I’m tinkering and working on an app that solves a very common problem that many of you face (would tell you more but I’m building in stealth right now). I want it to be accessible to as many people as possible so I’m looking to offer a free version, with a twist.
I’m exploring different business models, and I’m interested if any of you would be willing to pay for privacy. For free users, I’d aggregate and anonymize user data, and for those that care about privacy, I’d offer a premium version, which collects no data / offers enhanced privacy, along with a few other features.
Assuming that this is an application that you’d find useful, would you:
1. Use it for free - you don’t care about privacy (or care enough to pay)
2. Pay for privacy - if so, how much would you be willing to pay monthly (assume the app is comparable to social media or a search engine)?
3. Won’t use it at all (even if you assume it’ll be useful) - if not, why?
More food for thought:
4. If you could pay Google not to collect your data, would you?
5. If you could pay Instagram not to collect your data, would you?
6. If you could pay Facebook not to collect your data, would you?
Curious what you all think about this approach. Thanks for your time!!
The reasoning is very simple --- it's impossible to verify that something is not being done.
Privacy invasion is ethically suspect. Most of the major companies who engage it are guilty of exceeding the boundaries they established themselves and have been legally penalized for their practices in many cases. They exceed the boundaries in search of more profit.
It's hard to play both sides of the fence. You're either trustworthy or you're not. I wouldn't place blind trust in those I judge to be ethically suspect.
The answer is simply: I shouldn't have to. It's well past time for legislation and regulatory bodies to rein in consumer data collection.
2. Yes, given the assumption that it's something I'd use. One caveat to that is I would hard pass on a subscription model.
3. It's possible that I would not want to use it but that would depend on the problem it's intended to solve. (This is getting close to, "I would not find it useful," as forbidden by the assumption.)
4. I would consider paying if I had good reason to believe they wouldn't share my data. Their products are genuinely useful because of how they process the data they gather, even if that processing happens on their machines. Privacy concerns only really come into play when 1) they share large swaths of that data with business partners and 2) they have a large-scale data breach.
5. Given the way Meta explicitly tries to track people who have never even had an account for one of their services, this question reads like extortion. (I expect you're more well-intentioned but still, that's a hell of a consideration.) In short: hell no.
6. Same as 5.
E.g. when one pays for YouTube to avoid ads, one gets tracked just as well (or better, since you can't even use it "logged out" if you don't want ads). The only winning move is not to play.
At first glance, this seems like a very difficult business model to scale, as if it works as described you would be denying yourself insight into what makes a user pay and their behaviors.
90% of users aren't aware or don't care. In my case I'd be careful what data I share with them and how it affects me, and look for a "free" service.
The worst data I can give you is my credit card, then you will know I can pay for stuff, and even if you protect my data, you can still spam offers.
The application is optional. This is true whether it's free or paid.
I can sort of think of an exception: domain registrars, I only use ones that have private registration info which tends to cost more than bargain registrars. They are also more competent and have no nonsense admin panels.