Live data from Hacker News

Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

blog.flattr.net

11–20 of 147 posts

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#11
I was initially very excited to see this post. I have always believed that flattr's subscription/contribution model could be so important for supporting creatives and grassroots efforts.

So I'm disappointed that it seems I can't signup and contribute without installing a browser plugin that can read and change all my browser data and browser history... nope.

Flattr team, please fix that and I'll consider giving you another chance.

P.S. I've been keeping my eye open for someone trying to implement this subscription/contribution model using blockchain. I haven't been able to find anything -- anyone seen that yet?

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#12
I used to love Flattr's general concept, but from a product management perspective, I'm more than skeptical these changes will drive adoption. They don't make it easier for creators, and consumers now have a default-spending process running with questionable privacy implications, instead of making conscious decisions about whom to support.

That being said, I think the general model of Flattr is really great and I've always wondered why the Flattr button wasn't more widely adopted. It seemed like the perfect solution to publishers' monetization crisis.

- The transaction happens directly between consumer and creator, without a detour through ads (yes, there is a payment provider involved, but it's a lot more direct through Flattr) - I can pay after I actually consumed the content, when I have full information about its usefulness for me (unlike subscription models and paywalls) - There is a feedback mechanism built in, that lets content creators know what consumers consider pay-worthy.

What I would have loved to see was an analysis of key inhibiting factors and then a few well-researched product decisions and how they will remove these inhibitors.

I'm worried by Flattr's statement in this post, saying (paraphrased) 'we're not sure how many of you are going to like these changes, but we don't really have any guidance to go by'.

Creators still have to sign up with Flattr, so the only thing that's easier for them is that they don't have to add the button to their sites anymore.

Consumers still have to manage their payment details and amount per payment cycle, what's easier for them is that they don't have to press the button anymore. But this removes the conscious act of explicitly supporting something I liked to a default mode of supporting everyone on whose site I spend a certain amount of time, no matter if I actually liked what I found there (if I understand the new model correctly).

Yes, I can go in afterwards and remove sites from the list of sites I give money to, but that seems much more tedious than pressing a Flattr button once per article/post/whatever that I actually enjoyed and want to consciously support. Now I need to be careful about who I give money to.

I'd like me spending money to be a conscious decision, not an automated process running by default in the background.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#13

I would like to point out two things about Flattr: - Whenever other people send you money, Flattr keeps 10% from that money. - When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like. And they will send them back to other authors. As the money are sent back and forth, and 10% are removed at each step, Flattr is the only one actually making any money.

"When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like."

Not true, from the FAQ:

How do I withdraw money I have received? You need to have a valid bank account associated with your profile. You can then request a withdrawal. This works worldwide as long as your bank accepts international bank transfers.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#14
post #7
post #4

My thoughts when reading that (in order): - With as many pivots as Flattr had, it should be called Flattr 5.0 (after reading the headline) - Hmm, actually looks really interesting now, and they seem to have tought about the major pitfalls (after reading the blog post) - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) (Oh boy have I made many dismissive comments…

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

A lot of people have issue with the fact they allow certain ads through if the publisher pays them enough. They claim that these ads are not aggressive or distracting, but the optics are pretty bad. A for profit ad-blocking company that makes money from ads.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#15
post #6

Seems like a lot of hassle. Why shouldn't creators just keep using Patreon? None of the buzzwords in the post would convince me to switch.

For creators: Because (assuming it gains a decent userbase) Flattr will give you money from people that not explicitly subscribe to you.

For users: because it'll spread your contribution between people who made the content you consume, without individually selecting them and managing that distribution over time. It'll automatically distribute it between sites you visit.

It doesn't handle the exact same thing as Patreon, nor are they mutual exclusive.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#16
post #7
post #4

My thoughts when reading that (in order): - With as many pivots as Flattr had, it should be called Flattr 5.0 (after reading the headline) - Hmm, actually looks really interesting now, and they seem to have tought about the major pitfalls (after reading the blog post) - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) (Oh boy have I made many dismissive comments…

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

I don't get that either. Eyeo is a german company, so the rather strict german privacy laws now apply to flatter. I think thats a good thing.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#17
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

They charge advertisers to unblock ads. So actually you will see ads as long as Adblock Plus is making money. They are generally seen as untrustworthy compared to something totally free like uBlock Origin.

So actually you will see ads as long as Adblock Plus is making money.

It's literally one checkbox to disable the whitelisted ("non-intrusive") ads.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#18
post #16
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

I don't get that either. Eyeo is a german company, so the rather strict german privacy laws now apply to flatter. I think thats a good thing.

https://adblockplus.org/acceptable-ads

They're wishy washy with language, but the long and short is that they charge companies to whitelist their ads.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#20
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

A lot of people have issue with the fact they allow certain ads through if the publisher pays them enough. They claim that these ads are not aggressive or distracting, but the optics are pretty bad. A for profit ad-blocking company that makes money from ads.

I think this is the main reason basically everyone has switched to uBlock Origin. Which, by the way, works quite well.
Post reply on HN