Subscription Hell • Hacker News Board

Re: Subscription Hell

#271

Post by lifeformed » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:21 PM UTC

makecheck wrote: post #200

lifeformed wrote: post #89

I wish I could just pay $x/mo for unlimited access to all media. It would get distributed to content creators proportionally based on my time using websites, music, videos, and games. No ads or subscriptions. I can't imagine how such a system would be implemented though. And I'm sure there would be new unintended consequences with such an incentive structure. But something like that would be nice!

This model would require some way to indicate the cost of producing content (e.g. sending journalist overseas with risk to life and limb, versus 30 seconds making up a meme). And unfortunately, it has the huge problem that a lot of technologies that could track what you do could be misused. An anonymizing scheme similar to Apple Pay might work.

With the first point, that's already a problem with an ad based revenue system. A life-risking article still just generates <1 page worth of ad revenue per reader, the same amount as a no-effort article. Maybe this system could include some sort of tip-based approach to reward quality content. Maybe 10% of your monthly $x is distributed based on your favorite content of that month.

Re: Subscription Hell

#272

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:27 PM UTC

techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

https://opensource.com/article/17/12/open-source-business-mo...

Re: Subscription Hell

#273

Post by wffurr » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:28 PM UTC

wutbrodo wrote: post #145

JauntTrooper wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. Look what happens whenever a city adopts a $0.05 plastic bag tax. When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. I'd expect prompting u…

> I'd expect prompting users to choose whether reading a story is worth $0.05 to them every time will cause them to read and engage significantly less. The example that gives me a little bit of optimism in the long run is power: people don't really have a problem with the fact that their power bill is pay-per-use, and if it discourages them from unduly wasting power, all the better. But the problem you describe is st…

Electricity is different. The charge is decoupled from point of use. When you flip a light switch, it doesn't visibly and immediately bill you 2¢.

The bag tax, pay per article, etc. do.

Re: Subscription Hell

#274

Post by lsc » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:29 PM UTC

jacques_chester wrote: post #245

Paul-ish wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive used blendle. I wish there was a browser extension that would detect paywalls and let me use blendle to see the article. Right now I have to open a new tab and search the article on blendles website. That adds friction that causes me to use blendle less than I would.

> Ive used blendle. I wish there was a browser extension that would detect paywalls and let me use blendle to see the article. I designed such a system in 2012 and was granted a patent for it late last year. I asked a professional about what to do next and the advice was "wait until someone is infringing". Not hugely satisfactory. I wanted to build the scheme described in the article. My goal was: fix the internet .…

well, just sitting on a patent and waiting for an infringement isn't going to help fix the internet. That would be the other thing.

Seems to me like a patent is a good start, a good nucleus around which you could build some venture capital to actually try to start a company to solve the problem.

I totally agree that the problem isn't technology, it's the business side, the negotiation and that end. You'd need a very business-y business partner.

Re: Subscription Hell

#275

Post by dgudkov » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:33 PM UTC

The level of naivete in this article is frustrating.

>I’m frustrated that the web’s promise of instant and free access to the world’s information appears to be dying.

Free access won't die as long as there are people who are willing to work for free. It's not that subscriptions and paywalls charge money for something that was made by someone for free.

>I’m frustrated that subscription usually means just putting formerly free content behind a paywall.

That content was never free. Someone paid for it, typically advertisers. We all know the downsides of cost-per-click based economy. It's time to grow up. Kids eventually realize that food doesn't appear in the fridge magically, but someone pays a price for it and brings it home. The author also should realize that there is always a price to pay.

Re: Subscription Hell

#276

Post by pythonaut_16 » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:36 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #240

techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

A model I really like is the one IntelliJ uses. They encourage you to buy a subscription. But when you buy a year at once, you get a "perpetual fallback license" such that you can always keep using the version that is current when you buy: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What... That means I always will have access to my projects and to the level of functionality I start with. But I keep getti…

You also get the perpetual fallback license if you pay month to month for a year, for whatever version you had 12 months ago.

