Well damn. Here's the thing that bothers me personally (pun intended)- If small businesses want to step away from the Facebook, IG, google, yelp game how do we create essential visibility for our companies. My unfortunate reality is that if I don't play the game, I lose clients and an ability to sustain my business. Another system/structure would be brilliant but in the same breath seems impossible.
Yeah. That would be great but that will definitely take lots of resources and effort because we know the current powers that be have no incentive to do so.
Thank you again ,,value information , yes we are outside , I receive daily calls from Japan , China, Indonesia ? And so on , I speak about something and very fast they suggest things about that , crazy, I cut with many social media even I don’t use that much ,still I feel they are using me
Thank you for your acute insight, Alex. Truly enlightening. Sad what we have come to just for the sake of making a buck. When you think about it we’ve always been just commodity.
i wonder if the human traficking line is entirely useful. because i feel like it steers away unnecessarily from the standard critique in that work is exploitation and that capitalism forces you to sell work/labor power. in a way, there's no substantial difference between action and digital action. in that sense, i think that the fungibility-inalienability argument could be applied to labor power in general. but that it isn't tied to the fact that you can be re-identified (that remains a privacy issue). because the datasets are generaly not used (and not valuable) because you can identify people, but precicely to learn about more general patterns etc. which means it really doesn't matter who's who specifically. it's just like very very "unskilled labor" in a way (in that workers are in fact repalceable and replaced). in that sense, i feel like the campaign to get paid for data may have some issues with it, but if companies needed to pay billions of people (however small the fee for an individual) it would become more difficult to do what is currently being done. those are just some thoughts. i really like reading your stuff and it's really cool that you're doing it:)
I understand, and I don’t fully disagree either, if given the current context only. But if we can extrapolate from the current conditions of data trafficking to the scenario in which we are living out just about all our lives not only attached to media but within the Internet itself, either vis-à-vis augmented reality or virtual reality, the issue becomes inextricable from trafficking. Not future state the division between who and what we are and our data will be virtually indistinguishable. At that point, if we do not have Personhood extending to our data buddies, we will affectively have no protections in our digital embodiments. 
Well damn. Here's the thing that bothers me personally (pun intended)- If small businesses want to step away from the Facebook, IG, google, yelp game how do we create essential visibility for our companies. My unfortunate reality is that if I don't play the game, I lose clients and an ability to sustain my business. Another system/structure would be brilliant but in the same breath seems impossible.
Ya, that’s what I think the focus should probably be less on an exodus from the web and more on protections within it.
Yeah. That would be great but that will definitely take lots of resources and effort because we know the current powers that be have no incentive to do so.
The path seems to be lawsuit - a couple lawsuits basing themselves on right of publicity are underway in a state or two.
That creates hope! ♥️
Thank you again ,,value information , yes we are outside , I receive daily calls from Japan , China, Indonesia ? And so on , I speak about something and very fast they suggest things about that , crazy, I cut with many social media even I don’t use that much ,still I feel they are using me
Thank you for your acute insight, Alex. Truly enlightening. Sad what we have come to just for the sake of making a buck. When you think about it we’ve always been just commodity.
i wonder if the human traficking line is entirely useful. because i feel like it steers away unnecessarily from the standard critique in that work is exploitation and that capitalism forces you to sell work/labor power. in a way, there's no substantial difference between action and digital action. in that sense, i think that the fungibility-inalienability argument could be applied to labor power in general. but that it isn't tied to the fact that you can be re-identified (that remains a privacy issue). because the datasets are generaly not used (and not valuable) because you can identify people, but precicely to learn about more general patterns etc. which means it really doesn't matter who's who specifically. it's just like very very "unskilled labor" in a way (in that workers are in fact repalceable and replaced). in that sense, i feel like the campaign to get paid for data may have some issues with it, but if companies needed to pay billions of people (however small the fee for an individual) it would become more difficult to do what is currently being done. those are just some thoughts. i really like reading your stuff and it's really cool that you're doing it:)
I understand, and I don’t fully disagree either, if given the current context only. But if we can extrapolate from the current conditions of data trafficking to the scenario in which we are living out just about all our lives not only attached to media but within the Internet itself, either vis-à-vis augmented reality or virtual reality, the issue becomes inextricable from trafficking. Not future state the division between who and what we are and our data will be virtually indistinguishable. At that point, if we do not have Personhood extending to our data buddies, we will affectively have no protections in our digital embodiments. 
*in that future state and *data bodies (tho “buddies” works, ha)