You are making a mighty fine distinction, one that sometimes makes no difference. You are also assuming that "access to attention" is perfectly firewalled from data, which it isn't. I know one person who is playing with what correlations can be made by getting people to click on google ads. I can't imagine he's the first.
You are also assuming that Google's policy will never change, Google's assets will never end up for sale, etc.[1]
Obviously, we weight these things differently. But calling it nonsense demonstrates either contempt for those you disagree with or a lack of thought on the matter.
[1] Sure, looks unlikely at the moment. But unless you think it is going to rival the Catholic Church for longevity, it is worth thinking about. The average corporate lifespan in the US is 27 years.
> The average corporate lifespan in the US is 27 years.
I wonder what the average lifespan is for companies that are already more than X years old, where X could be 1, 2, 5...
I'm thinking as a comparison to how the biggest increase in average lifespan for humans wasn't everyone dying a tiny bit later, it was infant mortality dropping massively.
Among the more fascinating results out of evolutionary biology and the Red Queen Hypothesis is that species survival probability is almost wholly independent of species age. That is: survival does not convey a survival benefit.
I don't know what the corresponding trend is for business ventures, but I suspect they may exhibit similar traits.
I am aware that various measures of corporate dominance are declining -- residency within the Dow Jones 30 Industrials, for example.
Period life expectancy is the term you are looking for, I think. Immediate googling does not provide a helpful answer.
Another interesting question would be Cohort life expectancy of corporations - that is, have corporations started in the 1990's lasted longer than those started in the 2000's? (obviously, the graph of corporations in the 2000's would have less data)
the original commenter said they "sell personal data". Yes this is nonsense. Yes every company is susceptible to breaches and every company has the ability to change TOS in the future. Not to belittle you but the only way to protect yourself is to live completely off the grid. As to the person, correlations != direct persons personal data.
No fears; I don't find it the least bit belittling when people assert factually incorrect things.
I don't know what you mean by "direct persons personal data". If it is supposed to mean that correlations don't reveal information that people would prefer to be kept private, either in general or specifically about my friend's results with Google ads, well, that's also wrong. I'm getting the feeling, though, that this is becoming unproductive.
You are also assuming that Google's policy will never change, Google's assets will never end up for sale, etc.[1]
Obviously, we weight these things differently. But calling it nonsense demonstrates either contempt for those you disagree with or a lack of thought on the matter.
[1] Sure, looks unlikely at the moment. But unless you think it is going to rival the Catholic Church for longevity, it is worth thinking about. The average corporate lifespan in the US is 27 years.