4 ms·
Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. We are not in a system that allows for micropaymen
by caslon 3y ago
Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage.
We are not in a system that allows for micropayments to work.
You list a very famous content creator. On the other hand, there are lots of content creators who actually are struggling, and not making half as much as a minimum wage worker despite working longer hours than full-time.
If you look at the Twitch leaks, the payment curve has a long tail; the vast majority of creators do not make very much at all, while the top creators tend to make out with multigenerational wealth in a year.
This is especially true with CS-sphere content creators, because computer scientists seem especially reluctant to spend money, ever, if it isn't required of them, as they are very good at justifying not doing so with "They'll be fine!"
In many cases, a sentiment that's right. In other cases, not so much. There are lots of Twitch streamers, open source software developers, and YouTubers that can't seem to find ways to monetize their content that work well. Oftentimes, these are some of the people that have the most interesting content!
If a person likes someone's content, they should find a way to financially support that, if they're able.
- gruez 3y ago> Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. Paypal micropayments has it down to 5% + 9 cents. https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/merchant-fees#micropaymentfixedfee https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/merchant-fees#micropay...
- kube-system 3y ago> Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. Well yes, micropayments don't work if you don't use a micropayment platform. There are solutions that cater specifically to micropayments that have different fee structures so that it makes sense. A platform with enough resources and interest could also accept deposits from traditional payment processors in bulk, and payout at some threshold to content creators. > If you look at the Twitch leaks, the payment curve has a long tail; the vast majority of creators do not make very much at all, while the top creators tend to make out with multigenerational wealth in a year. This isn't because of the payment system. This is because content quality and discovery both have a long tail. The average content is poor quality and has almost no views.
- throw10920 3y agoRight - GP puts up a strawman: > Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. Nobody ever said that you'd have to use payment processors directly for micropayments, and most schemes that I know of don't, because of those fees.
- PoignardAzur 3y ago> Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. From what I remember, Patreon solves this by bundling all micro-payments together on the same day. So if you have twenty 50¢ pledges, first you pay 10$ to Patreon, then Patreon spreads that money between creators. The final overhead is only paid once per user and once per creator.