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.
Make Firefox Private Again
201–210 of 348 posts
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#202Earlier 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.
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#203Earlier 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.
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
#204Earlier 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.
predatory lawyers and greedy creators is the reason I don't.
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#205Earlier 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.
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#206Earlier 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.
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#207Earlier 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.
Re: Make Firefox Private Again
#208wasn'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,…
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
#209Earlier 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?