3 ms·

How is the Internet (effectively) free? * desktops, laptops, phones, tablets, etc aren't free * wireless data plans aren't free * wired Internet co

How is the Internet (effectively) free? * desktops, laptops, phones, tablets, etc aren't free * wireless data plans aren't free * wired Internet connections aren't free * streaming services aren't free

randomdata 7y ago
> desktops, laptops, phones, tablets, etc aren't free But can be obtained for free. People literally throw out perfectly functional machines daily. But anyway, "effectively" was meant to cover the marginal costs of getting onto the internet. > streaming services aren't free Okay. While I don't quite see the appeal when there is already an infinite depth of content that is not a paid streaming service, let's talk about streaming services. The assertion was that if you make more money, you will buy more things. While there is some variation from service to service, streaming services have carved out a price point of around $10 per month. Does that mean for every $10 you make over and above the cost of necessities that you will buy another streaming service? If you are given a $10,000 raise above an income that already provides necessities will you buy 1,000 streaming services? Probably not. Let's narrow our focus to music streaming services. I like to listen to music at work. Other places too, but work gives us a tidy eight hour window. 173 hours per month, on average. The average song is around three minutes, so nearly 3,500 songs a month. Using the Spotify free music service there are ads and time to queue up songs, so let's say 3,000 songs a month. For argument's sake, let's assume they are all performed by different artists. When I was younger a CD sold for around $20. Not having much money, I might buy one or two a month, but that's it. If I had more money would I conceivably buy more CDs to access those 3,000 songs I listen to now? I think the answer is yes. I would have bought more CDs if I had more money. But now I get that for what is effectively free. Even if I did pay the marginal cost to access a non-free tier on a music steaming service, that payment buys me all the music, so to speak. What would have cost $60,000 per month 30 years ago would now cost somewhere around $10 a month, with, most importantly, no linear increase in price with consumption. So, sure, you need to buy a few things, like a computer and internet access. But the point is that, even given unlimited money, one quickly runs out of things to buy in this day of age.

randomdata 7y ago

> desktops, laptops, phones, tablets, etc aren't free But can be obtained for free. People literally throw out perfectly functional machines daily. But anyway, "effectively" was meant to cover the marginal costs of getting onto the internet. > streaming services aren't free Okay. While I don't quite see the appeal when there is already an infinite depth of content that is not a paid streaming service, let's talk about streaming services. The assertion was that if you make more money, you will buy more things. While there is some variation from service to service, streaming services have carved out a price point of around $10 per month. Does that mean for every $10 you make over and above the cost of necessities that you will buy another streaming service? If you are given a $10,000 raise above an income that already provides necessities will you buy 1,000 streaming services? Probably not. Let's narrow our focus to music streaming services. I like to listen to music at work. Other places too, but work gives us a tidy eight hour window. 173 hours per month, on average. The average song is around three minutes, so nearly 3,500 songs a month. Using the Spotify free music service there are ads and time to queue up songs, so let's say 3,000 songs a month. For argument's sake, let's assume they are all performed by different artists. When I was younger a CD sold for around $20. Not having much money, I might buy one or two a month, but that's it. If I had more money would I conceivably buy more CDs to access those 3,000 songs I listen to now? I think the answer is yes. I would have bought more CDs if I had more money. But now I get that for what is effectively free. Even if I did pay the marginal cost to access a non-free tier on a music steaming service, that payment buys me all the music, so to speak. What would have cost $60,000 per month 30 years ago would now cost somewhere around $10 a month, with, most importantly, no linear increase in price with consumption. So, sure, you need to buy a few things, like a computer and internet access. But the point is that, even given unlimited money, one quickly runs out of things to buy in this day of age.