Lately they have passed through my mobile hands of many people in situations of exclusion, and I have noticed that there is a link in them between the price of the device and the possibility of setting up privacy. The cheapest device reduces the user’s privacy settings. In addition, by default, they have installed applications that directly channel data inputs to third-party clouds. Such as keyboard, microphone, camera… These sensors and buttons allow application owners to capture received data.

The market for cheap smart phones has grown considerably, 67% of the world’s population has access to the internet (according to data from the United Nations and the International Telecommunication Union). They are multi-brand mobiles: Oppo, My Phone, Redmi… It’s interesting to know that the owners are Chinese companies. The sale of low-priced mobiles should be a significant value for companies/governments to compensate for the low profitability they obtain.

This week there has been a debate in the @AbantoLibre Telegram group on this subject, on the occasion of the agreement signed between the company Google and the education department. With this agreement, Google will provide a free service to education over the next four years. But what's the value for Google? That the price is free does not mean that there are no benefits for the company providing the service.

Digital transformation has other profit-generating logics that we still don't fully understand, but, as the poet Antonio Machado said, let's not be fools and don't confuse value with price.