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

Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

blog.flattr.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 147 posts

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#91

Post by eterm »

Deimorz wrote: post #90
eterm wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have the whitelist, you compare the hash on the backend to known hashes. That's how "Safebrowsing" things work, no reason why it couldn't work here too.

You'd have to know which site each hash relates to, so that you know who to give the money to. So the hashing wouldn't gain anything, since the system only works if they can reverse the hash. It can work for Safebrowsing because they can just have a gigantic list of hashes and it doesn't matter which specific site the user is visiting, only whether it's any site in the list. But for Flattr to work, you need to know w…

If you produce a list of hashes, you can reverse those hashes simply comparing against the hash.

This still isn't private for any URLs in the list, but it does anonymize any URLs which get transmitted in case your white-listing goes bad and allows all. It also makes it clear that you're only transmitting exact matches and not fuzzy matches. This also makes it clear only the URL part and no URL parameters are transmitted which is also important for privacy. (Otherwise any URLs in redirects are also hoovered up).

I haven't looked at the flattr code but if it's regex without going through proper URL parsing I also wouldn't trust it to go 'bad' at some point, there are too many edge cases from the tricky to the mundane such as matching on http://example.com#twitter.com , etc.

A side benefit to hashes for safebrowsing but perhaps a bad thing for this use case is that it also effectively allows you to anonymize a whitelist from your end-users because you can then compare client-side without leaking the list.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#92

Post by eterm »

bradbeattie wrote: post #88
notheguyouthink wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I used to like Flattr (though, I only used it once), but this is a terrible design decision from them, imo. I'm not sure what the right solution is, but this is pretty gross as you describe it. Off the top of my head, the only thing that would make me feel better about Flattr is if they somehow tracked money as it flows through Flattr, and prevented double-taxing content creators. I do find my perception interes…

An easy enough solution might be to take a cut when money is moved in to or out of Flattr, but to take nothing when moved between Flattr accounts.

For optics they could take a cut only when moving money out. Then the consumers never feel taxed, they feel like the producer is getting 100% of the money.

If the money then circulates then that's OK. If the money is withdrawn then take a good cut of that.

One downside to that is that the more popular it becomes, the more 'currency' the flattr-coin becomes, it simply circulates with people neither depositing it nor withdrawing it. However, flattr are then effectively become a central bank and that isn't a problem.

The real problem with not taking a cut of moving between flattr accounts is that people would sell flattr through side channels to avoid flattr taking a cut. So you'd pay me cash and I'd transfer to you the flattr coin on platform.

And if it took off in a big way then money laundering becomes a problem and the cut would not cover the cost of KYC etc.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#93

Post by johndoe489 »

I'd rather make few, but meaningful contributions to creators with a system like Patreon or Kickstarter, than make many "micro", meaningless payments without a clue where my money is going.

This is failed from the get go. The whole idea that the program is going to determine where your attention goes, and how that relates to your contributions. Maybe I read a blog I contribute to, and it takes a lot of time, yet I download music from an artist I want to contribute even more to, but I spend 5 mins on his site to download the music.

For small creators I think this is dumb and almost deceitful. You're not going to make anything from hundreds of micro payments. You aren't an (fairly popular) artist on Spotify earning revenue from millions of streamings.

I have a small site on Patreon that people find useful and earn a little over a hundred USD a month atm, from less than 30 patrons. I don't even have any "perks" atm. I can't imagine earning even 10 $ from something like Flattr, much less Google Ads (but I digress ;)).

Point being for small creators the connection to the audience, and how meaningful their contribution is I think is key. Making micro payments in a way that's invisible to me as a contributor, that's meaningless and I feel no connection to the creator.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#94

Post by PurpleRamen »

CaveTech wrote: post #14
tome wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Nope, not gonna touch that! (after finding out that flatter was acquired by the makers of Adblock Plus) What's wrong with Adblock Plus? I use it. I thought it was supposed to be good. Is there something I've missed?

A lot of people have issue with the fact they allow certain ads through if the publisher pays them enough. They claim that these ads are not aggressive or distracting, but the optics are pretty bad. A for profit ad-blocking company that makes money from ads.

