Any individual with a curious passion would have the entire world’s data at

their fingertips, empowering every one of us to become an expert in any

subject that inspires us. Expertise we can then share back into the data
stream—a positive feedback loop spearheading progress for the entirety of
humanity’s knowledge.
Such exponential gains represent a dataism utopia.
Unfortunately, our current incentives and economy also show us the tragic
failures of this model.
As Harari has pointed out, the rise of datism means that “humanism is now
facing an existential challenge and the idea of ‘free will’ is under threat.”

Cons: Manipulation and Extortion

In 2017, The Economist declared that data was the most valuable resource
on the planet—even more valuable than oil.
Perhaps this is because data is ‘priceless’: it represents understanding, and
understanding represents control. And so, in the world of advertising and
politics, having data on your consumers and voters gives you an incredible
advantage.
This was evidenced by the Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which it’s
believed that Donald Trump and the architects of Brexit leveraged users’
Facebook data to create psychological profiles that enabled them to
manipulate the masses.
How powerful are these psychological models?
A team who built a model similar to that used by Cambridge Analytica said
their model could understand someone as well as a coworker with access to
only 10 Facebook likes. With 70 likes they could know them as well as a
friend might, 150 likes to match their parents’ understanding, and at 300
likes they could even come to know someone better than their lovers. With
more likes, they could even come to know someone better than that person
knows themselves.
Proceeding With Caution
In a capitalist democracy, do we want businesses and politicians to know us
better than we know ourselves?
In spite of the remarkable benefits that may result for our species by freely
giving away our information, do we run the risk of that data being used to
exploit and manipulate the masses towards a future without free will, where
our daily lives are puppeteered by those who own our data?
It’s extremely possible.
And it’s for this reason that one of the most important conversations we’ll
have as a species centers around data ownership: do we just give ownership
of the data back to the users, allowing them to choose who to sell or freely
give their data to? Or will that simply deter the entrepreneurial drive and
cause all of the free services we use today, like Google Search and Facebook,
to begin charging inaccessible prices? How much are we willing to pay for
our freedom? And how much do we actually care?
If recent history has taught us anything, it’s that humans are willing to give
up more privacy than they like to think. Fifteen years ago, it would have
been crazy to suggest we’d all allow ourselves to be tracked by our cars,
phones, and daily check-ins to our favorite neighborhood locations; but now
most of us see it as a worthwhile trade for optimized commutes and dating.
As we continue navigating that fine line between exploitation and
innovation into a more technological future, what other trade-offs might we
be willing to make?