Skip to content

Data Privacy vs. Monetization: Friend.Tech & Your Online Reputation

Web3, through platforms like Friend.Tech, allows users to monetize online reputations, raising ethical concerns around data privacy and consent. The article explores these issues, alongside evolving community-driven governance.

Photo by DANNY G / Unsplash

Web3 is putting a whole new spin on what it means to benefit from one’s digital reputation. Take Friend.Tech, for example. It’s a hot new platform that lets users monetize their social media influence by allowing people to buy "shares" of their online presence using cryptocurrency. In other words, you can turn your digital persona into an investment opportunity for others.

Amid the prevailing hype, critical issues related to ethics, society, and personal autonomy often get overshadowed. The fusion of personal lives with commodified assets is a notable concern. Similarly, the transformation of tweets, likes, and social engagements into commodities has significant implications.

For all the innovation it offers, Friend.Tech is pushing us to consider what we might be sacrificing. Namely our privacy and safety could potentially be at stake when we put a price tag on our identity and reputation. Not to mention the broader social implications of influencer hyper-monetization.

The Dichotomy of Friend.Tech: A Case Study

Friend.Tech lets users invest in people by buying "shares" in social profiles, assigning real financial value to social influence. But it's not without controversy. Recently, the platform was accused of leaking the data of over 100,000 users. Although Friend.Tech disputes this claim, the incident spotlighted ethical questions about data privacy and user consent. 

This post is for subscribers only


Already have an account? Sign In


Hong Kong Cracks Down on Worldcoin's Data Collection Practices

Hong Kong Cracks Down on Worldcoin's Data Collection Practices

Authorities found that Worldcoin failed to adequately inform users about the collection of their personal data and did not obtain their informed consent. Worldcoin also retained user data for extended periods beyond what was necessary and did not provide a Chinese translation of its privacy policy.