If "minted" by a consortium of EV charging operators, drivers would only have to register with ONE of them to get "Watts" but be able to use them to pay on ALL charging poles
Imagine being a German EV driver, not having to register with several of the 400+ EV charging operators just to get energy on the road, but paying with a “Watts” token accepted by any of them.
What would that mean to users and operators?
Thread 1/12👇
If "minted" by a consortium of EV charging operators, drivers would only have to register with ONE of them to get "Watts" but be able to use them to pay on ALL charging poles
Sold as vouchers for cash, buying "Watts" would even be (nearly) anonymous.
That’s "dirt cheap" in terms of infrastructure cost, especially when considering that “Watts” could be transferred infinitely w/o ever incurring any fees
With IOTA-based "coloured tokens", the operator consortium would stay in full control of their "Watts" token. In case they need more than 5 bn worth of them, they could create "Watts" v2 any time
With “Watts”, operators would only settle among themselves, reducing their overhead of conducting business by 99% + have no risk of defaults
A “profit only”-opportunity for them.
Literally everybody would win
How long until energy can be sold to neighbour houses or even strangers? Impossible based on paper-contracts, but easily enabled by “Watts”.
More from Tech
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.