Guest 1

So it seems like a key point here is that markets and regulation aren't enemies.

You mentioned the EU's Data Governance Act.

Meaning they have to act in the user's best interest.

Better than the current system of zero leverage and total opacity.

Hmm.

That's an optimistic take.

But fiduciary duty.

How robust is that against billions in potential profit?

Isn't there always a tension?

OK, but now let's flip it because the counter arguments here are really strong.

If privacy becomes something you buy and sell.

Who ultimately pays the price?

For the rich only.

How so?

So the market doesn't create the inequality, it just formalizes it, puts a price tag on it.

And there's that weird dynamic where if everyone else is selling data, choosing not to sell might make you look suspicious.

Which brings us to exploitation.

People agree to bad deals because the alternative is worse.

That makes the idea of voluntary consent seem really weak here.

Like that world coin example in Brazil, paying people for iris scans.