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

Exploring alternative funding models for the web

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 104 posts

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#81

Post by crispinb »

TylerE wrote: post #15
99052882514569 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tips are cool, but a browser-based micro-payments setup will create a more consistent alternative revenue stream.

People have been beating the micro-payments horse since at least the late '90s. I don't get it, at all. No one likes turning every action into a financial decision. History has shown that buffet-style pricing (Netflix, Spotify, et al) is much more appetizing - because you only have to make the decision ONCE. There is no financial pain for consuming content.

> History has shown that buffet-style pricing (Netflix, Spotify, et al) is much more appetizing

Maybe, but I don't think anyone could make the claim that a micropayments hypothesis has been tested (market or tech) with anything like the robustness or to anywhere near the scope with which those services have been. There's not yet a solid basis from which to compare.

In any case, appetising or not, the subscription model is deeply antagonistic to the fundamental nature of the web. It's a model borrowed from prior tech. It works, but it retards the web's innate potential.

> because you only have to make the decision ONCE

That's the problem. The web is a web. Each link is a decision point. Portals are portals. Leaping through the locked gate is a single decision. They are different things. Portals can be built on the web, but much would be lost if the whole web were to only be portals.

Micropayments may or may not be a solution to funding the web in its best potential form. We don't know - but the success of portals has little to say about it either way. They were just a known quantity from a previous world.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#82

Post by kaycebasques »

snambi wrote: post #21
jerrac wrote: post #4

For a long time I've thought that we need a browser based universal tip jar. Some way that lets me read a blog post, and then tip the site with however much I want. 1 cent, 25 cents, 1 dollar, 200 dollars, any amount. From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. The second thing is making sure the money goes where it is supposed to. With services like Scroll,…

It need not be a tip jar. It can be proper payments. But current credit based online payment system is too expensive for micropayments ( for a fraction of a penny) and it is too cumbersome to be used by the user. We need a modern payment system, that can process micropayments ( that is a fraction of a penny ) with higher security guarantees and cheaper (or free) than the credit cards.

Even the economics of $1 transactions under the current online payment systems can be hard to make work. $0.35 per transaction + 3% is typical, yes?

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#83

Post by toast0 »

kaycebasques wrote: post #82
snambi wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It need not be a tip jar. It can be proper payments. But current credit based online payment system is too expensive for micropayments ( for a fraction of a penny) and it is too cumbersome to be used by the user. We need a modern payment system, that can process micropayments ( that is a fraction of a penny ) with higher security guarantees and cheaper (or free) than the credit cards.

Even the economics of $1 transactions under the current online payment systems can be hard to make work. $0.35 per transaction + 3% is typical, yes?

Some places have micropayment rates. For Paypal you can (maybe) sign up for 5% + $0.05 on purchases under $10. For $1, it's a lot more palettable.

But still, the problem with micropayments is usually not the cost, but the hassle; and if you're going for worldwide coverage, you'll also add ability to pay in an accepted form, and for poorer countries, ability to pay in a meaningful amount.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#84

Post by jerrac »

lone_haxx0r wrote: post #69
jerrac wrote: post #4

For a long time I've thought that we need a browser based universal tip jar. Some way that lets me read a blog post, and then tip the site with however much I want. 1 cent, 25 cents, 1 dollar, 200 dollars, any amount. From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. The second thing is making sure the money goes where it is supposed to. With services like Scroll,…

I wouldn't trust Mozilla with such a thing. Actually, I wouldn't trust any silicon valley corporation. I predict that Mozilla would ban wrong-thinkers from their service using the excuse of hate speech. Want to donate to a progressive/leftist organization? Mozilla will gladly help you. Want to donate to a right wing conservative? Mozilla doesn't allow "bigots" on their platform. They did exaxtly that with the Dissent…

I somewhat share your concerns. Mozilla has been pretty intolerant in the past (firing someone due to personal political views.)

That said, I really can't see anything gaining traction unless it's centralized. There is no decentralized means of payments. Cryptocurrencies don't work because very very very few people use them. And fees from Visa/Mastercard/etc are high enough you have to have some form of a "tip wallet" for it to make financial sense.

The non-profit doesn't have to be from Mozilla. It's something any of us with the organizational skills and other resources could do. Is there a way to make something like a legally binding charter? Part of it could say "Unless your content breaks the law, you can register."

