5 ms·

I've been participating in Google Contributor since it's inception, this is like the 3rd relaunch of the service. I have no doubt it will fail just like the pa

I've been participating in Google Contributor since it's inception, this is like the 3rd relaunch of the service. I have no doubt it will fail just like the past iterations because the fundamental flaw is that Google is the heart of the system and they're unwilling to extricate themselves from it. I don't think this type of service is the way forward and the solution will not come from Google or any other ad provider for a number of reasons. The first is that Google is not the only ad network and no one wants to be cut out. The second is that this does nothing to address the privacy or security issues people have today that drive them to ad blockers. There aren't just a handful of Ad networks, there are thousands if not millions out there. On top of that, they utilize each other to push out ads in a horrid rat king like incestuous jumble. Any payments to avoid ads served by these companies would require compensating all of these companies, the end result predictably would be movie studio accounting that leaves the content provider with nothing in the end. This setup does nothing to address the privacy issues people have with companies like Google tracking their comings and goings. Google is still at the heart of this system and still knows everything about you. To get any benefit from this system actually requires you to embrace Google. People want to maintain their privacy, they don't want to login to Google to get rid of ads. It's easy to envision a system utilizing a crypto currency and a digital wallet held by your browser that you fill occasionally and that prompts you to pay a site similar to the manner in which Location Services work simply based on a meta tag a site provider puts in their page head containing their wallet and request pay amount and schedule. It's impossible to imagine Google, Apple, Facebook, or anyone who wants in your pants to allow themselves to be cut out of a revenue stream by such a system. Companies like this are double dipping by charging everyone else to be the broker and also by being the service provider being paid. I honestly don't know if an ad free web is allowable. It's technically possible but everyone who isn't the content creator is going to do everything they can to stop it form happening.

threepipeproblm 9y ago
I came here to say "bwahahahaha" but this is so much better. Thanks.
kemonocode 9y ago
I think the whole "fill up a digital wallet with cryptocurrency" thing is what Brave is (was?) attempting but without much success. I do think it's the future, they just took the wrong approach (Replacing others' ads with your own IS going to create bad blood no matter how you spin it) and were too early for it.
- cptskippy 9y ago
  The trouble with Brave's approach is that it removes the user's choice of browsers.
  - aptwelephant 9y ago
    I can only assume this forces you to use Chrome, so it has the same issue.
    - ReverseCold 9y ago
      The issue is lessened by the fact that everyone* already uses chrome. *Most relevant demographics
    - cramforce 9y ago
      I don't think it does. Previous versions of Contributor worked in all browsers. It simply doesn't draw an ad for users that. Not really something you need a special browser for :)
  - ElijahLynn 9y ago
    Not really a big issue but ultimately all the browsers will probably follow this approach. Once you taste speed it is hard to go back.
- ElijahLynn 9y ago
  You don't have to fill up a digital wallet with cryptocurrency with Brave, you can still block ads without doing that.
Eridrus 9y ago
> Any payments to avoid ads served by these companies would require compensating all of these companies I think you misunderstood how this iteration of Contributor would work; the publisher integrates Google's contributor code in such a way that if you pay them, they don't show you any ads, no need to worry about the ad ecosystem. > People want to maintain their privacy I will start believing this when people start acting like it rather than just saying it. I would be surprised if the group of people who care enough about their privacy to do anything about it is above 1% of internet users in the US. > It's easy to envision a system utilizing a crypto currency and a digital wallet held by your browser Brave is really killing it with their user numbers, right?
- cptskippy 9y ago
  > I think you misunderstood how this iteration of Contributor would work No, I understand perfectly well how it works. If you pay Google, then Google doesn't show you ads and it gives the Content Creator a cut. Google is part of the Ad ecosystem. Contributor not only excludes other Ad providers from participating, it also requires the Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem. And Google is still gathering metadata about you. So who benefits? Google has compelled Content Creators to join it's Ad Network, Google has compelled you to disable your Ad Blocker under the guise of compensating Content Creators, Google gets paid whether it serves an ad or not, and Google gets to track you in ways it couldn't with your Ad Blocker up. You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd Party Ad Blocker. I'm sure it will work just fine with whatever Google Ships in Chrome though.
  - Eridrus 9y ago
    > Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem I don't think there has been any indication of this one way or another, and I'd be sort of surprised if this is the tack they're taking. We'll see how it turns out, but it doesn't sound (to me) like they are compelling companies to show Google ads, merely providing the paywall technology. > You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd Party Ad Blocker. I think the entire point is to get people using uBlock etc to either turn it off or to pay, so I have no idea where you're getting this idea from.
infogulch 9y ago
> the end result predictably would be movie studio accounting that leaves the content provider with nothing This always saddens and upsets me that "movie studio accounting" even exists in the first place. I would be loathe to support a model that could devolve to this.
henningpeters 9y ago
> It's easy to envision a system utilizing a crypto currency and a digital wallet held by your browser that you fill occasionally and that prompts you to pay Check out: https://satoshipay.io/ https://satoshipay.io/
- korzun 9y ago
  That will fail on the first day. The likes of WSJ are not going to take that currency and people will not bother with 'digital wallets'. Adaptation is the key to success. Something like that would be counterproductive.
kbenson 9y ago
The only way the privacy issue will be solved is through legislation (or regulation, were the FCC to take a crack at it). Otherwise you're just fighting a highly incentivized system that is already in place and profitable. I can't imagine Google or Facebook sitting idly by and letting some change come about that might very well invalidate their entire business models, so it would take a real large shift in public opinion to get something that wasn't watered down. I'm of the opinion that the best we could hope for is strong silo protections and the ability to request deletion of our gathered personal information for individual companies, and even that's a stretch. Also, even if we got that, good luck enforcing it on remote entities.
Justsignedup 9y ago
Yes to everything and: uBlock is gonna be just as easy to install as hassling with setting up a contributor account.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- bdcravens 9y ago
  When Google adds ad-blocking to Chrome, it'll be interesting to see what happens to current solutions.
bitwize 9y ago
The solution is Xanadu: get the transaction costs low enough that people can be automatically charged for the content they read. The acceptance of half-assed worse-is-better partial solutions has doomed us all to scammy, spammy "Links from Around the Web" until these issues arw resolved.
tomcam 9y ago
Very perceptive, and extra points for the vivid but notably obscure rat King reference

