The NY Times Just Unknowingly Told They World It Needs STEEM!!!

Google Images

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:

Click For Manna Coins

In full disclosure this is a referral link