Live data from Hacker News

Make Firefox Private Again

make-firefox-private-again.com

201–210 of 348 posts

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you think that the video content is going to be stored and served if not through paid infrastructure? Secondary doesn't mean nonexistent, it comes after the primary thing, content creation. When the Internet was younger, people willingly paid for privilege of sharing content. Creation was the primary motivation; costs were a secondary concern. I think it resulted in more and better communities than today, wh…

> When the Internet was younger, people willingly paid for privilege of sharing content This silences a large number of people and communities who can’t afford that privilege. Not saying that’s inherently bad. But it’s worth weighing in the moral calculus.

The thing is, if your community is small costs are probably in the couple dollars a month range. An order of magnitude lower than the costs of hardware like your computer. If communities are large where an individual cannot trivially bear the costs, donation models have worked where the community itself funds its hosting.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the general problem of economic inequality, though. It's not specific to the Internet. Disadvantaged groups will already have less free time to share content, less exposure to the technical skills needed to do so, less attention, respect, and opportunity from doing so, etc. Advertising places a fig leaf over unequal access, but really makes the inequality worse by centralizing wealth and control in the hands o…

> That's the general problem of economic inequality, though. It's not specific to the Internet. Yes, but advertisement showed that it wasn't a structural limitation and that other options were available. Even if said options themselves had downsides.

Donations were and are a thing for covering hosting costs in many communities.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#203
post #97
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don't care if 90% of websites which rely on advertising disappear or replace their monetization strategy with gated, paid access. I even think this is a good thing. As such, I will fight the ability of websites to monetize by tracking wherever I can.

This means that people without means will automatically be excluded from the internet. Also most people don't want to pay for content. This just means that 99.99% of the web will instantly disappear.

> This just means that 99.99% of the web will instantly disappear.

Fine by me.

I'll browse the remaining 0.01%, search engines will be useful again and people won't be doom-scrolling all the time to see morons eating.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you think that the video content is going to be stored and served if not through paid infrastructure? Secondary doesn't mean nonexistent, it comes after the primary thing, content creation. When the Internet was younger, people willingly paid for privilege of sharing content. Creation was the primary motivation; costs were a secondary concern. I think it resulted in more and better communities than today, wh…

> When the Internet was younger, people willingly paid for privilege of sharing content This silences a large number of people and communities who can’t afford that privilege. Not saying that’s inherently bad. But it’s worth weighing in the moral calculus.

I'd happily provide hosting to a whole lot of media that I enjoy myself and would love to share. I might have bandwidth limits each month, but within reason, I'd share.

predatory lawyers and greedy creators is the reason I don't.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. Production quality != overall quality. I'd much rather have great content badly produced than professionally produced crap.

Most people still seem to watch Hollywood quality movies so I don't know if your taste is very representative.

Would they watch so many if they weren’t available at every movie theater in town and every streaming service on earth? A lot of attention has been devoted to such movies that would have been invested elsewhere in other efforts if movies didn’t exist.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the Internet was younger, people willingly paid for privilege of sharing content This silences a large number of people and communities who can’t afford that privilege. Not saying that’s inherently bad. But it’s worth weighing in the moral calculus.

Posting video on someone else's hardware is not a human right.

has anybody tried to argue this here? who are you replying to?

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#207
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was free before the insane amount of advertising. It was better before the insane amount of advertising.

> It was better before the insane amount of advertising. There was anything on it really before that. Wikipedia didn't start until 2001 and there were already pop-ups and banner ads everywhere. t was better before the insane amount of advertising. I seem to recall GeoCities having ads everywhere.

Geocities is an interesting case. It didn't start with ads and they monitored sites and told people to remove them (I received one such email). It wasn't out of some altruistic ideals though. They just didn't want anyone to advertise before they got their ads running on everyone's sites.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#208

wasn't aware that 'anonym' existed. I don't care if PII is stripped or not. the answer to 'helping advertisers' or anything with advertisement metrics in any fashion is always 'No.' - training things so that there's better data on how to best manipulate our psyche / give people data to psychologically manipulate us in to buying/doing things is a hard 'No.' > Asked whether Mozilla has any concerns that its user base,…

Most importantly, advertisement is a business. It's not charity and it's not a publicly owned resource. It doesn't keep the Internet free, because it makes a boat load of money doing what it does. It doesn't take an expert understanding of economics to see that any belief that advertisement allows for a free Internet is smoke and mirrors. The money comes from somewhere, notably from you.

Either advertisement works, and you pay for your content by being psychologically manipulated into paying more than you otherwise would on things you don't need, or it doesn't, and businesses pay for ineffective advertisement, leading to increased prices.

Advertisement is not free. It's a trick that looks free if you ignore the entire way it functions.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#209
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don't care if 90% of websites which rely on advertising disappear or replace their monetization strategy with gated, paid access. I even think this is a good thing. As such, I will fight the ability of websites to monetize by tracking wherever I can.

That's not the alternative. The alternative is the death of most sites other than walled gardens like Meta and Amazon that own their own advertising end-to-end. Do you want the internet to be even more Meta controlled?

The internet and humanity would exist fine without advertisers. History has proven this to be true.

Re: Make Firefox Private Again

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

/.

The same Slashdot that is monetised through advertisement with 500M monthly ad impressions? Source: https://slashdotmedia.com/advertising-and-marketing-services...

I mean, they still don't/can't handle Unicode.
Post reply on HN