Comment on "On Web's Cutting Edge, Anonymity in Name Only"

From Wall Street Journal

On Web's Cutting Edge, Anonymity in Name Only

What (x+1) did was introducing a fact finding algorithm, and, perhaps, suggesting an optimal response function to its client, e.g. Capital One, based on the fact(s) found.

As discussed in yesterday's post, there are two potential problems in the (x+1)/Capital One relationship, namely, the reliability of (x+1)'s "fact" finding service, and, if (x+1) does offer suggestions to Capital One on response, the incentive compatibility between (x+1) and Capital One.

Any (serious) conflict of interests between the two contracting parties can ruin the set-up.

I am interested to know, if possible, a little more about the remuneration clause(s) of the (x+1)/Capital One service contract.

Designing an algorithm shouldn't be considered a violation of privacy. It is the data collecting process which the Authority should focus on.