New Research Challenges Tech Giants to Recognize Users as Laborers, Not Byproducts

The approximately 5 billion people who use the internet daily leave traces of their activity behind. Companies use these data to learn user interests, purchase history, and other browsing habits, and benefit through sales, advertising, or researching user behaviors.

Carnegie Mellon University’s Tae Wan Kim and Nicholas Vincent from Simon Fraser University published a new study in Philosophy & Technology that interrogates the fundamental relationship between digital platforms and their users. "Are We Horses? Rethinking Data as Labor," argues that technology companies currently treat human data like horse manure, a discarded byproduct, rather than the essential labor that fuels modern artificial intelligence. This shift in perspective suggests that the clicks, scrolls, and digital interactions of billions of people constitute a "thin form of labor" that requires a radical rethink of fairness and compensation.

The authors built on a famous analogy used by economists to describe how automobiles eventually replaced horses. While many scholars worry that AI will replace humans just as the car replaced the horse, Kim and Vincent ask a more immediate question about the value humans provide right now. They argue that every time a user solves a reCAPTCHA or browses a social media feed, they provide the training data necessary for AI systems to function. Currently, tech giants extract this value without offering users any bargaining power or fair terms of engagement.
"We must decide if we are merely horses leaving digital manure behind or if we are the essential workers who build the intelligence of the future," says co-author Tae Wan Kim, an Associate Professor of Business Ethics at Carnegie Mellon University. "If we recognize our everyday digital activities as labor, we can finally demand the fairness and professional respect that the tech industry currently denies the public."

The study moves the conversation beyond simple debates over data ownership. Instead, the researchers focus on the concept of "data leverage." They advocate for the use of data unions, data strikes, and enhanced portability rights to give users a way to negotiate with massive platforms. By treating data as labor, the authors provide a framework for the public to exert collective power against the extractive practices of surveillance capitalism.

"Data strikes and data unions give the public a powerful tool to talk back to technology companies," explains co-author Nicholas Vincent. "When we act together to withhold or redirect our data, we transform from passive sources of information into a collective force that can reshape the digital economy to serve everyone, not just a few billionaires."

This research invites policymakers and the public to reconsider the ethics of the digital age. By identifying the "thin labor" inherent in digital life, Kim and Vincent challenge the status quo and offer a path toward a more equitable future. The authors conclude that recognizing the value of human contribution is the first step toward ensuring that technology benefits the many rather than the few.

###

Kim, T., Vincent, N. Are We Horses? Rethinking Data as Labor. Philos. Technol. 39, 27 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-026-01033-4