E.g. I start paying month-to-month at 2016.2, after 12 months I have a license to 2016.2. But say after the first month, 2017.1 comes out. Then after 13 months I now have a license for 2017.1.

Re: Subscription Hell

#277

Post by rolleiflex » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:38 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #240

techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

A model I really like is the one IntelliJ uses. They encourage you to buy a subscription. But when you buy a year at once, you get a "perpetual fallback license" such that you can always keep using the version that is current when you buy: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What... That means I always will have access to my projects and to the level of functionality I start with. But I keep getti…

One thing that always rubbed me wrong about this is that, logically speaking, if you buy a license for a year, the perpetual fallback license should be the version you had at the end of the license, not the one that was on the market at the beginning of it. It doesn't really make sense the way they do it, and it feels like a particularly hamfisted attempt to grab an almost negligible amount of money, so I'm puzzled.

Re: Subscription Hell

#278

Post by aarmenaa » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:42 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #240

techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

A model I really like is the one IntelliJ uses. They encourage you to buy a subscription. But when you buy a year at once, you get a "perpetual fallback license" such that you can always keep using the version that is current when you buy: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What... That means I always will have access to my projects and to the level of functionality I start with. But I keep getti…

As I recall, the perpetual fallback thing was added to appease their customer base, who were enraged when IntelliJ announced that they were moving to a subscription model. The term "rent-seeking" was thrown around quite a bit then and seems appropriate now as well.

Re: Subscription Hell

#279

Post by jacques_chester » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:44 PM UTC

lsc wrote: post #274

jacques_chester wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ive used blendle. I wish there was a browser extension that would detect paywalls and let me use blendle to see the article. I designed such a system in 2012 and was granted a patent for it late last year. I asked a professional about what to do next and the advice was "wait until someone is infringing". Not hugely satisfactory. I wanted to build the scheme described in the article. My goal was: fix the internet .…

well, just sitting on a patent and waiting for an infringement isn't going to help fix the internet. That would be the other thing. Seems to me like a patent is a good start, a good nucleus around which you could build some venture capital to actually try to start a company to solve the problem. I totally agree that the problem isn't technology, it's the business side, the negotiation and that end. You'd need a very…

In fact I got the patent for that purpose -- to act as a substitute for the usual pedigree pattern-matching. I just didn't see it taking 5 years.

I go back and forth on whether to try and raise funds. It's an all-or-nothing proposition because of my visa status. There are also personal considerations involved.

Having worked for a mixed services/enterprise company, I am now keenly aware that sales is a strategic necessity and steady PR is a massive force multiplier. You can have the best everything in the world, but if nobody's buying, it doesn't matter.

Re: Subscription Hell

#280

Post by lultimouomo » Sun, May 06, 2018, 9:44 PM UTC

rolleiflex wrote: post #277

wpietri wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A model I really like is the one IntelliJ uses. They encourage you to buy a subscription. But when you buy a year at once, you get a "perpetual fallback license" such that you can always keep using the version that is current when you buy: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What... That means I always will have access to my projects and to the level of functionality I start with. But I keep getti…

One thing that always rubbed me wrong about this is that, logically speaking, if you buy a license for a year, the perpetual fallback license should be the version you had at the end of the license, not the one that was on the market at the beginning of it. It doesn't really make sense the way they do it, and it feels like a particularly hamfisted attempt to grab an almost negligible amount of money, so I'm puzzled.

It's not the negligible amount of money that matters. The trick is that at the end of your yearly subscription you have already upgraded to a newer version, so falling back to the perpetual license means downgrading, which is both often a practical problem and (perhaps most importantly) something that I think many have an emotional aversion to.

I'm pretty sure that if the fallback license was to the most recent version you're entitled to during your subscription way more people would take leaps between the end of a subscription and the start of the next one (though Jetbrains offers you a further discount if you don't do so).