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

Who's doing this to my internet?

veekaybee.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 306 posts

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#91

Post by MalcolmPF »

sillygeese wrote: post #49
vkb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is chiming in on this point, so I don't think I wrote it clearly enough. I would be willing to pay $1.50 for a song if it were through a known party, like Amazon Payments or PayPal. I've bought lots of music through Amazon. I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. Additionally, my expectations as a consumer have been set to pay 99 cents per track, so to me, in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems li…

> I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. $1.50 isn't much of a risk you know, even if you don't know the website. You'd probably even get the song! Also, if a song is on Audio CD, it's probably on iTunes too. > in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems like it's too much This makes no sense. If you're a true music lover, a great song will give you countless hours of enjoyment and appreciation. Do you serious…

> This makes no sense. If you're a true music lover, a great song will give you countless hours of enjoyment and appreciation. Do you seriously think $1.50 is too much for that?

Just to add to this: since you've been streaming the song, you already know that you enjoy it! There is no risk to you, as a consumer, of purchasing something you'd dislike. This, to me, is the genius of streaming services. I know that my money, once I spend it, is going to artists I enjoy.

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#92

Post by andrewmcwatters »

Oh shut up already.

We are, because people like us don't want to pay 99¢-$1.50 for songs that took time to compose, play, record, master, ship, and market, apps for mobile devices are quite literally a dime a dozen in app packs, games are at their lowest prices ever and the only sustainable model is DLC and subscriptions, and hundreds of petabytes of video storage are hosted by YouTube for no charge.

It's 2015, grow up. Innovators need to make money. Maybe you'll understand one day when you make something people want.

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#94

Post by shawabawa3 »

sillygeese wrote: post #49
vkb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is chiming in on this point, so I don't think I wrote it clearly enough. I would be willing to pay $1.50 for a song if it were through a known party, like Amazon Payments or PayPal. I've bought lots of music through Amazon. I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. Additionally, my expectations as a consumer have been set to pay 99 cents per track, so to me, in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems li…

> I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. $1.50 isn't much of a risk you know, even if you don't know the website. You'd probably even get the song! Also, if a song is on Audio CD, it's probably on iTunes too. > in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems like it's too much This makes no sense. If you're a true music lover, a great song will give you countless hours of enjoyment and appreciation. Do you serious…

> $1.50 isn't much of a risk you know, even if you don't know the website. You'd probably even get the song!

The $1.50 itself isn't the risk, it's how you pay for it - by entering your card details you let them charge you whatever they want whenever they want

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#96

Post by scrabble »

This might be a better question for an Ask HN, but this post brings it up. How do you translate hits on a web page into dollars?

Is advertising the only way to make money from hits? There are plenty of sites that users will like and frequent, but would never drop pay for access. Is advertising a huge turn off for most users?

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#97

Post by juliangregorian »

mahouse wrote: post #40
woofyman wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 45 RPM single in 1962 was $1.00. That would be $5.60 adjusted for inflation today.

Even if you adjust for inflation, you really can't compare the production costs.

Can't you? The music has value even apart from the production cost.

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#98

Post by alistairSH »

sillygeese wrote: post #49
vkb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is chiming in on this point, so I don't think I wrote it clearly enough. I would be willing to pay $1.50 for a song if it were through a known party, like Amazon Payments or PayPal. I've bought lots of music through Amazon. I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. Additionally, my expectations as a consumer have been set to pay 99 cents per track, so to me, in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems li…

> I'm not going to risk $1.50 to an unknown website. $1.50 isn't much of a risk you know, even if you don't know the website. You'd probably even get the song! Also, if a song is on Audio CD, it's probably on iTunes too. > in the current atmosphere, $1.50 seems like it's too much This makes no sense. If you're a true music lover, a great song will give you countless hours of enjoyment and appreciation. Do you serious…

I don't think it's a problem with $1.50 in absolute terms. It's $1.50 compared to $0.99 from other vendors. Artists have set the expectation that songs are worth $0.99 by selling them for that amount elsewhere.

FWIW, I don't buy a lot of music - I use free Pandora and put up with the ads.

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#99

Post by icebraining »

fit2rule wrote: post #48

This is why I think solutions like IPFS are the future: http://ipfs.io/ (tl;dr: go get github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/cmd/ipfs) Basically, the day will come when any single one of us will be able to serve our own content privately from our own machine without requiring a massive infrastructure investment, nor any kind of fancy participation in what is, essentially, branding on steroids (Internet of today), but rather all it…

You can already set up a website using a "website builder" which hosts it for a couple of bucks and doesn't force any branding on it. A site on Squarespace costs $8/m and gives you unlimited storage and bandwidth to distribute your music; for $18 more, you get to use the ecommerce part to sell your stuff.

If artists aren't doing this already, which is much less intrusive than Soundcloud/iTunes/etc, what makes you think they'll be hosting their own IPFS sites?

Re: Who's doing this to my internet?

#100

Post by jamespo »

CrLf wrote: post #73
dmschulman wrote: post #29

Here's a radical idea: pay for the services you love to use. The author mentions she pays for an NYTimes subscription presumably because she gets a lot of value from their content. I pony up the same for a handful of websites and services that I choose to support. It's certainly not a democracy but there is some logic to "voting with your wallet". I hate ads as much as the next person but one thing I hate even more i…

"Here's a radical idea: pay for the services you love to use." Here's another radical idea: trying to understand why people are unwilling to pay. To me it's pretty obvious. People don't value those things they're supposed to "love" enough to pay for them. They don't actually "love" them, they're just induced necessities. If the whole Internet was turned into a pay-it-or-leave-it model, I wouldn't be surprised if most…

Often those other types of monetization boil down to someone else paying for it in one way or another.
Post reply on HN