[chis]

Price targeting can help the poor in some cases and hurt them in others. For essentials where the need to purchase is high and the provider has a semi-monopoly, dynamic pricing leaves everyone worse off. For instance, think of groceries where there is only one store nearby or medicines with only one producer.

On the other hand, for something like a Netflix subscription, price discrimination DOES tend to help the poor users out. Netflix is 10x cheaper in third world countries for the exact same product. If they were forced to charge the same price everywhere, they would just charge everyone the US price and foreign users would be left out.

[Gigachad]

Per customer pricing will squeeze every customer for every dollar they can possibly afford. The more data they have the more they can calculate the level of desperation for each purchase. If they have your message history and see your mum is dying, they can spike flight tickets for example. And they will know exactly the highest amount you can afford for it.

[root_cause]

I would say it would "squeeze" every customer for every dollar they are willing to pay. Perhaps semantics, apologies if so.

I have no problem with this for luxuries like Netflix which have sufficient competition (I am not saying Netflix has sufficient competition - I don't watch much TV, but I assume there is at least some: HBO Max, Disney+, others?)

I think I have a problem with this for literal necessities such as food, water, air.

I believe the solution to these problems is competition. If there is only one grocery store available to me, that store can set prices at whatever they want. If there are 20 stores near me - they are going to have to compete on price. I know plenty of very wealthy people near me who still get many of their groceries from Walmart.

If my mother is dying, but there are literally 1000 safe, fast ways for me to get to her in a hurry, the price is going to be reasonable unless there is some legislation which enforces some minimum (which I am also against).

That does not I mean I in any way support data collection without consent.

I do agree with you that with personal data, and without competition, for-profit companies have a strong incentive to, and will, "squeeze" you for every dollar they can get.

I think some industries, such as energy, are naturally resistant to competition; and while I am generally wary of regulations, those are areas where I think regulation in the public interest makes sense. The question of course becomes which products and services are naturally resistant to competition, and necessary enough that regulation should be required. I don't think entertainment falls in this category. I don't know enough about airline travel to give an informed opinion.

[wolftune]

Price discrimination at all is not the same as individualized prices. And really the issue conflates two things: 1, privacy and surveillance pricing; 2, AI profit-maximizing.

Even if Netflix or others do price-discrimination, the AI-pricing issue would still be used to squeeze as much as possible from the poor. It's not like these blood-sucking capitalists who run these massive corporations are into helping the poor.