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

Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

elezea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#111

Post by robryan »

carrotsalad wrote: post #91
icebraining wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about most people, but I don't read many articles from the same source: I read a few from some online newspaper, then some from another, then a blog post, etc. Now take NYT.com: the minimum subscription is $15/month - it's absurdly expensive for the three or four articles I might read there. You need to solve micropayments to make paywalls work.

That's part of what we're trying to do with http://TipTheWeb.org/ , letting people support the content they like with voluntary micro-donations. For instance, I've already tipped the original article 20¢ :-) (see my Tip stream at http://tiptheweb.org/tipstream/patg6vy3pyb62/ ) If publishers can get direct financial support from their audience, they wouldn't need to overdo things with ads, and they'd focus more on pro…

It's a concept that has been around in various forms for some time but doesn't seem to have gained much traction anywhere. As well as a tip everywhere system I assume your letting publishers after they have claimed their site to push the tips with buttons on their site?

I don't think I would be inclined to ever tip unless I knew that the author has a presence on the tipping service so I knew they were actually going to claim the tips. Wonder to if a reverse model, similar to a kickstarter would work, as in an author proposes a piece of content they will put some time into a produce if they get some upfront commitment of tips.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#113

Post by njw45 »

tbourdon wrote: post #85
jerf wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am hopeful that as the providers become more directly connected to the consumers and it becomes increasingly feasible to deal with them directly, instead of at an arms length in aggregate as was the only option up until now, that we can cut out what is ultimately functioning as a middleman in the relationship, the advertiser. You know how the internet feels about middlemen than aren't adding much value. Even if I j…

This has been my dream for years. Netflix is satisfying part of my content needs with its streaming option. I can only hope that more company's will follow suite. What I'd really like to see is a "real" news website that supplies non-biased news written by real investigative journalists with no advertisements. I'd pay handsomely for that.

Re: "real news" - http://www.propublica.org/ comes close...

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#114

Post by re_todd »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #42
prawn wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay for a newspaper and it still has advertising...

...but my newspaper ads are a wad of color-printed coupon sheets etc. I extract the ad-wad and drop it in the bin on the way out of the market. Leaving me with 3 or 4 thin sheets of local news.

... and they don't reduce our multi-core cpus to a crawl.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#116

Post by genieyclo »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #90

"... as well as the growing number of sites that offer memberships (like The Loop and Daring Fireball)." So there is a concept, that you can't tell people about, they have to experience it, then they "get it." Small anecdote, when I left Sun in 1995 I went to a startup called "GolfWeb" which was publishing an online magazine about Golf. I saw the web as the new world of publishing (I was waaaaaaaaay early :-)) and ha…

Great comment, some forward thinking publications are already doing this on their own sites like the Boston Globe, which has a new $0.99/mo plan to read their content. Sounds reasonable to me, and having a platform for multiple mags and other content providers to all do this sounds like a good plan. Incidentally Boston Globe also has a great new redesign that is responsive and provides a great experience for the user, check it out.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#117

Post by tomjen3 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #83
delinka wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty certain that YouTube links are not "unexpected video." Perhaps it's flash, but I think the original means an entirely flash-navigated site.

But the new YouTube ads that play before video are unexpected. And, for me, quite often a back button. After 6 seconds of watching the ad I usually don't care about the video anymore :/ (call it short attention span).

I haven't seen them, but if I do that's going to be the last time I go to youtube for a very long time.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#118

Post by hollerith »

pjscott wrote: post #110
ladon86 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Publishers' solution to your problem: Disable the back button.

I tend to open things in new tabs. Closing the tab works. If things get annoying enough, other people can adopt my habits on this.

Or switch to a browser that doesnt allow a website to disable your back button.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#119

Post by hollerith »

EwanToo wrote: post #39
icebraining wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about most people, but I don't read many articles from the same source: I read a few from some online newspaper, then some from another, then a blog post, etc. Now take NYT.com: the minimum subscription is $15/month - it's absurdly expensive for the three or four articles I might read there. You need to solve micropayments to make paywalls work.

I think the view that NYT.com and www.thetimes.co.uk are taking is that if you pay the $15, you'll end up sourcing most of your news from that site, justifying the price. I don't know how true that premise is, but it's definitely a simpler solution for them than coming up with a solution to micropayments (which you're absolutely right, does need to get solved).

Sourcing most of my news from the NYT would seriously impair my knowledge of the world. It would be like going back to the bad old days before access to the internet.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#120

Post by muyuu »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #90

"... as well as the growing number of sites that offer memberships (like The Loop and Daring Fireball)." So there is a concept, that you can't tell people about, they have to experience it, then they "get it." Small anecdote, when I left Sun in 1995 I went to a startup called "GolfWeb" which was publishing an online magazine about Golf. I saw the web as the new world of publishing (I was waaaaaaaaay early :-)) and ha…

The problem with paid content is that you only know whether it's worthy for you in hindsight. On top of that you have to compete with gratis (and often surprisingly good quality).

You have all the problems of an asymmetrical information market and you also have to break a cultural gap.

Honestly, I don't subscribe to magazines anymore. I just can't get consistently satisfied with any single source. The only subscription I pay is the broadband contract itself. I don't consistently watch TV or follow any sports for me to consider paying. I know there is a market for that, but it's a really difficult one.

Post reply on HN