Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

1life.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–55 of 55 posts

Re: Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

#51

Post by openknot »

tenebrisalietum wrote: post #49
openknot wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about being entitled to post. Rather, it's about creating a network with content created by people from a diverse set of backgrounds. Consider Hacker News, specifically this submission [0] on "My Story as a Homeless Developer." If HN had a paywall to post, the readers wouldn't be able to learn from the story. Even if the person paid to post, the comment section might also not have included as many offers to…

I really don't mean to sound cruel here, but humor me: If funds can help homeless software engineers, they can pay for their social media posts too. > content creation isn't equivalent to a competitive sport Why are scores (likes) kept and displayed then? Why do various platforms let vote count drive their algorithm?

>I really don't mean to sound cruel here, but humor me: If funds can help homeless software engineers, they can pay for their social media posts too.

Most would rather have funding for essentials or educational opportunities.

>Why are scores (likes) kept and displayed then? Why do various platforms let vote count drive their algorithm?

There can be competitive elements, but that doesn't contradict the observation that social media posting isn't exactly like swimming or running.

Re: Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

#52

Post by endisneigh »

autoexec wrote: post #50
endisneigh wrote: post #29

I guarantee this idea won’t work. Despite the downsides, there’s not really anything better and more accessible than ads. If you want to end ads, create a provably correct and robust system to know when a given person is looking at a given thing on a computer. Once you do that, then the attention directly can be monetized without ads (of course it will be used for ads mainly as that’s the main use case)

> Despite the downsides, there’s not really anything better and more accessible than ads. Ads may be a "better" way for a website owner to to make money, but they do nothing at all to promote quality content, or improve the quality of a platform. It's not as if "knowing what a person is looking at" does either of those things either. I think creating a platform for useful and engaging communities/communication and ge…

They’re really not. The problem with counter points like these is that it assumes people will create content for free.

If money isn’t a motivator then ads aren’t necessary either way. If it is, ads again are really the only way that’s accessible.

Ads to help promote quality content as implemented on most sites.

Re: Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

#53

Post by autoexec »

endisneigh wrote: post #52
autoexec wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Despite the downsides, there’s not really anything better and more accessible than ads. Ads may be a "better" way for a website owner to to make money, but they do nothing at all to promote quality content, or improve the quality of a platform. It's not as if "knowing what a person is looking at" does either of those things either. I think creating a platform for useful and engaging communities/communication and ge…

They’re really not. The problem with counter points like these is that it assumes people will create content for free. If money isn’t a motivator then ads aren’t necessary either way. If it is, ads again are really the only way that’s accessible. Ads to help promote quality content as implemented on most sites.

> They’re really not. The problem with counter points like these is that it assumes people will create content for free.

It's no assumption. Anyone who was around in the early days of the internet saw it happen over and over again with their own eyes. Even now people start internet forums, online groups, and passion projects with zero interest in making money off of it. I couldn't count the number of services I've seen start out that way. Some do reluctantly add ads later on to help cover expenses once the site/service gets too popular too afford (sometimes removing them again the moment it's no longer needed). Some get bought up by other companies who are only interested in making money. Some get abandoned or cave in to larger sites (reddit and facebook groups have killed off most of the small internet forums that used to thrive). Some are still around.

The one thing we can absolutely say about the internet is that people will create content for it and will develop and maintain spaces for others to share that content. In between the ads every social media platform is filled with user generated content for which the creator was uncompensated in anything but internet points, shares, and likes. Reddit's moderators aren't paid to help maintain the communities that make Reddit money. Long before social media people flocked to Geocities, to usenet, and to IRC, and produced massive amounts of content without looking for a buck. Before that they'd dial into a BBS or participate in mailing lists. People want to be heard, to help share their passions, and to hear others.

The internet was first and because it was thriving and growing ads, and then surveillance capitalism, showed up after the fact and infested it.

Re: Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

#54

Post by BitwiseFool »

cardanome wrote: post #46
BitwiseFool wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"vastly overrepresents content that is actively harmful to society, meaning conspiracy theories, right wing propaganda and general fake news" Your list seems lopsided.

Yeah, I am strongly siding with reason and progress. Thousands of people have senselessly died from a disease for which a vaccine exists that can effectively reduce the risk of such a death. Social media is very responsible for those deaths.

I place the responsibility on the individuals themselves. I also caution you about thinking that your own side is exclusively in the domain of both reason and progress. It's a cognitive trap that reinforces groupthink and bigotry.

Re: Will charging for posts lead to higher social media content quality?

#55

Post by endisneigh »

autoexec wrote: post #53
endisneigh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re really not. The problem with counter points like these is that it assumes people will create content for free. If money isn’t a motivator then ads aren’t necessary either way. If it is, ads again are really the only way that’s accessible. Ads to help promote quality content as implemented on most sites.

> They’re really not. The problem with counter points like these is that it assumes people will create content for free. It's no assumption. Anyone who was around in the early days of the internet saw it happen over and over again with their own eyes. Even now people start internet forums, online groups, and passion projects with zero interest in making money off of it. I couldn't count the number of services I've se…

I’m not really seeing your point - the type of internet you’re describing can still be trivially used. Most don’t care for it because the content under ads is superior, which is my point.

Even this site we are both engaging on is a glorified ad.

Post reply on HN