9 ms·
Richard Stallman: Online Publishers Should Let Readers Pay Anonymously
- mrfusion 10y agoI'm still appalled when an ebook accepts Bitcoin but still asks for your "billing address".
- protomyth 10y agoWelcome to the fun and inflexible world of enterprise software. I attribute that to legacy code more than actual malevolence.
- ldjb 10y agoI don't know about other countries, but here in the EU businesses are often required to collect customers' billing address to comply with EU regulation, such as the VAT MOSS.
- Normal_gaussian 10y agoI find it surprising that we havent already got a payment gateway that handles the entire user identity, including email forwarding. I also hadn't realised Stallman wrote for the Guardian, but going through his historic articles shows a healthy number of articles.
- ex3ndr 10y agoWho will integrate such things? Everybody want's to know who is paying you.
- Normal_gaussian 10y agoAs a startup it doesn't quite work, as the large companies that will want that info. As a feature added to an existing gateway - say Amazon or Google - it could allow anonymized demographics whilst not exposing you to all kinds of data protection issues. One of the main reasons for using a payment gateway is to avoid the legal requirements for card handling, it seems like a logical extension to me.
- mverwijs 10y agoA lot of them do. Per article. It's called https://blendle.com https://blendle.com. Only an email address is required. And money. And it's not libre.
- jstanley 10y agoIf it takes fiat currency it's probably not anonymous.
- mverwijs 10y agoWe accepted bitcoins from day one. Not sure if they still do as it was used I think 8 times over the course of 2 years. But given the people working there I wouldn't be surprised if they still accept them. (Disclaimer: Former employee. Left in sept 2015.)
- clydethefrog 10y agoBlendle also tracks which articles you read. They also are working on an algorithm that picks the news for you, creating a filter bubble.
- mverwijs 10y agoThe filter will be opt-in, obviously. And, again obviously, they need to keep track of which account is allowed access to which article. If only to allow you to read the article across multiple devices. (Former employee here. Not in the exact loop these past 12 months)
- n0ke 10y agoIt could be a really good use case for a crypto currency. But eg. Bitcoin needs too long for a finished transaction (I don't want to wait ~10 minuntes until I can read an article). And you still can track down a person who purchased (separately) two articles by his keys or analysing the block chain. I know we've a lot of crypto currencies right now, but I really hope that there is finally a new one coming, which is just simply fast, secure and somehow helps you paying anonymously.
- inlineint 10y agoIn case of an article (which is cheap) there is no need to wait for confirmation, it's enough to wait for transaction to appear in mempool and have enough fee.
- jstimpfle 10y ago> Tracking, as we know, gives companies and governments dangerous power; the intimidating effect of general surveillance has been measured and is massive. The rate of visits to some Wikipedia pages – those about “al-Qaida”, “car bomb” and “Taliban” – declined by one-fifth after Edward Snowden showed us how much the US government spies on our internet activity.
- mjevans 10y agoThat is a nice and lovely idea... Only every government everywhere hates it. If it is possible to pay for something anonymously, then there is no following the money of others paying anonymously for other reasons. Including paying for products or services that are illegal or even with money from such sales. Yes, you might compare this to cash. Cash that everyone used to carry around. It the higher denominations are marked (serial numbered), at least for US currency. Still it takes a LOT of effort to track their flow. For any kind of digital currency this scheme isn't tenable or repeatable. The tracking would either be too easy to prevent abuse, or too easy to abuse (get around). Maybe we can have this level of freedom, if we admit that being at war with our population is a bad idea. If we allow the legal and controlled use of current vices. It wouldn't be perfect, but at least in that world we could probably get by with just controlling the income phase. Though if you wanted to tax wealth (not income) you'd also need to report a total of 'outflow'. Which makes obtaining 'gifts' from sources not clearly related to work a vector suspect as tax avoidance via temporal displacement of wealth.
- lumberjack 10y agoHe's plugging GNU Taler which was specifically designed to be government friendly (allows collection of taxes and AML compliance and not easy to implement black markets). He's not talking about other kind cryptocurrencies. Stallman isn't a "down with the government" type of person despite being sceptical of surveillance.
- mirimir 10y agoSo the title of his article is a lie, then. > Publishers must let online readers pay for news anonymously It's not anonymous if GNU Taler knows user identity.
- p4bl0 10y agoGNU Taler is a technology, not a company, so it doesn't "know" things in the sense that would be bothersome here. From GNU Taler's website: “When you pay with Taler, your identity does not have to be revealed to the merchant. The bank, government and exchange will also never learn how you spent your electronic money. However, you can prove that you paid in court if necessary.”
- daw___ 10y agoIs this something Brave is implementing with its "Brave Payments" [0]? [0] https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments , HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12411405 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12411405
- davidgerard 10y agoBrave uses Bitcoin, which is otherwise known as "prosecution futures", so doesn't really fit the bill.
- daw___ 10y agoGot it, thanks.
- rolfvandekrol 10y agoI find it interesting that this article is published on a platform that makes uBlock block 27 requests and most certainly does contain non-free javascript. Richard Stallman talks a lot about how these thing inhibit freedom and that we should not support those companies. But when he publishes an article on ad blocking he does this on a platform that absolutely does not meet his standard on freedom.
- djaychela 10y agoMaybe that's so he's not preaching to the converted? I'd imagine that most non-tech people wouldn't have any idea about the multiple layers of problems that online ad platforms can generate. I'm no tech genius, but I'm my friends' go to guy for anything computer related, and all of them have no idea about any of this, but most of them are tech literate at a 'general' level. I'd think the vast majority of people have no idea any this is even happening, let alone the downsides.
