That means you are publicly shaming your "pirating" visitors? That's morally unacceptable!
Except, I see no mention that anything is made public.
Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
81–90 of 190 posts
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple Pay and Android Pay are one touch, authenticated by thumb print and IIRC uses a temporary credit card number.
That's not going to work given that it is still CC on the back end -- per-tx fees will eat you alive at the $1/tx level.
Are those fees > $1? Depending on the rest of your model - huge volume of transactions for a free-to-reproduce product? - even a massive cut might still be workable.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#83Who cares... site does not load with javascript disabled.
I agree. I'll JS whitelist the domain itself in good faith but when it's more than 4 CDN and framework domains deep, all loading each other in serially, I'm just going to close the tab.
It's even worse when all they're trying to do is show simple text.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#84Don't think of it as asking for 1 dollar. Think like this: Say if you walk up to me irl and ask for a dollar, I'll be like, sure here's your change and open up my wallet. Online, asking for one dollar is too much mental overhead. Its not like people don't want to pay, but you need to make it easy for them to pay you. Personally, I would stick with ad revenue instead of 1 dollar payments.
Online micropayments is still a woefully untouched market, it was supposed to be the wave of the future some years ago, but never went anywhere. I won't pay 10 dollars a month (each) to the NYT (LAT, WaPo, et al) for a subscription I might quite happily pay 5 to 20 cents for an article though. I can see a service that functions a lot like EZPass, you load your account with 5-10 bucks, you agree to pay by clicking a p…
Note that it does seem to work reasonably well for the "adult" industry. People are often reluctant to pay for recurring fees on those sites (social stigma plays a role there, probably). But "pay-as-you-go" or pay per view schemes seem to fare far better. And, it makes sense; why pay for a monthly thing when the moment of enjoyment is relatively short. A DRM free download for that thing you like is mentally easier to justify. The big hurdle is still sign-up and credit cards I think, I'd personally be much more inclined to use systems with more privacy conscious approaches: since micropayments give an opportunity to track /exactly/ what you're looking at. This might even be more relevant for news outlets that cover a wide range of topics and writing styles.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> don't think it's worth paying $1 Key word there is paying . A buck is fine with me, but I don't have a good way to offer it. I'm not giving you my credit card number, email or phone number; I'm not going to spend even 10 seconds filling out a form just for your site; I don't use PayPal; I don't currently authorize you to ever take any more than the buck I want to give you right now; I want a refund if the function…
In Portugal ATM systems are like tiny Internet, so some websites generate a one time ID number that you can use for an ATM transfer. Basically you get the ID, then either make use of online banking or go to the next ATM machine around the corner and make the transfer.
So we've gone from filling out a form to either switching to a new tab and logging in to online banking to make the transfer, or even worse, leaving the building to go to an ATM?
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#86Don't think of it as asking for 1 dollar. Think like this: Say if you walk up to me irl and ask for a dollar, I'll be like, sure here's your change and open up my wallet. Online, asking for one dollar is too much mental overhead. Its not like people don't want to pay, but you need to make it easy for them to pay you. Personally, I would stick with ad revenue instead of 1 dollar payments.
We really need web standards for a "web wallet" and for micropayments. Something managed locally by your browser, preferably in some sort of separate sandbox. And then you'd be able set a per-site budget. However, it feels like is something the big boys don't want to handle as a standards because there's too much money at stake if they get a piece of the pay themselves, i.e. Apple Pay & co.
I don't really have any interest in bitcoin and various cryptocurrencies, but that sounds perfect for this sort of thing, no?
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blende is great! I have zero problems paying for good reading material but I don’t want to pay 5 $10 subscriptions. Blendle just lets me pay per article. They are based in the Netherlands, my home country and they have deals with all major newspapers here, so I am not missing out on anything. I highly recommend you give this a shot. Note: I am not associated with Blendle in any way. Just a happy user spreading the wo…
Does it work as I suspect: you pay, and yet you still get ads too?
No ads in my experience. You should check out the beta and see what you think, I still think it's running. You receive a few dollars in credit to try out the platform. Personally, I really love it.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's not worth the "cognitive cost" to make a comment Their comment form requires login or signup. I'm already signed up and logged in here. That's reason enough for me to post here and not there. I would never create an account just to leave a comment unless it was someplace where I intended to visit and comment often.
Not only that, but by now I've figured out that the comment sections of most sites are toxic with little, if any, moderation. HN has a good moderation set-up, respectful members, etc. I try to avoid even reading the comments of other websites since they just end up being depressing.
BBC is especially depressing.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#89Don't think of it as asking for 1 dollar. Think like this: Say if you walk up to me irl and ask for a dollar, I'll be like, sure here's your change and open up my wallet. Online, asking for one dollar is too much mental overhead. Its not like people don't want to pay, but you need to make it easy for them to pay you. Personally, I would stick with ad revenue instead of 1 dollar payments.
We really need web standards for a "web wallet" and for micropayments. Something managed locally by your browser, preferably in some sort of separate sandbox. And then you'd be able set a per-site budget. However, it feels like is something the big boys don't want to handle as a standards because there's too much money at stake if they get a piece of the pay themselves, i.e. Apple Pay & co.
Have you read much about the Brave browser and the token system it's trying to implement? It's very similar to your proposed solution.
Re: Letting users skip our paywall if they wrote an apology
#90Anyone can afford a dollar. I'm guessing the real reason these people don't pay is because they don't think it's worth paying $1 to generate a meme. IMO I think it makes more sense to put advertising on the main site and fund it that way. If I was a user of this service I'd prefer to have some ads on the site rather than paying $1 for it. I don't feel it makes sense to remove the branded gifs...that's how you will gr…
>> don't think it's worth paying $1 Key word there is paying . A buck is fine with me, but I don't have a good way to offer it. I'm not giving you my credit card number, email or phone number; I'm not going to spend even 10 seconds filling out a form just for your site; I don't use PayPal; I don't currently authorize you to ever take any more than the buck I want to give you right now; I want a refund if the function…
I disagree, I think the keyword is $1, because at least for me as strictly a user (not a stakeholder or business owner) generating a meme is simply not worth that cost no matter how easy it is to pay it.