s fair enough, but it seems the Ad revenue is drying up as the popularity increases — or at least the diffusion amounts are increasing — basic economics.
So what have the podcasters decided to do about that? Subscriptions and memberships are where its at, apparently.
Unsustainable
I’ve paid for some and will likely continue, and pay for more but at some point this is even more unsustainable than the Ad-supported model. Why?
Well here’s the thing. Most people like to watch many TV channels — podcasts are no different. My feed contains around 33 podcasts. And I’m not even an extreme case.
The subscription model that complements the falling Ad revenue is going to have to increase and be more prevalent otherwise the podcasters are going out of business. They don’t do ‘just for fun’ ! Most of the ‘Membership’ models require around 5 to 10$ per month. If only half of my feed goes subscription that translates to around 80 to a 160$ per month to listen to a few Podcasts, that’s nearly a 1000$ a year Minimum. It just won’t fly. My albeit fairly shitty Satelite subscription isn’t even close to that range and offers around 100–10 watchable — practically 24 hours a day.
Consolidation and mutualisation
So the next logical step is consolidation of the podcasters. We’re seeing some of this already — although its more of a natural phenomenon rather than revenue pressure — where quite a few Podcast Networks have sprung up. But further consolidation will be necessary in order to mutualise and benefit from the economies of scale. That may or may not reduce overall quality, but I doubt that.
I’m more concerned that we get back to the starting point of big corporations running ‘Podcasts’ and the small independent guys being squeezed out — until the next enabling technology comes along.
The question is; will the independents get big enough to fight off the corporations only to then become the new corporations …