5 ms·

> content creators are compensated for their work I have a gut feeling that we've been tricked (by ad companies) into thinking that this is somehow realistic a

by jwr 11mo ago

> content creators are compensated for their work I have a gut feeling that we've been tricked (by ad companies) into thinking that this is somehow realistic and that casual "content creators" can get meaningful money from us reading their articles. Realistically, while professional content creators can make a living, writing a blog post every once in a while will not provide meaningful income. Instead of trying to "monetize" everything, we would be better off with free content like on the internet of old. There are other means of making money. It seems that the current situation means that the "content creators" earn insignificant money, while ad companies earn huge money because of scale, and we all somehow keep believing that this is necessary for content to appear.

Buttons840 11mo ago
You mean I shouldn't make a comfortable living off my valuable HN comments? I was about to consider this comment a good days work. Maybe if I put this comment on my own webpage it would be more valuable?
- ykonstant 11mo ago
  Best I can do is tree fiddy. Perhaps a little ragebait could give it that extra oomph it needs.
  - Buttons840 11mo ago
    You mean tree fiddy per month, right?
- zelphirkalt 11mo ago
  About as valuable, as many content creators' work. But it all hinges on engagement, so consider this my part in helping you to the next million.
FireBeyond 11mo ago
> writing a blog post every once in a while will not provide meaningful income Nor, generally, should it. Sitting down one or two Saturday afternoons a month to write a blog post shouldn't be generating the income of a FTE.
- chiefalchemist 11mo ago
  Allow me a second to play Devil’s Advocate. What if it could? Or should (be able to produce FTE or close income)? In that world, the amount of pointless shite - questing to “go viral” - would be reduced to near zero. That is, if the incentive were more quality, and less quantity, we’d be better off, yes?
  - FireBeyond 11mo ago
    So there's an element of truth to that. And there are those who can contribute enough value, have enough audience, etc., that they can "coast" on those 2 blog posts a month and make significant income... ... but that's also not, nor should it be the median. I'm not sure how the economy functions if, say 8h/mo effort generates a median living wage.
    - o11c 11mo ago
      Tbf in a post-scarcity society, that should be expected, if historical inertia doesn't prevent it.
      - deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
      - FireBeyond 11mo ago
        In that world, a Culture-esque thing, then absolutely so.
  - sfink 11mo ago
    That's tempting, but I still don't think it should. There would still be the quest to go viral. "Quality" would still be determined in the aggregate, which means that your income depends on appealing to the widest audience possible, which means high quality niche bloggers still don't get paid much. Metrics are hard. Just making sure they reward one particular desired outcome doesn't mean you'll escape the unintended consequences. Also, note that we are past the point of being able to reasonably able to manage any of this. Today, you'd need to come up with a reward function that cannot be maximized by AI. (And lest you think you can fix that by using site visitors to evaluate, most of them will be bots too.)
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
geocar 11mo ago
> writing a blog post every once in a while will not provide meaningful income Should people receive meaningful income for writing a blog post every once in a while? I feel like that's the real question and not everyone agrees on the answer > we would be better off with free content like on the internet of old Well as someone who was there you used to need meaningful income to use the Internet of old. Nowadays everyone needs the Internet and it's a pretty big expense in most peoples' budget, and I think that's why so many people are willing to try something at it, I figure if you just gave everyone meaningful income we could have that again

by jwr 11mo ago

Buttons840 11mo ago

You mean I shouldn't make a comfortable living off my valuable HN comments? I was about to consider this comment a good days work. Maybe if I put this comment on my own webpage it would be more valuable?

ykonstant 11mo ago
Best I can do is tree fiddy. Perhaps a little ragebait could give it that extra oomph it needs.
- Buttons840 11mo ago
  You mean tree fiddy per month, right?
zelphirkalt 11mo ago
About as valuable, as many content creators' work. But it all hinges on engagement, so consider this my part in helping you to the next million.

FireBeyond 11mo ago

> writing a blog post every once in a while will not provide meaningful income Nor, generally, should it. Sitting down one or two Saturday afternoons a month to write a blog post shouldn't be generating the income of a FTE.

chiefalchemist 11mo ago
Allow me a second to play Devil’s Advocate. What if it could? Or should (be able to produce FTE or close income)? In that world, the amount of pointless shite - questing to “go viral” - would be reduced to near zero. That is, if the incentive were more quality, and less quantity, we’d be better off, yes?
- FireBeyond 11mo ago
  So there's an element of truth to that. And there are those who can contribute enough value, have enough audience, etc., that they can "coast" on those 2 blog posts a month and make significant income... ... but that's also not, nor should it be the median. I'm not sure how the economy functions if, say 8h/mo effort generates a median living wage.
  - o11c 11mo ago
    Tbf in a post-scarcity society, that should be expected, if historical inertia doesn't prevent it.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
    - FireBeyond 11mo ago
      In that world, a Culture-esque thing, then absolutely so.
- sfink 11mo ago
  That's tempting, but I still don't think it should. There would still be the quest to go viral. "Quality" would still be determined in the aggregate, which means that your income depends on appealing to the widest audience possible, which means high quality niche bloggers still don't get paid much. Metrics are hard. Just making sure they reward one particular desired outcome doesn't mean you'll escape the unintended consequences. Also, note that we are past the point of being able to reasonably able to manage any of this. Today, you'd need to come up with a reward function that cannot be maximized by AI. (And lest you think you can fix that by using site visitors to evaluate, most of them will be bots too.)

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

geocar 11mo ago

> writing a blog post every once in a while will not provide meaningful income Should people receive meaningful income for writing a blog post every once in a while? I feel like that's the real question and not everyone agrees on the answer > we would be better off with free content like on the internet of old Well as someone who was there you used to need meaningful income to use the Internet of old. Nowadays everyone needs the Internet and it's a pretty big expense in most peoples' budget, and I think that's why so many people are willing to try something at it, I figure if you just gave everyone meaningful income we could have that again