6 ms·

Because I pay my money and use my bandwidth, so that you can read the content you want.

by tomeric 14y ago

uoou 14y ago
Which you freely choose to do. You exist in the market as it is, not as you wish it to be. If you can't find a way to make it pay (if that is your priority/a requirement) then you'll fail and someone else will try. If no one can think of a way to make it pay, then we'll lose such sites until someone can. Which is fine. Better that than ads.
- andymcsherry 14y ago
  If you remove the incentive to freely distribute content, eventually people will stop doing it. When this happens, most of the content you enjoy will end up behind a paywall. The reason you don't see it now is only a small portion of the internet is aware of and uses these products. Most of us can't work for free, and I imagine a substantial portion of this reader base's income is directly or indirectly supported by advertising.
  - uoou 14y ago
    Yes, I said that in my previous post. And we'll go back to having a greater proportion of hobbyist sites. People doing it for the love of it rather than the money. That's fine. I think advertising is a terribly crude way to make money from a website, as well as being cultural and aesthetic pollution. I think we'll look back on this period when websites were ad-funded with embarrassment. Of course, I can't think of a better idea. But if the use of ad-blockers increases then many many sites will go pop (the really good ones - the ones that people are actually actively willing to pay for - will survive of course) until some clever sausage eventually thinks of a better idea. And that will be great. Good old free market at work.
  - uoou 14y ago
    Also, if there's advertising then it's not free.
  - jessaustin 14y ago
    ... most of the content you enjoy will end up behind a paywall. This is often threatened, occasionally attempted, and rarely continued after the resulting precipitous traffic drop. "Content" is not rare. If a particular producer can't figure out a remuneration technique that doesn't annoy consumers, she'll find her lunch eaten by competing producers who can.
tomp 14y ago
But unless you made a site especially for mobile devices, and also use mobile-friendly ads, I'm just downloading the huge ads that you serve your desktop users, without even being able to see them when I zoom in.

Because I pay my money and use my bandwidth, so that you can read the content you want.

by tomeric 14y ago

Because I pay my money and use my bandwidth, so that you can read the content you want.

uoou 14y ago

Which you freely choose to do. You exist in the market as it is, not as you wish it to be. If you can't find a way to make it pay (if that is your priority/a requirement) then you'll fail and someone else will try. If no one can think of a way to make it pay, then we'll lose such sites until someone can. Which is fine. Better that than ads.

andymcsherry 14y ago
If you remove the incentive to freely distribute content, eventually people will stop doing it. When this happens, most of the content you enjoy will end up behind a paywall. The reason you don't see it now is only a small portion of the internet is aware of and uses these products. Most of us can't work for free, and I imagine a substantial portion of this reader base's income is directly or indirectly supported by advertising.
- uoou 14y ago
  Yes, I said that in my previous post. And we'll go back to having a greater proportion of hobbyist sites. People doing it for the love of it rather than the money. That's fine. I think advertising is a terribly crude way to make money from a website, as well as being cultural and aesthetic pollution. I think we'll look back on this period when websites were ad-funded with embarrassment. Of course, I can't think of a better idea. But if the use of ad-blockers increases then many many sites will go pop (the really good ones - the ones that people are actually actively willing to pay for - will survive of course) until some clever sausage eventually thinks of a better idea. And that will be great. Good old free market at work.
- uoou 14y ago
  Also, if there's advertising then it's not free.
- jessaustin 14y ago
  ... most of the content you enjoy will end up behind a paywall. This is often threatened, occasionally attempted, and rarely continued after the resulting precipitous traffic drop. "Content" is not rare. If a particular producer can't figure out a remuneration technique that doesn't annoy consumers, she'll find her lunch eaten by competing producers who can.

tomp 14y ago

But unless you made a site especially for mobile devices, and also use mobile-friendly ads, I'm just downloading the huge ads that you serve your desktop users, without even being able to see them when I zoom in.