Live data from Hacker News

Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

blog.zgp.org

291–300 of 408 posts

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#291

The YouTube Premium model seems to be the way forward here. In short, pay $5 per month and every video you watch gets paid slightly more per view than they would if you watched ads. Expanding this to a larger ecosystem may require a larger fee, but avoiding the friction of people deciding whether the marginal cost to read an article is worth it is an obvious win.

i believe in the world of long-form text content, this is the medium.com model. the've been working at this for a while, i think even before youtube premium existed.

they're still kicking, but it hasn't exactly been a roaring success.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#292

Let's say a journalist writes an excellent article about something political of serious import. I'm fine with paying for that article to get access to it. But, really, the article is a lot more useful to me if other people can access it too. Since everyone can vote, I want the whole populace to be informed, even poor people. I wonder if there is a viable business model where for each article, readers can pay to unloc…

that is an incredible idea and i would support you with code should you or anyone else decide to make that happen

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#293

Let's say a journalist writes an excellent article about something political of serious import. I'm fine with paying for that article to get access to it. But, really, the article is a lot more useful to me if other people can access it too. Since everyone can vote, I want the whole populace to be informed, even poor people. I wonder if there is a viable business model where for each article, readers can pay to unloc…

I wonder if there is a viable business model where for each article, readers can pay to unlock it not just for themselves, but for everyone. The price would obviously have to be higher since you aren't just buying it for yourself. But perhaps the sense of "I'm helping build a better-informed world and helping broadcast my values" would encourage people to pay that higher price. What you're asking for is the system we…

> Rich people buy out newspapers to signal-boost their own preferred messages to the public.

Right, but micro level difference matters here. If a middle-class person can help an important story reach an audience, that's helpful for democracy. When a billionaire buys a newspaper, it isn't.

This is also why I think suggesting it work like a kickstarter where multiple people can pool money to unlock an article would be helpful. It naturally collects the will of many people in a democratic way.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#294

Let's say a journalist writes an excellent article about something political of serious import. I'm fine with paying for that article to get access to it. But, really, the article is a lot more useful to me if other people can access it too. Since everyone can vote, I want the whole populace to be informed, even poor people. I wonder if there is a viable business model where for each article, readers can pay to unloc…

Sorry to be the wet blanket but what you're arguing for, advocacy, is by far the worst and most ineffective form of doing politics. Talking about things doesn't convince anyone. Talking to the small amounts of people that agree doesn't get the balling moving. Want to know what does? Organizing. Getting people that disagree with you, to agree with you. That never happens through advocacy, you have to organize.

Organizing still requires access to ground truth information. It's not enough for people to be organized. They do need to be organized around actual good ideas which requires information.

Organizing without journalism is just religious evangelism and mob justice.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#295
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't so much hate, as it's fundamentally DoA based on the financial system architecture of the United States, which creates strict liability, and a licensing requirement for digital money transmission. You do not get to opt out of that responsibility . Micropayments are therefore a pipedream that undermines all progress at making any type of AML or KYC possible, which then in turn makes fighting any type of fi…

Please help me understand better, because it feels like part of the problem has already been solved. Specifically, I've been told that the independent journalists that I watch on YouTube Premium receive a portion of my subscription fee. Is that not a form of micropayments? The system seems to work well enough for videos. Isn't there some way to adapt that kind of system to other media?

No, that is absolutely 100% not micropayments, as the consumer is not paying per view/article/video whatever. They're paying a fixed fee and are not metered.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#296
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine you could have some contract that interacts with ecash, based on revelation of a blind signature. Similar to a HTLC. I have actually written up some ideas for a system based on something like this that I called "chaumian coupons", but I would have to go through my notes to find it.

Indeed, for any particular outcome you could design a custom protocol. In contrast, Radius gives you a generic execution environment. Going custom you lose EVM tooling, audited standard contracts, and every bespoke protocol needs its own security analysis, its own edge case handling, and its own integration work. That said, the most important loss is composability: an agent can't take your Chaumian coupon escrow and…

I think that in the large, efficiency does matter. You are optimizing a three-variable problem of efficiency, decentralization, and configuration of the smart contracts.

The fact that AI agents are involved does not nessisarially tilt the scale towards the configurability of smart contracts. If you have extra cognition, you can probably spend some time thinking about what specialized protocol to use.

I am pessimistic on etherium and similar "open-ended" scripting cryptocurrencies because everything they can do can be replicated with a specialized cryptocurrency. So as soon as some killer app emerges (e.g. ENS) people will realize that it's more cheap/fast/decentralized to do this with a specialized system (e.g. namecoin).

