News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilem... by cromwellian on Tuesday December 08, 2015 @12:30PM (#10697866)
I'll be contrarian here, since there are many people claiming the solution is paywalls (which people also whine about). (and BTW, the opinion that follows has nothing to do with my employer, Google, and their business model)

I grew up poor, my family didn't have disposable income for buying media. Everything I got, came from ad supported radio, TV, or public libraries. I used to call into radio stations to ask them to play a song, and then wait for hours so I could tape the songs and create tapes. Our family did not have cable, and though we had VHS, we often didn't rent movies, but rather used the VHS like a Tivo.

There are billions of people in the world who now have access to billions of Web documents that were paid for by advertisers, many of whom probably didn't even get their moneys worth. If the Web originated as a paywall, it would have never grown to the size and usage rates that exists today.

The first crawlers would have never arisen if anyone wanting to built a search index had to strike deals to access content for indexing.

Paywalls raise transaction barriers that ads do not. Ads make you pay in bandwidth and time, but for much of the internet's life, those were tradeoffs that were much easier to make than having to break out a credit card everytime you saw an article that MIGHT interest you. Paywalls also make centralizing vs federated/decentralized content more economically efficient.

How many of you have searched for scientific papers only to be pissed that they're behind some Springer-Verlag paywall?

Do we want to live in a world of walls, or a world of open highways with billboards? That's the choice being made here. And the scorn being heaped on ads is the luxury and privilege of living in a time when most of the content on the Web and most of the infrastructure costs have already been sunk and payed for by advertisers in years past. We live in a Web of excess now, forgetting the hundreds of billions sunk into datacenters and network infrastructure and content creation that came before. Who paid for that, and would it have even existed if the entire thing was like Cable TV premium channels?

I don't really want the Web to turn into a giant Apple Store, where every link, I must face the cognitive burden of paying for it before I know that I even want it. We need to solve the issues that ads create with respect to bandwidth hogging and privacy, but I think paywalls, even micro-payment paywalls, impose too much of a transaction cost and cognitive burden for the free exchange of knowledge.

Re:Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilem... by dragonwriter on Tuesday December 08, 2015 @12:40PM (#10697945)
Its not a choice between a world of paywalls and a world of ads -- closed, for-paying-users services are going to exist whether or not ad-based services also exist. And, open services without distinct ads (which may themselves be ads, on some level) that are paid for by someone other than the direct user are going to exist. The real question is in what circumstances, and to what extent, are services with intrusive ads disrupting the main content acceptable alternatives to those other two models, not an exclusive choice of a world with one model or a world with one of the other models.

> I don't really want the Web to turn into a giant Apple Store, where every link, I must face the cognitive burden of paying for it before I know that I even want it.

Life is that way: even with "free with ads" content, you are accepting a cost for the content before you can be certain that the benefit justifies it. (Heck, there's an opportunity cost even with "free without ads" content.)

If you just mean the friction of active choice with each click, well, even in a payment model you could create a system with configurable passive thresholds and lumped periodic payments where the cognitive burden of an active purchase decision was avoided for people who preferred to do so.

Re:Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilem... by cromwellian on Tuesday December 08, 2015 @12:53PM (#10698037)
Yes, there's an opportunity cost for content, but different people have different marginal utility for their dollars vs their time.

For children, or the unemployed, the marginal utility of a dollar is quite high, but free time is cheap.

Likewise, the unauthenticated, un-paid-for Web has permitted frictionless composition and repurpose of content without the need to 'do deals'. Beyond just the consumer issue, a non-Ad supported web would have severely limited its evolution, by forcing content to require authentication.

Re:Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilem... by dragonwriter on Tuesday December 08, 2015 @01:13PM (#10698180)
> Likewise, the unauthenticated, un-paid-for Web has permitted frictionless composition and repurpose of content without the need to 'do deals'.

Yes, but...

> Beyond just the consumer issue, a non-Ad supported web would have severely limited its evolution, by forcing content to require authentication.

Having no ads would have eliminated one of the several means of funding content that doesn't require authentication -- but ads aren't the only mechanism that doesn't require authentication -- and, yes, any limitation in available models would have limited the ways in which the web could evolve, by changing the opportunity space.

Re:Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilem... by TravelTechGuy on Tuesday December 08, 2015 @12:40PM (#10697947)
The solution, as always, will lie somewhere on the axis between allowing advertisers to run rampant on your page with obnoxious, harmful ads, and content providers charging you.

Perhaps we'll all agree to unblock a small part of our pages if we get promised that the content would be tasteful, and controlled. Perhaps I'll turn of my blockers if I know I don't have a dozen 3rd party cookies installed every time I read the news. But knowing advertisers (I used to work for your employer's competitor BTW) this will not hapen anytime soon.