3 ms·

You mean if the content does not cater to people who are well-off enough to pay for it with money? There are many people who simply don't have the financial me

by kqr 4y ago

You mean if the content does not cater to people who are well-off enough to pay for it with money? There are many people who simply don't have the financial means to support all the content they like. Does that content not deserve to exist? Should quality internet content really be a class question?

paskozdilar 4y ago
No, I'm just saying if it's important, someone will want to preserve it, and it will survive. If nobody does, then it's not important.
- frereubu 4y ago
  That's a very specific definition of important. Thought experiment: what about a free website that shows people where their nearest food bank is?
  - cupofpython 4y ago
    they can appeal for grants and funds as a non-profit to keep it running. why does such a website need to make a profit?
    - frereubu 4y ago
      I wasn't suggesting that they need to make a profit, just enough to pay for hosting and maintenance time.
Firmwarrior 4y ago
This is a really disingenuous argument that can justify all sorts of ridiculous stuff, the least of which would be the predatory and toxic mobile game industry
- cupofpython 4y ago
  Im pretty sure predatory and toxic mobile game industry would fall under the same (or worse) categorization as ads, so would fall under the same logic of "if you cant afford to run your website without doing something unethical, then your website doesnt deserve to run"
  - Firmwarrior 4y ago
    Amen to that. The toxic casino games have choked out 99.99% of the actual games, and that model is now spreading out to other platforms like a cancer. Back to ads, it sounds like living in a corporate dystopian nightmare where your every move is tracked and you're constantly manipulated is somehow the "woke" option in this discussion. Great. I could easily host a local Facebook-esque site for a hundred friends and family for less than $10 a month. I wouldn't need all their apps and every website they use to participate in a spy network to make it work, either.

by kqr 4y ago

paskozdilar 4y ago

No, I'm just saying if it's important, someone will want to preserve it, and it will survive. If nobody does, then it's not important.

frereubu 4y ago
That's a very specific definition of important. Thought experiment: what about a free website that shows people where their nearest food bank is?
- cupofpython 4y ago
  they can appeal for grants and funds as a non-profit to keep it running. why does such a website need to make a profit?
  - frereubu 4y ago
    I wasn't suggesting that they need to make a profit, just enough to pay for hosting and maintenance time.

Firmwarrior 4y ago

This is a really disingenuous argument that can justify all sorts of ridiculous stuff, the least of which would be the predatory and toxic mobile game industry

cupofpython 4y ago
Im pretty sure predatory and toxic mobile game industry would fall under the same (or worse) categorization as ads, so would fall under the same logic of "if you cant afford to run your website without doing something unethical, then your website doesnt deserve to run"
- Firmwarrior 4y ago
  Amen to that. The toxic casino games have choked out 99.99% of the actual games, and that model is now spreading out to other platforms like a cancer. Back to ads, it sounds like living in a corporate dystopian nightmare where your every move is tracked and you're constantly manipulated is somehow the "woke" option in this discussion. Great. I could easily host a local Facebook-esque site for a hundred friends and family for less than $10 a month. I wouldn't need all their apps and every website they use to participate in a spy network to make it work, either.