News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by cestith on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:26PM (#18078837)
I would absolutely pay $10 a month to an aggregator like HN or /. that then paid publishers a portion of that based on article rank and/or number of clicks through.
Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by xyzzy123 on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @02:43PM (#18079013)
Yes, agree that fixed-price deals with publishers / aggregators are tenable. Spotify works for people, for example.

The original argument was essentially that there was a minimum transaction size that was cognitively viable at scale.

Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by cestith on Wednesday September 26, 2018 @06:41PM (#18080886)
I understand it's about cognitive costs. What I propose makes the cognitive load of actual monetary payment a single decision per month. I pay X. Let the aggregator and the publishers automatically figure out every little fractional detail.
Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by michaelt on Thursday September 27, 2018 @03:07AM (#18082560)
If the objective of paying is to make the web better and reward quality content, you don't want two pages of clickbait to pay more than one page of watergate-level investigative reporting.

And any automated system to tell clickbait from quality journalism will incentivise people to trick it.

So at the very least, you need a refund button.

Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by mygo on Thursday September 27, 2018 @10:50AM (#18085039)
they could do it like medium “claps”.

No claps, no money.

Clap as long as you want.

At the end of each month your $10 is divided up by the number of claps you gave.

And if this isn’t for you, then go with ads or be paywalled.

Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by cestith on Thursday September 27, 2018 @01:06PM (#18086466)
An upvote button and a flag button I think might do the trick.
Re:Mmm, Pi-hole by wool_gather on Thursday September 27, 2018 @10:19AM (#18084713)
Well, Spotify works for the consumer. For the musicians, it's mostly advertising, not a useful source of income.