- Jedd 10y ago> But when he publishes an article on ad blocking he... This is not an article on ad blocking. It's an article on the need to be able to pay for things anonymously - to avoid being tracked. Like how cash works in the real world. I can highly recommend reading the actual article.
- madeofpalk 10y agoI'm guessing he's going for the lessor of (n) evils?
- cyphar 10y agoI don't think I've ever seen Stallman taking the "lesser evil" philosophy. As a smarter man than me said: "The lesser of two evils is still evil, and the enemy of my enemy is not my friend."
- covekeyboard 10y agoWhile the guardian website does contain non-free javascript, it is not required to read the article. I currently have noscript enabled and can read the article just fine. I don't even see any ads this way, and I'm not using an adblocker. So I'd say the website does meet his standard for freedom, because you don't need any non-free software to read it.
- lumberjack 10y agoI mean he's right but as a business model it doesn't work. Also for people who haven't realised this is a plug for GNU Taler. Anyway. I think the reason it doesn't work as a business model is that really, honestly, reading the paper provides very little in terms of value to the average person. It's a very mild source of entertainment and nothing more. It used to be that the newspapers where the only media to get important information (classifieds, job ads...etc). Not any more.
- RVuRnvbM2e 10y agoI strongly disagree. I order a physical (weekly) newspaper for two reasons: a) It provides a broad range of interesting articles on topics which are otherwise outside my filter bubble. This is incredibly important in an era where many people get all their news through their facebook feed. b) It's perfect to flick through over breakfast :)
- jasonkostempski 10y agoWhat is the name of the newspaper?
- RVuRnvbM2e 10y agoCoincidentally enough, given TFA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian_Weekly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian_Weekly
- danieldk 10y agoIt should also be mentioned that The Guardian is one of those newspapers that is willing to experiment with different models. E.g., they have a premium tier on iOS and Android for 3 Euro per month without ads: https://www.theguardian.com/info/2013/aug/12/1 https://www.theguardian.com/info/2013/aug/12/1
- netik 10y ago"Old man yells at clouds."
- blfr 10y agoIs this really the reason people block ads? I don't actually mind tracking as part of a useful service (like Google Maps). I block ads because they're 1) annoying 2) funding mass media. Depriving Bezos' WaPo or Slim's NYT of revenue is definitely a feature. If billionaires want to push propaganda, the least they can do is foot the bill. Tracking is a distant third. If an outlet I cared about ran ads, I'd white-list them. It just so happens that valuable sites like HN or developers' blogs either don't feature ads or do so in a way that adblockers don't interfere with (look at job posts here).
- jtrip 10y agoI personally block adds, not because of annoyance, but because of tracking. I find private collection of information a bigger threat than I do government tracking. I like neither, but given the option, I would rather be tracked by the government. I am not accusing the OP of any bias or failing in ideals, just pointing out an interesting perspective on things that I got from reading [0]. 'Mistrust of government is pretty much universal, and that’s a good thing. Outside of the United States, however, people trust corporations even less.' [0]http://www.disruptingjapan.com/how-ubers-failure-in-japan-can-help-startups-everywhere/ http://www.disruptingjapan.com/how-ubers-failure-in-japan-ca...
- blfr 10y ago> I find private collection of information a bigger threat than I do government tracking Why?
- jtrip 10y agoBecause the inherent idea is control of power. One would trust a small company over the government because the small company can't do much damage with only that much data, whereas the government can, combined with all the other data. The small company can earn more money, what we can rely on given that they are in it for the money, with helping us with the data than they can by selling the data. How ever, as the company grows, or uses a system developed and controlled by a larger entity, the data being collected can be combined with other larger data sets and can become much more powerful and potentially hurtful for us. In the same scenario, the power of the government has still remained the same, and given the history of Power, we the common people have some measure of control over them. More control than one would have over the large corporation.
- mtgx 10y agoSeems like this is what Brave is trying to do, too: https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/ https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments/
- smartbit 10y agoSee previous discussions on Taler GNU Taler 0.0.0 released https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11840453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11840453 GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10258312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10258312
- AdmiralAsshat 10y agoI've thought before about online commerce, and wish we could find some way to adopt a Vending Machine model. A vending machine is autonomous. It neither tracks nor engages the customer. It takes your money, and dispenses product. Since cash is untraceable, it keeps no record of what was bought and by whom. I feel at peace knowing I will give a vending machine a dollar, and I will receive a Coke, without fearing that I will start seeing targeted ads on my browser or in my inbox showing me more Coke products. The problem, of course, is that the amount of money lost to a vending machine is negligible. And so if the soda machine eats my dollar, I will probably swear for a bit, but I'm not going to do much to seek recourse. That model would be difficult to extend to, say, Amazon, where I might buy an $800 laptop and need Amazon to have a record that I bought it in case they ship me a lemon. Nonetheless, I still feel that the Vending Machine Model is something we should aspire to in the e-commerce age, even if we haven't reached it yet.
- dhimes 10y agoMaybe for the Amazon model they could issue a (public- that you keep private) key that allows you to challenge a request for proof of purchase. In other words, if you want a refund you show that you have this digital receipt.
- knowtheory 10y agoAre vending machines really that analogous? Vending machines are all about placement & location, and the ability of a vendor to find high traffic locations to put machines. Machines get placed based on info about locations whether it's demographics, or a kind of business or whatever. Individual transactions may not have identity tied to them, but it's not like the business is devoid of information about users, or hypotheses about them. And on the internet... how do you get that info from your users aside from usage analytics (even if it's gross analytics)?
- paulddraper 10y agoVending machines certainly track purchases. They just don't track the people making the purchases. The Internet can be the same. Lots of people buy X. Let's offer more if that. Y is a high traffic location (L as in URL). Etc.