Serendipity35

The phrase that if an app is free, you are the product means that when an app doesn’t charge you money, it usually makes money from you instead. They do that mainly by collecting your data or selling your attention to advertisers.

If that is true, then how is AI changing what that means? It is a question that deserves several posts here to really answer.

Your behavior, preferences, and time become what is being monetized. Your data becomes the product. Free apps often gather your demographics, browsing or in-app behavior, location, interests, and habits. This information is then used to target ads or sold to third parties.

The addictive nature of app design keeps you scrolling, tapping, or watching so they can show you ads. You pay with time, not dollars. “Free” is a business model, not a gift.

I will give these companies a nod that running an app costs money (servers, engineers, storage). If you are not paying, the company must earn revenue another way. Ad-free options are becoming more common as a premium. You have probably noticed that on apps and also on video streaming services. You thought that paying for Amazon Prime meant no ads on the videos. Wrong. Free is often an illusion.

In the world of AI, the difference between free and paid tiers is more than a matter of convenience. It is also about identity and privacy.

Privacy becomes the hidden cost. Data is currency. Companies track you across apps and devices, build detailed behavioral profiles, and use algorithms to influence what you see. This raises concerns about autonomy and consent.

Is there no stopping them? As long as you agree to their terms, they have a lot of power. BUT you can read those terms and privacy settings more carefully. (They rely on the fact that many users don't read the terms or adjust their settings at all.) Educate yourself and understand how digital ecosystems make money. You can choose paid or privacy-focused alternatives. And you can remove the app entirely from your life.

I see comparisons of using AI to using social media platforms. I don't think AI data is the same as social media data. Social media platforms monetize your attention. The longer you scroll, the more ads they can show. AI chatbots operate on a different axis. Your prompts aren’t just content; they’re training signals. They reveal how people think, what they struggle with, what they’re curious about, and how they phrase questions. Maybe it is anonymized (a good thing) but it is still valuable and often sensitive data.

Alarmist articles will remind you that many free AI chatbots use your prompts, your corrections, and your uploaded files. They have that photo of your family that you let them enhance. What will they do with what you give them? I can't answer that as of now, and certainly not for the future. I know that your conversation history is used to train or fine-tune future versions of the model. Hey, you are part of the product pipeline - but don't expect to be paid for your contributions.

I also concede that the business model matters and that different AI companies monetize differently. For example, Microsoft provides its own privacy commitments and policies, and those govern how your data is handled. For details, they always direct users to their Privacy Statement.

Here are 4 business models currently out there:
Ad-supported = Your attention is monetized.
Freemium = Free tier gathers usage; paid tier subsidizes development.
Enterprise licensing = Your data may be isolated; the company earns from businesses.
Open source =  The model is free; the company may sell hosting or support.

So "if an app is free, you are the product" still applies, but not always in the same way. When an AI tool is free, you’re not just the product — you’re also the collaborator. You’re an unpaid teacher, tester, and a source of fuel for improvement.

This week, you probably saw headlines like "Meta and YouTube designed addictive products that harmed young people," as a jury in Los Angeles awarded the plaintiff damages of $6 million, with Meta to pay 70% and YouTube the remainder

We are all plugged in to the electronic web around us that is far larger than the World Wide Web. That feeling of being unable to unplug is incredibly common and results from a powerful combination of psychological triggers, clever product design, and the essential role technology plays in modern life. "Addiction" is a strong word in this context, but it is the operative word in these kinds of cases.

Don't feel like you are "weak" or lack willpower if you find it difficult to disconnect. These systems are scientifically optimized to maximize your engagement. The core reason for compulsive checking is a chemical reaction in your brain centered on dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasure, motivation, and reward-seeking. 

Social media and even email platforms use the same psychological principle that makes slot machines and video games addictive. You don't know when the next "win" will appear. That could be a "like," a validating comment, an alert, or an email from someone "important." Are any of these really important? Maybe - and that possibility mixed in with that famous Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) is powerful. It compels you to keep checking. 

Designers know they need apps and websites to be addictive. I can list some of these techniques, and you can take them as things to be conscious of and avoid. You could also use it as a designer to create an addictive app or website. These things are intentionally engineered as features that make it easy to lose track of time and difficult to stop.

