Guest 1

And we're bad at weighing that future harm against present needs.

Which brings it all back to this fundamental question, if privacy is a human right.

And human rights are supposed to be inalienable things you can't give away or sell.

Or does treating privacy as inalienable mean some things just have to stay outside the market, period, to protect dignity, even if it costs potential income?

OK, so taking a step back, looking at both sides from the sources, it feels like, well, like there's no easy answer.

It's a genuine conundrum.

Like how markets can empower people with compensation.

And how transparency seems good, you know, clear pricing for data.

And the last one, property rights seem to offer control.

So the debate really boils down to can privacy's value be captured in individual deals or does it serve this bigger collective social function that markets will always miss?

So we've really seen how these micro consent deals, while they systematically undervalue the future harm.

That mismatch between selling today and facing the algorithmic consequences tomorrow.

It's stark.

Thank you for sharing these really challenging sources with us.

OK.

What kind of regulation could possibly work?

How do you price the loss of future free will?

A question definitely worth digging into further.

Until next time, keep analyzing the data that's analyzing you.

Now's a good time to remember where tequila's story truly began. In 1795, Cuervo invented tequila. Cuervo. What are you doing here? Cuervo. Anytime someone says Cuervo, I show up. Well, I do know that to be true, but even during ad reads, like... Cuervo. I think you could lay out, especially for one of our great partners. Sweet, delicious Cuervo. Since then, Cuervo has stayed true to its roots.