3 ms·

> I don't want to pay for every single site I visit I do - if the content is good, the price reasonable, and the transaction frictionless. And if that's what

> I don't want to pay for every single site I visit I do - if the content is good, the price reasonable, and the transaction frictionless. And if that's what it takes to get rid of intrusive advertising and user tracking, sign me up.

chillacy 8y ago
You'd also have to pay more than what you're worth at status quo today. By some estimates your data's worth $240, assuming you're an exactly average user: https://medium.com/wibson/how-much-is-your-data-worth-at-least-240-per-year-likely-much-more-984e250c2ffa https://medium.com/wibson/how-much-is-your-data-worth-at-lea... Since not every user will pay or can afford to pay, and presumably heavier users are worth more, you might have to pay thousands, or tens of thousands (in case you bought a house or something based on targeted ads). You can sort of simulate this today: imagine if you were to bid past all other ads shown to you for every ad slot on every site, then you could replace them with an empty picture. That might get expensive.
- inetknght 8y ago
  > By some estimates your data's worth $240 Thanks for putting a price point on the amount that people^H^H^H^H^H^H^H advertisers will pay to ruin my freedom. I value it much more than they.
- ViViDboarder 8y ago
  Most ads these days are CPC. As I never click any ads, the “value” is none. I could outbid easily as if never actually pay for a lead.
asark 8y ago
Plus, spy-vertising and creepily recording users' mouse movements is 100% not required for Web advertising to be A Thing that Pays For Lots of Stuff. The notion that if we kill the moats that Google and friends have with their vast troves of user data and various spying methods it'll be anything more than a speedbump to the Web generally is ridiculous. Bad for Google and Facebook and so on, yeah. But so what.

3 ms·

> I don't want to pay for every single site I visit I do - if the content is good, the price reasonable, and the transaction frictionless. And if that's what

by brandonmenc 8y ago

chillacy 8y ago
You'd also have to pay more than what you're worth at status quo today. By some estimates your data's worth $240, assuming you're an exactly average user: https://medium.com/wibson/how-much-is-your-data-worth-at-least-240-per-year-likely-much-more-984e250c2ffa https://medium.com/wibson/how-much-is-your-data-worth-at-lea... Since not every user will pay or can afford to pay, and presumably heavier users are worth more, you might have to pay thousands, or tens of thousands (in case you bought a house or something based on targeted ads). You can sort of simulate this today: imagine if you were to bid past all other ads shown to you for every ad slot on every site, then you could replace them with an empty picture. That might get expensive.
- inetknght 8y ago
  > By some estimates your data's worth $240 Thanks for putting a price point on the amount that people^H^H^H^H^H^H^H advertisers will pay to ruin my freedom. I value it much more than they.
- ViViDboarder 8y ago
  Most ads these days are CPC. As I never click any ads, the “value” is none. I could outbid easily as if never actually pay for a lead.
asark 8y ago
Plus, spy-vertising and creepily recording users' mouse movements is 100% not required for Web advertising to be A Thing that Pays For Lots of Stuff. The notion that if we kill the moats that Google and friends have with their vast troves of user data and various spying methods it'll be anything more than a speedbump to the Web generally is ridiculous. Bad for Google and Facebook and so on, yeah. But so what.