3 ms·

Google actually tried this... at least twice, I think? In 2011, they partnered with some publishers to offer "One Pass", a pass-through billing system that als

Google actually tried this... at least twice, I think? In 2011, they partnered with some publishers to offer "One Pass", a pass-through billing system that also had an option for pay-per-article: https://www.electronicpaymentsinternational.com/news/google-launches-micropayments-solution/ https://www.electronicpaymentsinternational.com/news/google-... Then, separately in 2012 they tried to launch "Google Wallet for content", offering publishers a way to sell individual articles for less than a dollar: https://9to5google.com/guides/peachpit/ https://9to5google.com/guides/peachpit/ I don't think either service ever took off. Probably people were just too cheap :( ------ Edit, at least 3 times, apparently! See fastest963's comment about "Google Contributor": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38622362 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38622362

saghm 3y ago
I suspect that when presented with the actual "cost" of reading an article up front, most people realize that they just don't actually care that much about reading it. When the cost is indirect (via ads) and deferred (in terms of the effects on the entire system, leading to what we have today), it's a lot easier to ignore.
- amelius 3y ago
  This could be the end of addictive content. Would you watch an endless stream of useless content if you had to pay for it?
zelphirkalt 3y ago
I am not the mainstream user, but a solution like that would have to come from someone other that Google, because it is 100% safe to assume, that Google would be mining my choices of what I want to read or would try to profile me or would put mandatory recaptcha on the pages or similar.