Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

thoughts.jatan.space

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 351 posts

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#341

Post by compuguy »

rglullis wrote: post #157
rollcat wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Crypto is meant to be an alternative for the cases where the cost of existing processors make the transaction not viable. Allow me to quote myself: using proof of work in place of CC processor fees is just moving the problem around - and arguably, making it worse: you're essentially taking on environmental debt, which all of us will eventually have to pay down.

Ethereum is moving to PoS in less than two months. Can we please drop this BS excuse of an argument? (Before you reply with the usual "Ethereum devs have been promising PoS for years" line, I will tell you this: I pledge to drop all work on Hub20 if Ethereum doesn't complete the transition by the end of the year.)

And I really really want Ethereum to succeed so other cryptocurrencies move to non PoW systems. Good to hear we are getting close to it rolling out....

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#342

Post by compuguy »

rglullis wrote: post #243
luma wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the point of view of the merchant, crypto is riddled with fraud: https://www.pcgamer.com/50-of-transactions-were-fraudulent-w... If crypto truly solved all the problems you claim it solves, I think it’s reasonable for the major online marketplaces and vendors to have already switched over. I’ll note that they haven’t, and the state of the overall crypto market in the past few weeks suggests one good reason why.

I'd really like that more information was provided in the article. What is he counting as a "fraudulent transaction"? > If crypto truly solved all the problems (...) vendors would have already switched over. Transaction fees are not solved yet. UX is not solved yet. Privacy is not solved yet. (Well, it is if you count Monero, but for commerce you need a stabletoken, and you can not easily build a stabletoken on Moner…

Honestly the biggest issue with any crypto, at least in the United States, is for taxation purposes, it's treated like buying or selling a stock vs an actual currency. We need some actual crypto regulation defined that protects people and allows for cryptocurrencies to be used as an actual payment method, not an investment...

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#344

Post by tatertots1234 »

compuguy wrote: post #339
tatertots1234 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many Patreon payments are simple donations, or gated access to digital media. These can be achieved with smart contract functionality to mitigate the need for costly payment processing.

Yes though I would point out that smart contracts require some knowledge of coding knowledge to implement....

Yes, a theoretical crypto-Patreon would have to be coded in Solidity and frontend interfaces built around it for the web. This might be OSS or just a private enterprise.

But the users of this platform do not need to know how to code.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#345

Post by tatertots1234 »

compuguy wrote: post #340
KallDrexx wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works if all "input parameters" involved in the transaction are verifyably on chain. If I'm buying a physical good with crypto there's no way you can write a smart contract that verifies I did indeed get the good I paid for. Oracles don't count because that's just kicking the can to a different level (how do I dispute the oracle saying something happened that didn't).

Exactly. On top of that and the high transaction fees, it's more complicated to do a Patreon like service with Crypto than just work with the imperfect financial systems we have now....

It’s really not that hard to build a Patreon style service on crypto and web3. It’s also far easier to build a new payment processing platform on crypto than it is to build an alternative to PayPal or Stripe.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#346

Post by account42 »

I don't know your audience but calling $25/year or $3/month "Symbolic support" on your "Donorbox" seems a bit ungrateful.

I do support creators moving off the sluggish excuse for a website that Patreon is though - especially if they can't even provide the main advantage of a centralized patronage platform: to keep fees low by aggregating smaller amounts distributed to many creators in one credit card/bank transaction.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#347

Post by unity1001 »

markstos wrote: post #328
unity1001 wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they don't collect, process and pay international tax like EU VAT. Or California sales tax etc. You have to correctly collect it and file it one by one. So Ghost is not a creator platform. Its a payment platform.

Ghost is a platform for creating content. Ghost partners with Stripe to handle the payments. For a customer who runs a small town Indiana newspaper, who may be a somewhat typical customer, it's not that complicated: They won't have international subscribers and they would pay state and federal taxes-- standard income staff stuff. And doing so with Ghost vs Patreon could save thousands of dollars per year!

Not really - because, with Patreon you can very probably report your income as 'Patreon income', whereas with Stripe, you will need file each and every single income that enters your account because Stripe does not do that for you.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#348

Post by unity1001 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #334
unity1001 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Patreon is a CRUD app and something you could build in a few months and consider it done if you wanted to. Yeah. EVERYBODY says that for EVERY single app or service that is posted on Hackernews. They could do it with even less people and funding. Yet, there doesn't seem to be anyone who actually did any such thing in a few months with 4-5 people. Apparently, real world works differently.

> Yet, there doesn't seem to be anyone who actually did any such thing in a few months with 4-5 people. What about https://liberapay.com ? Also, keep in mind that once a well-funded player with infinite money to spend on marketing enters a market it's often no longer worthwhile for a bootstrapped player to compete even if it's possible on technical grounds.

I heard about it and I know enough about it to know that it is scarcely known. The problem is not making something that caters to a small group of users. The problem is doing it at scale.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#349

Post by Nextgrid »

unity1001 wrote: post #348
Nextgrid wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet, there doesn't seem to be anyone who actually did any such thing in a few months with 4-5 people. What about https://liberapay.com ? Also, keep in mind that once a well-funded player with infinite money to spend on marketing enters a market it's often no longer worthwhile for a bootstrapped player to compete even if it's possible on technical grounds.

I heard about it and I know enough about it to know that it is scarcely known. The problem is not making something that caters to a small group of users. The problem is doing it at scale.

I agree, it is scarcely known. However it does confirm that the technical problem of Patreon isn’t rocket science if it can be solved by volunteers on a very restricted budget.

> The problem is doing it at scale.

IMO that’s more down to support/operations than tech.

Re: Patreon cuts deep inside creators’ pockets

#350

Post by unity1001 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #349
unity1001 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard about it and I know enough about it to know that it is scarcely known. The problem is not making something that caters to a small group of users. The problem is doing it at scale.

I agree, it is scarcely known. However it does confirm that the technical problem of Patreon isn’t rocket science if it can be solved by volunteers on a very restricted budget. > The problem is doing it at scale. IMO that’s more down to support/operations than tech.

Subscription aggregation services already existed WAY Before Patreon. So the technical problem was never rocket science.

The technical problem was, and still is, making it easy, safe, legal and scaling it to millions of users. Like every single technical problem in the tech startup world.

Post reply on HN