5 ms·

> Micropayments are proven to work Do you mean that it's technically feasible to implement them, or that they actually work economically to fund viable, compet

> Micropayments are proven to work Do you mean that it's technically feasible to implement them, or that they actually work economically to fund viable, competitive businesses.

mrtksn 6y ago
Fund the business. Yes, everyone hates on them but there's a reason why every game and every software is switching to "pay for the extra feature or resource or pay monthly" model. I also find it far less fun-killing than the ad-supported ones. The ad-supported games and software(I will count the websites also in this) has terrible user experience as it is geared to interrupt you and make you do something else. Free(as in beer) software has become a bait to direct you to something else. You want to drive a virtual car? Here is your virtual car but why don't you check the bubble popping game first? Here are your bubbles to pop but why don't you try jumping over hops instead? Here are the hops you may want to jump but wouldn't you not like to get angry for this political issue first? This endless ad-supported stream of offers, I believe, is taking the oxygen of truly high quality works. Why would you buy the 0.99$ app or game when you can use the free version, right?
- takluyver 6y ago
  I see in-app purchases and subscription models as quite different from micropayments. Micropayments would mean something like Spotify - you pay some amount up front, and the company pays artists a tiny amount for each time someone listens to their work. A quick search suggests that that amount is on average less than half a US cent per play on Spotify, and similar services range from about 1/10 to 2 cents per play. It's not a system that the artists are very happy with.
  - mrtksn 6y ago
    It’s the same thing but they pay programmers and designers instead of musicians. It’s actually better because most of these programmers and designers make decent amount of money - unlike Spotify.

> Micropayments are proven to work Do you mean that it's technically feasible to implement them, or that they actually work economically to fund viable, competitive businesses.

mrtksn 6y ago

Fund the business. Yes, everyone hates on them but there's a reason why every game and every software is switching to "pay for the extra feature or resource or pay monthly" model. I also find it far less fun-killing than the ad-supported ones. The ad-supported games and software(I will count the websites also in this) has terrible user experience as it is geared to interrupt you and make you do something else. Free(as in beer) software has become a bait to direct you to something else. You want to drive a virtual car? Here is your virtual car but why don't you check the bubble popping game first? Here are your bubbles to pop but why don't you try jumping over hops instead? Here are the hops you may want to jump but wouldn't you not like to get angry for this political issue first? This endless ad-supported stream of offers, I believe, is taking the oxygen of truly high quality works. Why would you buy the 0.99$ app or game when you can use the free version, right?

takluyver 6y ago
I see in-app purchases and subscription models as quite different from micropayments. Micropayments would mean something like Spotify - you pay some amount up front, and the company pays artists a tiny amount for each time someone listens to their work. A quick search suggests that that amount is on average less than half a US cent per play on Spotify, and similar services range from about 1/10 to 2 cents per play. It's not a system that the artists are very happy with.
- mrtksn 6y ago
  It’s the same thing but they pay programmers and designers instead of musicians. It’s actually better because most of these programmers and designers make decent amount of money - unlike Spotify.