5 ms·
At least the solution is obvious, even if the path to an ad-free web is not. And it's a solution that also has the advantage of being a solid public good.
by GolfPopper 6mo ago
At least the solution is obvious, even if the path to an ad-free web is not. And it's a solution that also has the advantage of being a solid public good.
- anovikov 6mo agoThe free internet of the workers and peasants? I mean, how will the websites make money?
- GuinansEyebrows 6mo agomaybe we're better off without websites that only exist to make money.
- colesantiago 6mo agoHow do website owners pay for server costs if you think they shouldn't make money? Should everyone be in a loss when they run a website?
- GuinansEyebrows 6mo agoi manage to do so using money i make elsewhere. the information i put on the internet is either of benefit to people or a matter of vanity. i don't afford special concern to people who want to use the internet for profit.
- colesantiago 6mo agoSo you have never sold anything, or participated with other people or groups that have sold anything online because you believe that they should not use the internet for profit?
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- GuinansEyebrows 6mo agothis rhetoric is not compelling to me.
- colesantiago 6mo agoThis is not rhetoric and dodging a yes / no question is not an answer. You didn't deny it. So I am assuming you sold something or participated with other people or groups that have sold something for profit on the internet. > i manage to do so using money i make elsewhere And the place you work at most likely has an internet presence (highly likely) to sell products and services? You don't want your place of work to make money and not pay their server bills if they have an internet presence? You're living in a fantasy land in 2026.
- qu4z-2 6mo agoI think if everyone with a website made a small financial loss on it, the web would be immeasurably better.
- colesantiago 6mo agoHow?
- anovikov 6mo agoWell in the end of the day, everything exists to make money. Because if we remove that, only goal becomes direct power - violence and domination - and it's too dystopian.
- jmorenoamor 6mo agoThat's their problem to solve
- wao0uuno 6mo agoWhy do they have to make money?
- colesantiago 6mo agoSo that the website... stays online? Have you bought a domain before or anything online before?
- wao0uuno 6mo agoYes, I hosted a website for about two years. Paid for it from my own pocket. Had some fun, learned a few things. There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?
- colesantiago 6mo agoYes. This predates websites, it's called commerce. Pick any medium, humans will always find a way to transact with one another, it's been like this for thousands of years. I don't understand why you think websites and the internet should be exempt from this? > > There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this? Forget websites. How are you going to pay the rent, or put food on the table for your children if you don't want to generate money? Unless you're retired with savings (some on HN are), have an inheritance windfall or are living on government money, then you can do things that don't need an income. Otherwise you need to generate an income.
- anovikov 6mo agoPerhaps they have a point actually: if we assume that a significant proportion of society is retired with savings (and this is the case in the US - ~1% of population can afford a rich lifestyle on passive income alone, and ~5% can afford about a median lifestyle), then serving society may become a calling for those people - they need something to do after all - once everyone will understand that normal "jobs" became mostly harmful to society, or if not harmful, so poorly paid that anyone with even $2M in stocks will not be interested in doing them.