[boomboomsubban]

>I'd say the use for personal identification is cross-platform linking of users.

Its "this person watched this, so they would also be interested in this video and this ad." You can't make this anonymous and near as useful, and it is currently YouTube and Google's premium money maker.

Most other data is already available with a little work, providing the data you describe doesn't help competition that much.

[dmos62]

> this person watched this, so they would also be interested in this video and this ad

That's what I meant by cross-platform linking.

> You can't make this anonymous and near as useful

I argue that you can. Anonymity is about not linking you, the physical person, to your online presence. An online presence can be tracked and profiled, without the invasion of privacy. It all depends on what data is collectable and who has access to the data. An algo provider doesn't need to also control the data it is used on, it just needs access to training datasets. There are technical solutions to all these problems, but it's a political solution that's lacking.

> Most other data is already available with a little work, providing the data you describe doesn't help competition that much.

Well if it doesn't help competition, how useful can it be?

[boomboomsubban]

>That's what I meant by cross-platform linking..

Everything there is taking place on YouTube. Ads can maybe be a cross platform, but even that isn't necessary

>I argue that you can

It can't. Knowing what videos I have watched in the past is very useful. This can't truly be anonymous and shared.

>Well if it doesn't help competition, how useful can it be?

You are the one arguing that releasing this data solves a problem.

[dmos62]

I've tried to explain my thoughts on all these points. This seems like a dead conversation, so let's not continue it.