2 ms·
> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. It's a great idea! I completely agree. If adver
by Kalium 10y ago
> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads.
It's a great idea! I completely agree. If advertising on the web respected users and users could trust that they would be respected, users wouldn't feel the need to block ads.
With that said, it's possible that perhaps users have trusted this precise pitch in the past. In general, money has proven corrosive to respect, and ad-blockers stage a comeback as a result.
> What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content.
Make something good enough that I want to pay for it. This isn't ridiculous or a pipe dream. I pay for The Economist and Nautilus because they are worth it to me.
- news_to_me 10y agoIt's a little difficult because there are a lot of publications that I'd like to read a few articles from, but not enough to warrant a subscription. Micro-payments seems like an interesting solution to this, but I haven't seen it fully worked out. Right now, advertising serves this niche. I don't really see the need to trust advertisers in Brave's scheme here, either. You need to trust the browser to judge which ads are acceptable, but alternatively you need to trust the ad blocker to know which things are ads.
- Kalium 10y agoMicropayments, as a rule, don't work because there's too much friction. Subscriptions work because there's a single point of friction once.