3 ms·
> They cannot be monetized via anything but ads. Sure a few people will pay for access to a social network. But the majority will not pay $0.01 because the fric
by u801e 6y ago
> They cannot be monetized via anything but ads. Sure a few people will pay for access to a social network. But the majority will not pay $0.01 because the friction of the transaction will prevent them.
This could be done by the ISP hosting an instance of the service that can inter-operate with other hosted instances on other ISPs. They already do this with email and many of them did with usenet.
- IgorPartola 6y agoSo you want your ISP to offer the Facebook Package, the Twitter Package, the Slack Package, the Discord Package, the Instagram Package, the Tik Tok package, and with any of them you can get the AOL package? Sort of like the opposite of net neutrality? Plus do you really want Comcast to have control over what most people see as news via social media? The same Comcast that is very politically connected and regularly lobbies state and federal legislatures to blatantly advance their own interests.
- u801e 6y agoThe idea doesn't work with closed source protocols like what you listed. It would work with open source protocols that can interface with other instances on other ISPs.
- IgorPartola 6y agoUnless your ISP blocks that traffic or makes you pay extra for access to that system you want them to host or has their own curation team curating the news to suit their needs.
- u801e 6y agoYou're only able to access the service using the credentials you use for your internet connection. What other people post is not under the ISPs control, nor is what you post. Back when ISPs provided access to usenet, they never filtered what was posted and what you saw was under your control.
- j16sdiz 6y agoHere in Hong Kong, lots of isp have stop providing email. Lots of internet users are mobile-only and never had an ISP email to begin with.