*Really, they'll even trade it for intangible gold. http://candycrushgametactics.com/get-free-gold-bars-in-candy...
There's always a subset of people who don't care. There was a time when women didn't have the right to vote, and although I wasn't around during that time, I'm sure there was a subset of women who didn't care. Their apathy is not a justification for withholding that right from the rest.
The problem is when it's the seeming majority who don't care.
Really? In my circles, even when I lived in "red" states, the attitude was more like it's a damn shame it's illegal, and too bad there isn't a prayer of it changing.
How about gay, women or minority rights. All of them were strongly opposed by the masses.
In the 1st and 3rd case, of course, because the subject group was a minority. In the case of women, things only changed when enough of the subject group started to demand change. In the case of privacy, the subject group isn't distinct from the masses, it is everyone. So yes, it's a problem for progress until everyone gets more clued in. (It will happen, when enough bad stuff has happened.)
They want privacy too, but one could argue that we've failed to educate them about how to use existing tools and failed to make those tools simple enough that they're usable by the average Joe.
Let's say google offers some kind of privacy plan, which is 100% outside of their interests. Do you think they'll give me honest pricing if I opted out of all their tracking? Lets say they actually make $15 off me annually via tracking. What would they charge me to not be spied on? It sure as hell won't be $15.
The problem is we're not being offered a fair value in the beginning when we get into a relationship with these companies. Cloud providers are throwing snickers bars at me and not offering to stop. When I do say I don't want them, I'm hit with punitive pricing. Look at AT&T's gigapower charge to not be spied on. Its like $40 a month. Sorry, but I doubt anyone is making $40 a month from someone like me who almost never clicks on ads and whose information can't be that valuable. If advertisers are paying AT&T $40 a month to see how long I'm on reddit, then the whole system is well... fucked.
It seems to me that cloud providers and ISPs want their cake and to eat it to. They're double-dipping. I'm still paying somehow, even if its indirectly. I bought $100 worth of apps and movie rentals last quarter via my android device. They sure as hell weren't free. Not only am I subject to market pricing on these items, not to mention my hefty phone bill, I also am being spied on? Where exactly is the 'free' where the products monetize themselves via app store purchases and rentals? VUDU and On Demand charge the exact same amount for these rentals.
This narrative that customers won't pay for things is asinine. We're constantly paying for things.
Sure, pricing will probably be set way too high by the companies at first, but even making that explicit tradeoff and the option to purchase will help show consumers that privacy IS valuable.
Addition parameters that would be interesting: Inform that the information is worth more/less than the Snickers bar, or inform that "the government" will have free access to the information.
Not as cheap as a Snickers, but I once had a CS professor do a straw poll of the class for this experiment. Back in the day the most evident tracking was through customer loyalty cards at grocery stores. He asked the class: how much money do you save per visit using your loyalty card? $10? And would you instead pay $10 each time to not be tracked?
Perhaps not surprisingly, in 2007 a room full of undergrads would take the discount.
Coordination problems. Coordination problems as far as the eye can see.