Hacker News Reader

So long as revenue sources other than subscription fees are more lucrative than the subscription fees, it remains the case that users are "the product", even if fees are charged.

For fees to change the balance, they have to have enough economic weight to swamp advertising and tracking revenue, so that losing users makes tracking unprofitable. But very few services like WhatsApp can charge so much that the balance is shifted.

People seem to say this all the time, but assuming it's true, what's inherently wrong with "being the product"?

There's not much wrong with being the product as long as you are aware of that distinction. The problem arises when people aren't aware because this in essence takes away their right(option, if you will) to refuse to use the service.

It's just a catchy phrase designed to sound shocking as it suggests some opaque objectification.

Obviously you don't need to "be the product". Selling a shortcut to a bit of your attention makes a lot of money, too.

Edit: And you are always in the position to choose how much attention you grant the apps you use.

> what's inherently wrong with "being the product"?

Products are sold

Humans love being slaves...

Paying for something doesn't mean you're not a product.