The open-ended systems like etherium can only succeed if there is demand for constantly-novel open-ended scripting that interacts with other open-ended scripts all the time. I really don't think that's the case. If you can capture 90% of the use case with different specialized cryptocurrencies and do atomic swaps between them, that will always be better from a technological standpoint.

The fundamental limit of cryptocurrencies is bandwidth, and how much data you can sync between all nodes: either you have a few high-bandwidth nodes or many low-bandwidth nodes. Splitting different contracts across networks is naturally better than sharing a single blockchain and competing for gas.

People don't want this to be the case because you can't achieve vendor/cryptocurrency lock in, and "competition is for losers". If you have multiple independent blockchains, you pretty much must have multiple tokens. But it's true.

The moat for "utility" smart-contract systems is dependent on the cost of switching, which will be lowered by AI if anything. At the end of the day you can just fork the blockchain if you don't like the tokenomics or even just the fees. Some assembly required, but that is why stuff like litecoin can exist in this market.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this the main complaint people had about cable packages though? People were tired of paying $100/mo and only watching 10 channels out of 150. I came across a startup awhile ago that was handling the micropayments for you and you paid a monthly subscription fee which is similar to what you want. I think the main issue is getting every publisher to agree to onboard to your platform before you have sufficient scal…

It's a misunderstanding of the payment model really. No one watches 150 channels, the pricing is based on you being the average person who watches a subset of them, but it doesn't cost them any extra to provide all of them. Regular users also don't really like usage based fees which is why every consumer plan has a fixed price rather than paying per use. Cloud storage for example charging you for "up to x gb" rather…

And also that many of the channels people were insisting they don't want were actually paying for coverage, not charging for it. (Home shopping, religion, etc)

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#298
I imagine micropayments for small sites to avoid DoS (e.g. from dumb AI scrapers) and maybe get decent profit if they become very popular, but mainly pay to keep the server running. They would be so small that someone who spends their entire day visiting different websites would pay less than their phone bill; and centralized scrapers with a decent amount of funding would still work.

Real funding would come in ways that don't depend on visitor count: patronage, government/industry grants, people running the sites having side jobs, UBI. Because:

- I'd rather avoid intellectual property and allow AI summaries, remixes, etc. without penalty to the main site

- Visitor count tends to benefit mainstream sites. Patronage and grants can support niche sites who expect few users that are willing to pay more, without gating mainstream visitors (via higher visitor micropayments) in case they become popular

- Visitor count benefits sites that have already been built. Patronage and grants support sites that look promising, but haven't been built and may fail. The latter include indie and experimental sites; the former only include sites that are easy to build, and sites whose success is predictable from people that already have money

- I'm skeptical that revenue from visitor count (even from ads or subscriptions) will remain sustainable long-term

The above doesn't only apply to traditional sites, but any digital product including ones people currently pay for, like books, movies, and video games. These creators need to make a living, but since their product is not physical, there is no need to tie revenue to copies sold, and I suspect tying revenue to patronage and grants would lead to better products.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if there is a viable business model where for each article, readers can pay to unlock it not just for themselves, but for everyone. The price would obviously have to be higher since you aren't just buying it for yourself. But perhaps the sense of "I'm helping build a better-informed world and helping broadcast my values" would encourage people to pay that higher price. What you're asking for is the system we…

> Rich people buy out newspapers to signal-boost their own preferred messages to the public. Right, but micro level difference matters here. If a middle-class person can help an important story reach an audience, that's helpful for democracy. When a billionaire buys a newspaper, it isn't. This is also why I think suggesting it work like a kickstarter where multiple people can pool money to unlock an article would be…

This is basically political fundraising, where rich people signal-boost their preferred candidate and help them attract lots of donors from the public.

I think the fundamental piece you're missing is the Pareto principle. In any popularity contest, the most attention accrues to the most popular. This naturally leads to a power law distribution in popularity.

Re: Micropayments as a reality check for news sites

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most people mind ads. Throw up an animated gif or a jpg banner that you serve from your domain. Nobody is blocking that. What people dislike are mountains of javascript that track everything you do across broad swathes of the internet and then sell that to businesses and governments that are effectively engaging in mass psychological experiments on us.

Feels like there's an opportunity for an "ethical ads" platform

For a few years in the webcomic & blog space there was Ryan North's Project Wonderful, which served unintrusive auctioned banner ads that were usually advertising another creator's genuinely interesting work; I have no problem at all seeing ads for things sincerely made by humans.
Post reply on HN