Last time I read about it, it was still the users choice whether they wanna see those non-aggresive ads. Did it change?

Personally I see it as a good choice. I don't have a problem with ads themself, but with aggresive or harmful ads. So educating the companys to use better ads is good for the users.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#96

Post by lsdornheim »

IvanK_net wrote: post #34
marcusjt wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like." Not true, from the FAQ: How do I withdraw money I have received? You need to have a valid bank account associated with your profile. You can then request a withdrawal. This works worldwide as long as your bank accepts international bank transfers.

Of course you can withdraw your money. But when you just want to make money, both Creator and Contributor profiles are crated (to make contributions super easy). It is quite hard to make money with Flattr (you need to be really popular to get enough micropayments), and I guess that 95 % of Creators never reach the 10€ limit to actually withdraw their money. So giving money back to others is the "obvious" thing to do.

In the new version, there are separate accounts for "givers" (contributors) and "receivers" (creators / publishers).

So, just shuffling money around is neither the obvious nor the intended solution.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#97

Post by bonqis »

IvanK_net wrote: post #5

I would like to point out two things about Flattr: - Whenever other people send you money, Flattr keeps 10% from that money. - When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like. And they will send them back to other authors. As the money are sent back and forth, and 10% are removed at each step, Flattr is the only one actually making any money.

Not really, you can flattr others with it, but that is more because it would be strange if you could not do it.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#98

Post by lsdornheim »

IvanK_net wrote: post #5

I would like to point out two things about Flattr: - Whenever other people send you money, Flattr keeps 10% from that money. - When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like. And they will send them back to other authors. As the money are sent back and forth, and 10% are removed at each step, Flattr is the only one actually making any money.

As others have commented, Flattr itself keeps 7.5%. The detailed fees are described here: https://blog.flattr.net/2017/10/our-new-fee-structure/ Hopefully the payment cost will go down again, but unfortunately micropayments come with high transaction cost. Compared to revenue streams like App-Stores or even advertising, this is still much more efficient.

Regarding keeping money in the system: In the new version, there are separate accounts for "givers" (contributors) and "receivers" (creators / publishers). So, just shuffling money around is neither the obvious nor the intended solution.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#99

Post by bonqis »

falcolas wrote: post #48
IvanK_net wrote: post #5

I would like to point out two things about Flattr: - Whenever other people send you money, Flattr keeps 10% from that money. - When you make money with Flattr, Flattr expects you to give this money back to other authors you like. And they will send them back to other authors. As the money are sent back and forth, and 10% are removed at each step, Flattr is the only one actually making any money.

It's a bit more insidious than 10%. Flattr takes 7.5%. Their payment processor takes 9%. Withdrawing costs you $3. And people call Patreon's 5% (on top of Stripe's 3%) outrageous. I guess it's better than the walled garden 30%, for popular enough sites.

Stripe charges 2.9% + 30¢. So on $3 that would be 0.387 cents that is 12.9% fee.

Re: Flattr 2.0 launches to the public

#100

Post by lsdornheim »

mintplant wrote: post #69
stevenj wrote: post #28

Some things to consider about Flattr: you have to install a web browser extension; the extension requires access to your full browsing history; it was bought by the parent company of Adblock Plus, Eyeo.

And they're explicitly tracking and logging it all to their servers: > With the Flattr button it was only possible to flattr creators that joined Flattr. The new extension does not use the button so it does not need to know if there is a signed up receiver or not for flattrs. So simply put, if there is an owner they gets your money, if not the flattrs become the statistics we need to convince the creators. Yikes. Don…

That is just plain wrong. Check the privacy policy: https://flattr.com/files/privacy_policy.pdf

The extension keeps everything locally, only the information necessary to make payments is transferred. There is even a blacklist in place that prevents any information about sensitive sites (online banking, mail accounts, other adult content) from ever being stored.

Here is a blogpost about it: https://blog.flattr.net/2017/06/key-elements-of-the-new-flat...

Post reply on HN