One of those techniques is using infinite scroll, which eliminates natural stopping cues (like the bottom of a page). The content just keeps loading, encouraging endless consumption. |

Push notifications hijack your attention and create a sense of immediate urgency or curiosity, pulling you back into the app regardless of what you were doing.

Autoplay on videos and content streams automatically transitions you to the next item, removing the moment you would have had to make a conscious choice to continue or stop.

As I said earlier, many techniques used in gaming are used in the gamification of other apps. You might not think of things like streaks, badges or LinkedIn profile completeness bars create a feeling of required daily attendance to avoid losing progress or status.

Most of these are psychological traps. FoMO and the social validation of likes and shares, and positive comments tap directly into our fundamental need for social acceptance and validation.

Do you ever find yourself waiting in line, standing on the train, or during a commercial break, checking your phone? That instant, low-effort stimulation. is a form of addiction. 

It's true that technology is no longer optional. We need it for much of our communication and work. We crave constant connectivity. Some jobs demand constant email and instant messaging availability. The lines between work and personal time have been blurring for at least two decades. We need directions (maps), banking, tickets, appointments, and emergency communications from our digital devices. That new reality seems to make a complete disconnect feel irresponsible, unsafe, and maybe impossible.  

But I don't think it is hopeless. The solution is not to throw away devices or turn off your cell service and WiFi or have more willpower. Advice from "experts" is to create friction between yourself and the addictive features. Only allow notifications for direct calls, texts, and genuinely critical applications. Designate specific times (like the first hour of the day, mealtimes, or the hour before bed) and locations (the bedroom, the dinner table) as completely device-free. Remove the most addictive social media apps from your phone, or move them off the home screen and turn off those badges and notification sounds that remind you that there are 3 new somethings on Instagram.

Australia implemented a world-first nationwide ban on social media access for children under 16, effective December 10, 2025. The law, passed in November 2024 under the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill, requires major platforms to take "reasonable steps" to prevent users under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts. This includes age verification methods like behavioral inference (analyzing online activity), facial age estimation (e.g., via selfies), ID uploads, or linking bank details.

Millions of accounts are expected to be affected as companies, such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube, and X, face fines of up to $33M for serious or repeated noncompliance. The law places responsibility on companies rather than families, and platforms must demonstrate that they have taken “reasonable steps,” such as implementing age checks and removing suspected underage accounts.

The measure is cast as a child-protection and mental health safeguard, citing research showing 96% of 10- to 15-year-olds use social media, with many encountering harmful content, grooming, or cyberbullying. Critics say the law is difficult to enforce. It may even push teens onto harder-to-monitor platforms. Another criticism is that it may pose privacy risks.

Read the research from Australia used to create this ban
https://www.esafety.gov.au/research/the-online-experiences-of-children-in-australia/report-digital-use-and-risk-among-children-aged-10-to-15

Other countries have taken similar steps, such as strict youth modes or time limits.
https://studyinternational.com/news/countries-social-media-ban-children/

Australia’s nationwide ban on social media use for children under 16 takes effect today, making it the first country to prohibit underage users from major platforms outright. It is a noble and probably necessary thing, but I cannot believe it is doable.

Millions of accounts are expected to be affected as companies, such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube, and X, face fines of up to $33M for serious or repeated noncompliance. However, the law places responsibility on companies rather than families, and platforms must demonstrate that they have taken “reasonable steps," such as implementing age checks and removing suspected underage accounts.

I suspect the companies will say these things have already been put in place. (Have you noticed the increase in ads on TV and in your Instagram feed about their teen accounts?) And how will Australia monitor this? Critics say the law is difficult to enforce. It might push teens onto harder-to-monitor platforms. Enforcement may pose privacy risks. We know that many children who create accounts have already lied about their age. Can that be determined?

The research shows 96% of children aged 10 to 15 had used social media, and a majority had used a communication platform to chat, message, call, or video call others (94%). Anecdotally. many of them report encountering harmful content, grooming, or cyberbullying.

• Australia may have been the first country to pass a social media ban bill to stop children under 16 from accessing the platforms, but 7 other countries have taken similar steps, such as strict youth modes or time limits.
  https://studyinternational.com/news/countries-social-media-ban-children/  
• Read/download the Australian research report
  https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-07/Digital-use-and-risk-Online-platform-engagement-10-to-15.pdf