The NY Times Just Unknowingly Told They World It Needs STEEM!!!
What an amazing breakthough.
The NY Times just told the world that it needs STEEM.
Now don't get me wrong, it never said those words. In fact, STEEM was not even mentioned. However, the conclusions drawn point right to STEEM.
In an article about data, the name Facebook came up. In fact, the article starts in this way....
Should Facebook pay us for our puppy pictures?
Of course, the idea sounds crazy. Posting puppies on Facebook is not a chore. We love it: Facebook’s 1.4 billion daily users spend the better part of an hour on it every day. It’s amazing that we don’t have to pay for it.
And yet the idea is gaining momentum in Silicon Valley and beyond: Facebook and the other technological Goliaths offering free online services — from which they harvest data from and about their users — should pay for every nugget of information they reap.
This comes as no surprise to anyone on this blockchain but is a revolutionary idea to those outside of it. Those of us on here are well aware of the power that Facebook and Google have when it comes to data. They turn that information into billions of dollars a year in revenue. Of course, people sit at their computers each day handing all this valuable information over to these giants.
So who seeks out this data?
The first market is obviously advertisers. Facebook is probably the most successful at this being able to target people very specifically. It helps that many people put every detail of their lives on their Facebook page enabling the algorithms to go through and built a reliable profile. Google also does a good job at this from the searches. Advertisers spend large sums of money to reach these targeted audiences.
Another area that data has extreme value is one few consider. Artificial Intelligence (AI) requires a huge amount of data to learn. Looking at tagged photos, as an example, is a way that it can learn to recognize different things. Of course, for this information, people get paid nothing.
How much is it worth to these companies to train the AI?
How about paying people for the data they produced to train the robots? If A.I. accounted for 10 percent of the economy and the big-data companies paid two-thirds of their income for data — the same as labor’s share of income across the economy — the share of income going to “workers” would rise drastically. By Mr. Weyl and Mr. Posner’s reckoning, the median household of four would gain $20,000 a year.
Can you imagine if every home in the United States that had 4 people in it got $20,000? Considering that the medium household income is around $50K, that is a significant jump. Facebook is a global entity with people logging on from all over the world. The amount data is worth is the same in training AI. Now ponder the prospect that people from Indonesia or Vietnam got paid that same amount. In those areas, $20K goes a lot further.
The Times is alerting people to the fact they freely give a very valuable commodity over to Facebook and Google. This could be the start of the awakening that people need.
What is also interesting is that it is calling for personal payments of an otherwise non-monetized asset. That is exactly what tokens are designed for. We are seeing a change in the distribution model of anything that gets tokenized. Why should personal data be any different? If companies producing AI are willing to pay for the data, it is time they go direct. The easiest way to do that is through tokens.
Steemians know that posting on Facebook only makes Zuckerberg and his Wall Street cronies richer. This article by the Times spells it out.
Today, the dominant data harvesters in the business are Google and Facebook, with Amazon, Apple and Microsoft some way behind. Their dominance cannot really be challenged: Could you think of a rival search engine? Could another social network replace the one all your friends are on? This dominance might matter less if companies had to pay for their users’ data.
Or their dominance would matter less if their users were not there providing the data.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/business/economy/user-data-pay.html
The NY Times is basically screaming for an alternative to these entities. What it does not know is that it is really screaming for STEEM.
This is the future alternative to the centralized social media that leverages the user base for maximum profit while forcing political correctness upon them.
Funny how a cryptocurrency is the answer to the problem a mainstream publication like the Times brings up.
To receive the free basic income tokens you are entitled to and help end world wide poverty, please click the following:
I can't agree more. Not long ago I was chatting with a friend and debating how pages like Facebook use our data. The way they define data is your name, email etc. But in reality they are studying our behavior with smart algorithms, so even if you don't share your "data", with this information, they can get a really good idea of who you could be. They profit from this behavioral data. On top of that, I am tired of all the ads and marketing stuff that has been a plague on Facebook for a while now. A new mainstream solution is due!
You earned my follow with this article.
People really do want Steemit over facebook, even if they dont know it yet!
I have friends who got demonetized on youtube, and hadn't heard about dtube till I told them. This is the very early days still!!!!
I agree it is mega early.
We are only about two years into this and the entire crypto world is still unknown. People are starting to hear of Bitcoin but that is it. Wait until STEEM really hits the mainstream.
Great future ahead for Steemit!
This is good news. It helps popularize the idea that people’s life info should be acquired at a cost to those who data mine every aspect of our lives.
It also may be the beginning of another nail in Facebook’s coffin.
I just wrote a post about Facebook fading about an hour ago
https://steemit.com/steemit/@appone/steemit-all-the-way-facebook-is-fading
The advertising on Facebook (and now all the others) has been driving me crazy for years... some friends and I were talking about it and they were convinced that Facebook was audibly listening to them through their iPhones.... because they had products advertised to them that they spoke about but never typed in a search engine. I don't know if it's true, but that is creepy as hell. It's easy for Gen Xers to be nervous about that, but I wonder if Millenials will just accept the lack of privacy as normal? I hope not.
One thing I do like about Steem is that its all the social media in one place... I watch people on the bus cycle through Facey, Instagram, Snapchat, etc etc...
I think people are fade up with facebook.They wanna something new. Obviously steemit cpuld be a great platform alternative to facebook.There is a great opportunity for steemit and obviously also for @steematians
Steemit is the future, they just don’t know it 😉 it’s tough getting people to join Steemit. They are so programmed with Facebook it’s insane. I finally got my first convert almost a week ago, my cousin. He still hasn’t got his account verified yet. Not good!!
We are still in the early stages of Steemit, but with all the others apps build on the Steem blockchain I think it will grow much faster than Facebook and others.
Nice find BTW. They definately seem to be crying for, what Steemit already produces.
Steem is a very different way of looking at the world. It's going to take continued effort to get people to adopt it. If they're not ready, if they're still stuck in the old way of thinking, it could take a while to get them over here, but eventually it will happen. If everything else was equal, why would they post for free when they could get paid to post? They wouldn't. They'd want to earn their share of the pie.
This is quite interesting. If a publication like NYT writes about this, it can be safely said that these discussions are really entering mainstream. This one article will reach many more people then any direct advertisement Steemit is currently doing. Hope people start searching for solutions that offer what NYT writes about and stumble upon Steem and Steemit :)
I consider this whole report from NY Times goodnews.....
This is the future alternative to the centralized social media that leverages the user base for maximum profit while forcing political correctness upon them.
Well said @taskmaster4450, they'll keep screaming for more steem soon. Steemit will eventually become the envy of the competition. Just one day
Shazaam! All media will need t begin covering these crypto/blockchain stories as well as the financial technology swing already underway as life is changing rapidly. They are a dying entity as well and will soon succumb if they do not switch gears, get less political and more on the de-centralized bandwagon.
The challenge, in my view, is they are under orders, when they do cover it, to blast it.
Cryptocurrency is a threat to the banks, who ultimately own the corporations that own the media companies. This means that the coverage will not place crypto in a positive light.
Instead, we need to start promoting the ideas of decentralization and when a hack, as an example, takes place, we need to mention how it would not happen on a decentralized blockchain.