None of this makes you the product. Which was my main point. Those are both much more to the point. You can say "you are the product" or you can say "I don't know how they make money and it makes me suspicious". Even then, if you don't know that your payment at least covers the costs of the service you're likely no better off by paying and risk exposing payment information. Hell, I'd argue that a proxy service that makes $10 by showing you ads is safer than one that charges you $5. That's the kind of nuance that goes straight out of the window when free services are not so subtly compared to slavery.But with a paid service you statistically seen can get slightly more chances to being not exposed.
But do you honestly think that they will show me their exact, real plans for how to dealing with money income?
We can say, what we want to say. It's free speech. And I agree, putting an Anonymous quote was controversial. I also agree, that maybe you're not the product directly; but does not knowing about being the product is the same as simply not being the product? For me, it's safer to assume that all companies are exposing data (even that there may be providers who doesn't) - it's safer to assume that I'm the product in each and every case, than to give my trust to someone I don't know a bit and to rely on "facts" a corporation is providing me.
You're the product when you're in the middle of a marketplace. That's the one case where you, not something of yours, is on sale. It is very good to know what of yours a company has that can be monetized. For a proxy, browsing data is straightforward. They have it regardless of how much you pay them. It doesn't stop being product just because they also happen to sell proxy services, just that if they make enough money selling proxy services they don't have to sell it to stay afloat. The false dillema presented by "paying or product" is another good reason to use the phrase. If you are paying the company you are merely aware of one of the products they sell. > it's safer to assume that I'm the product in each and every case, than to give my trust to someone I don't know a bit and to rely on "facts" a corporation is providing me. Is paying someone to not sell your info not trust? My bottom line with proxies is that they simply aren't a privacy tool. They can help but shouldn't be relied upon. Trying to figure out what the product is just obacures that proxies by their very nature have a lot of info on you.
As I think, for the companies it's pretty important, that I am the middle of the(ir) marketplace. For them I'm/my identity is a possible product, something that somebody else will buy from them. Whoever gets the most of my identity first, makes the most profit. Simple as that. And no, for me paying someone, just for the plain reason, that (s)he will not sell/expose my data, is not a sign of trust and I also consider it as a stupid action. But that's my opinion. Stopping (or at least believing them to stop) selling my data away shouldn't be anything I should buy. It should be taken for granted. But it's not. Because not selling data away isn't as lucrative as doing it. Agreed with last point. Proxies aren't made for privacy. Handy but not even near to privacy.You're the product when you're in the middle of a marketplace. That's the one case where you, not something of yours, is on sale.
I think I don't understand - by speaking of VPNs, your identity is you. The 'data' I'm speaking of is the bundle of your preferences, your habits, your activity, your motive, etc. = your identity. Identities are the (new) currency of the (new) world.