5 ms·

I wrote this before and I will write it here again. There is a burger place. The burger place offers free burgers. They are able to do this because Big Lettu

I wrote this before and I will write it here again. There is a burger place. The burger place offers free burgers. They are able to do this because Big Lettuce pays the burger place to put lettuce in their burger. When I go and get a burger from the free burger place, what I do is I remove the lettuce from my burger. I just don’t like it. I made no agreement with the burger place to eat lettuce. They assume I will. They try to convince me to. They might even try to make the lettuce hard to remove from the burger. But what has not happened, unlike you are implying, is an agreement that I will consume the lettuce. I’m not going to stop going to the free burger place. I really like free burgers. And I won’t stop removing lettuce from my burger either. I deeply dislike lettuce. So, instead of telling me to stop going to the free burger shop because I like removing lettuce, how about you tell the shop to stop giving away free lettuce? If people really like their burgers, they will pay for them. If their burgers aren’t really that good and people consume them just because they’re free, maybe the burger place should go out of business.

datavirtue 4y ago
As ridiculous as this sounds, it makes sense. We tried the business model and it just didn't work out. We need to innovate ways to support content explicitly with some form of payment. The elusive micro-transactions that economists have been begging for for decades now. Maybe it is too late?
- throwawayacc2 4y ago
  If I had an answer for this I’d be pitching my startup somewhere. I honestly don’t know what the alternative will be. But I am sure there is on. Forcing people to consume ads just isn’t sustainable I think.
jefftk 4y ago
Here's where we had this conversation last time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32765972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32765972 As I said before, in your hypothetical you would be undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people eat burgers for free, and that would be selfishly making the world worse.
- throwawayacc2 4y ago
  I genuinely don’t know how to even approach this. Here’s something that sprang to mind. A slaver to his slave: Your attempts at achieving freedom are undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people enjoy cheap clothing, and that would be selfishly making the world worse. What’s your thoughts on that one? Genuinely curious. The way I see it, I’m not “making the world worse”. Waving away the can of worms opened by the notion of “making the world better/worse”, I genuinely cannot understand how refusing to consume something makes me selfish. I’m not selfish for removing lettuce from my burger and I’m not selfish for removing ads. The problem is not with me. The problem is with the business model. People not liking something drives innovation. Instead of doubling down on something that is not working and telling people “stop being a bad person and consume the ad” perhaps the business should find an alternative way of monetising.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    > A slaver to his slave: Your attempts at achieving freedom are undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people enjoy cheap clothing, and that would be selfishly making the world worse. This ignores harm of slavery to the slave, but in both the online ads case and your burger hypothetical there are no analogs to the slave. > I genuinely cannot understand how refusing to consume something makes me selfish. The argument is pretty straightforward. In your hypothetical, hunger has been mostly solved: everyone can eat as many burgers as they want. But this solution is fragile, and rests on people consuming the lettuce that comes with the burgers. By choosing to remove your lettuce, you increase the risk that this falls apart and we'll be back to the status quo where some people are hungry, and others spend a substantial portion of their income on food. (I still think this is a silly hypothetical)
    - throwawayacc2 4y ago
      I am literally harmed by ads. In my case, I suffer from internet addiction you see and those extra load seconds and interruptions are deeply harmful to me. They trigger anxiety and panic attacks. But that’s just me. Other people are harmed way more! Maybe you can wave away my ad inducted anxiety but can you wave away people with epilepsy? Can you wave away people with ADHD? Can you wave away people with accessibility needs? Can you wave away people unwillingly outed as lgbt by the ads they are served? Can you wave away predatory ads? Can you wave away “making the world worse” through ad enabled miss information? As for lettuce I am allergic to it. I will literally die if I don’t remove it. Your move.
cwkoss 4y ago
The analogy would work better if the lettuce was infected with parasitic worms that make the victim more likely to spend money on lettuce.

datavirtue 4y ago

As ridiculous as this sounds, it makes sense. We tried the business model and it just didn't work out. We need to innovate ways to support content explicitly with some form of payment. The elusive micro-transactions that economists have been begging for for decades now. Maybe it is too late?

throwawayacc2 4y ago
If I had an answer for this I’d be pitching my startup somewhere. I honestly don’t know what the alternative will be. But I am sure there is on. Forcing people to consume ads just isn’t sustainable I think.

jefftk 4y ago

Here's where we had this conversation last time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32765972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32765972 As I said before, in your hypothetical you would be undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people eat burgers for free, and that would be selfishly making the world worse.

throwawayacc2 4y ago
I genuinely don’t know how to even approach this. Here’s something that sprang to mind. A slaver to his slave: Your attempts at achieving freedom are undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people enjoy cheap clothing, and that would be selfishly making the world worse. What’s your thoughts on that one? Genuinely curious. The way I see it, I’m not “making the world worse”. Waving away the can of worms opened by the notion of “making the world better/worse”, I genuinely cannot understand how refusing to consume something makes me selfish. I’m not selfish for removing lettuce from my burger and I’m not selfish for removing ads. The problem is not with me. The problem is with the business model. People not liking something drives innovation. Instead of doubling down on something that is not working and telling people “stop being a bad person and consume the ad” perhaps the business should find an alternative way of monetising.
- jefftk 4y ago
  > A slaver to his slave: Your attempts at achieving freedom are undermining a business model that is letting a lot of people enjoy cheap clothing, and that would be selfishly making the world worse. This ignores harm of slavery to the slave, but in both the online ads case and your burger hypothetical there are no analogs to the slave. > I genuinely cannot understand how refusing to consume something makes me selfish. The argument is pretty straightforward. In your hypothetical, hunger has been mostly solved: everyone can eat as many burgers as they want. But this solution is fragile, and rests on people consuming the lettuce that comes with the burgers. By choosing to remove your lettuce, you increase the risk that this falls apart and we'll be back to the status quo where some people are hungry, and others spend a substantial portion of their income on food. (I still think this is a silly hypothetical)
  - throwawayacc2 4y ago
    I am literally harmed by ads. In my case, I suffer from internet addiction you see and those extra load seconds and interruptions are deeply harmful to me. They trigger anxiety and panic attacks. But that’s just me. Other people are harmed way more! Maybe you can wave away my ad inducted anxiety but can you wave away people with epilepsy? Can you wave away people with ADHD? Can you wave away people with accessibility needs? Can you wave away people unwillingly outed as lgbt by the ads they are served? Can you wave away predatory ads? Can you wave away “making the world worse” through ad enabled miss information? As for lettuce I am allergic to it. I will literally die if I don’t remove it. Your move.

cwkoss 4y ago

The analogy would work better if the lettuce was infected with parasitic worms that make the victim more likely to spend money on lettuce.