I don't buy the pivotal assumption: "Among the top 10,000 sites that show third-party capable advertising, we find that on average 15% of users visit the site

I don't buy the pivotal assumption: "Among the top 10,000 sites that show third-party capable advertising, we find that on average 15% of users visit the site at least 10 times per month, with the more popular sites tending to have more loyal visitation. We further estimate that if one-fourth of such loyal users ultimately subscribe to the sites they visit, a monthly fee of $2 would generate revenue comparable to the entire stream from third-party advertising, based on current ad rates" Why? Because the friction associated with paid subscriptions is still prohibitive, especially when the natural tendency is to evaluate the subscription decision (monthly recurring fee) in light of reading a single article. The notion of a fluid, browser-based payment system could easily overcome these frictions by allowing users to trivially pay a nominal fee to access any individual piece of content. While I can see Microsoft backing Do-Not-Track lobbying to weaken the threats coming out of the Bay Area; any browser-based content solution will likely strengthen the same companies who now control internet advertising.