threepipeproblm 9y ago

I came here to say "bwahahahaha" but this is so much better. Thanks.

kemonocode 9y ago

I think the whole "fill up a digital wallet with cryptocurrency" thing is what Brave is (was?) attempting but without much success. I do think it's the future, they just took the wrong approach (Replacing others' ads with your own IS going to create bad blood no matter how you spin it) and were too early for it.

cptskippy 9y ago
The trouble with Brave's approach is that it removes the user's choice of browsers.
- aptwelephant 9y ago
  I can only assume this forces you to use Chrome, so it has the same issue.
  - ReverseCold 9y ago
    The issue is lessened by the fact that everyone* already uses chrome. *Most relevant demographics
  - cramforce 9y ago
    I don't think it does. Previous versions of Contributor worked in all browsers. It simply doesn't draw an ad for users that. Not really something you need a special browser for :)
- ElijahLynn 9y ago
  Not really a big issue but ultimately all the browsers will probably follow this approach. Once you taste speed it is hard to go back.
ElijahLynn 9y ago
You don't have to fill up a digital wallet with cryptocurrency with Brave, you can still block ads without doing that.

Eridrus 9y ago

> Any payments to avoid ads served by these companies would require compensating all of these companies I think you misunderstood how this iteration of Contributor would work; the publisher integrates Google's contributor code in such a way that if you pay them, they don't show you any ads, no need to worry about the ad ecosystem. > People want to maintain their privacy I will start believing this when people start acting like it rather than just saying it. I would be surprised if the group of people who care enough about their privacy to do anything about it is above 1% of internet users in the US. > It's easy to envision a system utilizing a crypto currency and a digital wallet held by your browser Brave is really killing it with their user numbers, right?

cptskippy 9y ago
> I think you misunderstood how this iteration of Contributor would work No, I understand perfectly well how it works. If you pay Google, then Google doesn't show you ads and it gives the Content Creator a cut. Google is part of the Ad ecosystem. Contributor not only excludes other Ad providers from participating, it also requires the Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem. And Google is still gathering metadata about you. So who benefits? Google has compelled Content Creators to join it's Ad Network, Google has compelled you to disable your Ad Blocker under the guise of compensating Content Creators, Google gets paid whether it serves an ad or not, and Google gets to track you in ways it couldn't with your Ad Blocker up. You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd Party Ad Blocker. I'm sure it will work just fine with whatever Google Ships in Chrome though.
- Eridrus 9y ago
  > Content Creator to sign up to Google's Ad ecosystem I don't think there has been any indication of this one way or another, and I'd be sort of surprised if this is the tack they're taking. We'll see how it turns out, but it doesn't sound (to me) like they are compelling companies to show Google ads, merely providing the paywall technology. > You know god damn well this system won't work with uBlock or any other 3rd Party Ad Blocker. I think the entire point is to get people using uBlock etc to either turn it off or to pay, so I have no idea where you're getting this idea from.

infogulch 9y ago

> the end result predictably would be movie studio accounting that leaves the content provider with nothing This always saddens and upsets me that "movie studio accounting" even exists in the first place. I would be loathe to support a model that could devolve to this.

henningpeters 9y ago

> It's easy to envision a system utilizing a crypto currency and a digital wallet held by your browser that you fill occasionally and that prompts you to pay Check out: https://satoshipay.io/ https://satoshipay.io/

korzun 9y ago
That will fail on the first day. The likes of WSJ are not going to take that currency and people will not bother with 'digital wallets'. Adaptation is the key to success. Something like that would be counterproductive.

kbenson 9y ago

The only way the privacy issue will be solved is through legislation (or regulation, were the FCC to take a crack at it). Otherwise you're just fighting a highly incentivized system that is already in place and profitable. I can't imagine Google or Facebook sitting idly by and letting some change come about that might very well invalidate their entire business models, so it would take a real large shift in public opinion to get something that wasn't watered down. I'm of the opinion that the best we could hope for is strong silo protections and the ability to request deletion of our gathered personal information for individual companies, and even that's a stretch. Also, even if we got that, good luck enforcing it on remote entities.

Justsignedup 9y ago

Yes to everything and: uBlock is gonna be just as easy to install as hassling with setting up a contributor account.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bdcravens 9y ago
When Google adds ad-blocking to Chrome, it'll be interesting to see what happens to current solutions.

bitwize 9y ago

The solution is Xanadu: get the transaction costs low enough that people can be automatically charged for the content they read. The acceptance of half-assed worse-is-better partial solutions has doomed us all to scammy, spammy "Links from Around the Web" until these issues arw resolved.

tomcam 9y ago

Very perceptive, and extra points for the vivid but notably obscure rat King reference