5 ms·

The reason why ads work is consumers do not want to spend money now that they are conditioned to get stuff on the internet for free. Every time an article on he

The reason why ads work is consumers do not want to spend money now that they are conditioned to get stuff on the internet for free. Every time an article on here is posted the first comment is a link to archive.is. I agree this would be a better model, but I don’t think it will ever happen. Maybe the Web3 stuff will catch on and this will become sustainable.

kelvinjps10 3y ago
I think that we have enough hardware so that they user themselves provide the infrastructure, kind of how briar, peertube work
seydor 3y ago
> Every time an article on here is posted the first comment is a link to archive.is. Friction matters. Making an online payment is a slow 10 step procedure currently. If it was a single effortless click it would certinaly be used more. Kind of how arcade machines worked
- makestuff 3y ago
  That’s actually a really good point. I think I would be much more open to loading $100/mo or whatever into some account and then just one click “show me this article”. It could even use the same ad tech we already have with impression pixels. The impression is fired and on the backend it is deducted from your account. I guess the issue becomes you will never have one solution and each website will integrate with different payment providers. Honestly sounds like something Apple could solve with ApplePay.
  - ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
    Nobody have seen Brave's model?
bad_username 3y ago
I think consumers are not reluctant to spend money. They are just averse to the friction of doing the paying. If nanopayments for e.g. reading a news article could become totally automated and transparent, I think this would work.
wruza 3y ago
We are also conditioned that the stuff on the internet is an eyes-seeking bullshit nine times out of ten and there’s no way to mark a site, a blog or a section as “never again” so that you could know it next time. All this interaction of a user with the web is monopolized by few players who fuck them up in return. So it’s hard to blame a user for their reluctance.

kelvinjps10 3y ago

I think that we have enough hardware so that they user themselves provide the infrastructure, kind of how briar, peertube work

seydor 3y ago

> Every time an article on here is posted the first comment is a link to archive.is. Friction matters. Making an online payment is a slow 10 step procedure currently. If it was a single effortless click it would certinaly be used more. Kind of how arcade machines worked

makestuff 3y ago
That’s actually a really good point. I think I would be much more open to loading $100/mo or whatever into some account and then just one click “show me this article”. It could even use the same ad tech we already have with impression pixels. The impression is fired and on the backend it is deducted from your account. I guess the issue becomes you will never have one solution and each website will integrate with different payment providers. Honestly sounds like something Apple could solve with ApplePay.
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
  Nobody have seen Brave's model?

bad_username 3y ago

I think consumers are not reluctant to spend money. They are just averse to the friction of doing the paying. If nanopayments for e.g. reading a news article could become totally automated and transparent, I think this would work.

wruza 3y ago

We are also conditioned that the stuff on the internet is an eyes-seeking bullshit nine times out of ten and there’s no way to mark a site, a blog or a section as “never again” so that you could know it next time. All this interaction of a user with the web is monopolized by few players who fuck them up in return. So it’s hard to blame a user for their reluctance.