Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel You do. Everyone doesn't.

I'm not saying that you are specifically to blame, it's a systemic problem we're all complacent to because of everyone's self-interest. Kinda like climate change or pollution. Case to case, we make our own life a significantly easier, while simultaneously making everyone's a little bit worse.

And that adds up over time, and in the end we end up with a disaster which we don't really know what to do with.

26 comments
DELETED

@drq What do you mean I do? I'm pretty sure I know my finances more than you. Unless you read my message wrong here.

DELETED

@drq So, how are you expecting everyone to pay up? Even 1 cent per page adds up really fast. Especially if your income is low. Do you say that the Internet is only for those who can afford to pay up that much? I don't agree with that.

Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel I'm not "expecting" anything. I'm just saying how exactly is everything going to hell.

Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel And yes, I know nobody from the user's side has any money. That's the key issue. That's what I'm saying.

DELETED

@drq But you are saying they must pay.

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel Yes, and they don't, because they either don't want or can't. So... Ads.

DELETED replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌

@drq What exactly do you want people to do? Because paying for everything you visit is mathematically impossible for the most of the population.

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel This is exactly what I'm saying.
I? I don't "expect" or "want" anything (well, except for people to eat the rich maybe). I'm just showing you how the Internet collapses under economic pressures.

DELETED replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌

@drq It didn't yet. Maybe some things want to be too big for their own good :blobcatthinking:

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel They certainly do. And some certainly are too big for their own good. At which point they start farming and eating people. Not literally, but their data.

DELETED replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌

@drq Data mining people is a problem, I agree here.

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel That's the business model of ""free""

DELETED replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌

@drq Not really. At least not everywhere and you don't really *have to* datamine people to show ads, if you go with ads. Simply show ads which are relevant to the site/article in question.

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel The less data you mine - the less money you get. The worse off you are as a service provider.

It's catch-22.

DELETED replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌

@drq TBH, datamined ads rarely suggest anything useful. Can't speak for everyone here, though. In any case, you don't need to earn all the money that exists, but just enough to continue doing whatever you do.

Dr. Quadragon ❌ replied to DELETED

@tennoseremel At this point usefulness of the ad to you as an individual user may not really be relevant.

And you rarely can "just" continue doing whatever you do, the prices grow, the complexity of what you do rises over time, even if you're just a news site, for example.

Also, the line between "user data mining ads" and "content relevant ads" blurs significantly if the content in your service is user-centric, doesn't it.

There's no easy answers here. There's no disco solution. It wouldn't be much of a problem if there were, would it.

@tennoseremel At this point usefulness of the ad to you as an individual user may not really be relevant.

And you rarely can "just" continue doing whatever you do, the prices grow, the complexity of what you do rises over time, even if you're just a news site, for example.

Also, the line between "user data mining ads" and "content relevant ads" blurs significantly if the content in your service is user-centric, doesn't it.

Шуро replied to Dr. Quadragon ❌
@drq @tennoseremel
"the complexity of what you do rises over time"

Maybe it shouldn't :) It works for some other things. E.g. bread gets sold just as it is just fine. Same can work for news site.
DELETED

@drq Yeah, because only rich people with access to the Internet is certainly a much better society[!]

Шуро
@drq @tennoseremel There is also charity.

Our problem is that everyone sees the Internet as the source of income. This kind of paradigm of course means everyone is supposed to pay and as much as you can make them.

It wasn't always the case.
Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel And besides, aside from the fact that the ads are becoming ever harder to mitigate, if you DO mitigate them, and everyone does, the advertiser stops paying to the service provider. Because why should they? They're not making any profit, because nobody watches ads, and that's what they're after.

DELETED

@drq How exactly is this my problem? If you want your website up – do something about it. You can even paywall it if you want. That's on you, not on me.

Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel Your problem is that you're using the site, aren't you.

DELETED

@drq Nope. You made it available, I use it. If you close it, I move elsewhere. If there is nowhere to go, it's just the same thing as me not having access to the Internet. But I'm already there if I have to pay for everything.

Dr. Quadragon ❌

@tennoseremel Multiply that "I" by the number of the Internet users, and you'll see the point of what I'm saying.

The problem lies not with you as an individual.

DELETED

@drq I don't get your point, TBH. You need to rephrase it, maybe.

Go Up