('Course, not sure how you'd apply that to countries with governments that suppress free speech...)

If anyone wants to try that, I'd be happy to help with ideas and Linux Sys Admin skills.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#85

Post by captn3m0 »

ericflo wrote: post #51
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is kinda what the Basic Attention Token is in the Brave browser The difference is in OP’s proposal one gets money. Brave sends people its token things.

Hacker News seems to really hate cryptocurrencies, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Despite whatever properties you don't like about them, those tokens are being used today and have real value. You can close your eyes but the world will keep spinning.

As an Indian Citizen, I can not legally trade in Crypto.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#86

Post by metildaa »

jerrac wrote: post #84
lone_haxx0r wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't trust Mozilla with such a thing. Actually, I wouldn't trust any silicon valley corporation. I predict that Mozilla would ban wrong-thinkers from their service using the excuse of hate speech. Want to donate to a progressive/leftist organization? Mozilla will gladly help you. Want to donate to a right wing conservative? Mozilla doesn't allow "bigots" on their platform. They did exaxtly that with the Dissent…

I somewhat share your concerns. Mozilla has been pretty intolerant in the past (firing someone due to personal political views.) That said, I really can't see anything gaining traction unless it's centralized. There is no decentralized means of payments. Cryptocurrencies don't work because very very very few people use them. And fees from Visa/Mastercard/etc are high enough you have to have some form of a "tip wallet…

Mozilla did not fire Brendan Eich, the board actively worked to try and retain him: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich

Please cite sources when making claims in the future

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#88

Post by captn3m0 »

danShumway wrote: post #50
jerrac wrote: post #4

For a long time I've thought that we need a browser based universal tip jar. Some way that lets me read a blog post, and then tip the site with however much I want. 1 cent, 25 cents, 1 dollar, 200 dollars, any amount. From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. The second thing is making sure the money goes where it is supposed to. With services like Scroll,…

> From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. This is one of the largest problems (if not the largest problem) on the web that I've been thinking about recently. Services like Venmo aren't designed for commercial use. Paypal is a privacy nightmare, and it's bad for sellers too because their chargeback policy is a mess -- and that's even ignoring the fees. Ban…

GNU Taler looks like an answer.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#89

Post by Joakal »

Exploring alternative funding models for the web publishers*

That said, if it's so little money in it due to ads. Then shop around. If you're going to complain about the elephant in the room, Google being the only choice, then create your own ad network and charge more. Google has such a monopoly, that you may be getting pennies for every thousands they get. As well, ad blockers are becoming a fact of life that there's no solution for.

My opinion; Incredibly, the only way for publishers to publish on Internet and still have food on table is UBI. Sucks if you are the business owner though.

Re: Exploring alternative funding models for the web

#90

Post by solstice »

pkaye wrote: post #67
jerrac wrote: post #4

For a long time I've thought that we need a browser based universal tip jar. Some way that lets me read a blog post, and then tip the site with however much I want. 1 cent, 25 cents, 1 dollar, 200 dollars, any amount. From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. The second thing is making sure the money goes where it is supposed to. With services like Scroll,…

> From my understanding of things, the biggest thing in the way is that processing payments costs money. The biggest problem is people don't want to pay much for contents. They have no problem paying $2/day for a cup of coffee but then taking about online contents they will talk about cents.

People are willing to pay if it's made easy. The idea of Flattr (which soundd similar enough to what is proposed here) was that you top up your flattr account with let's say 20 usd and designate a monthly pay-out, let's say 5usd. This means that for the next 4 months flatter will pay out 5$ to creators you flattr, divided by the number of times the user clicked on the flatter button. If the user flattrs a lot of sites, then each site gets sth like 10cts. If they only click a few times, each site gets proportionally more of the 5$. The basic idea is that the user doesnt have to deal with thinking about exact amounts of money ("is this article really worth 50cts? Or should it be 2$?"). They set a monthly limit they are comfortable with spending on online content and it reaches the content creators they like. Unfortunately Flattr didn't really catch on in the USA, I think and is now largely irrelevant and I haven't followed its development since several years. (Anecdotally, it was quite big in the German podcasting scene...)
Post reply on HN