• @Whom
    link
    32 years ago

    It’s not wishful thinking. People still host websites for the sake of doing it and never intend to make any money. They will continue to do so, even as the dominant model of the web has shifted. It is not wishful thinking or too idealistic. It already exists and has as long as the web has been around.

    None of those “solutions” you propose are necessary. Forget about replacing ad revenue: let it all burn.

    • krolden
      link
      42 years ago

      None of those “solutions” you propose are necessary. Forget about replacing ad revenue: let it all burn.

      This, entirely

    • CHEF-KOCH
      link
      -52 years ago

      Those examples are rare examples and are not the standard. Even Martin Brinkman with 150k+ clicks a day had to gave up and sell his page. You cannot pay your bills with hopes and dreams and you cannot expect someone to produce lots of articles when no one supports you.

      It already exists and has as long as the web has been around.

      Yop, some pages no one heard of it, or pages with 1 post per year like Stallman.org or what. In meantime Google news spits out 100 news a second that actually impact the web and not your 10 clicks a day page.

      Totally from another planet dude, cringe. Had to laugh at your bs…

      • @Whom
        link
        4
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I know they are rare and irrelevant. The point is we don’t have to cater to the standard or what’s popular. We don’t have to cater to those trying to pay the bills with the web. The web does not have to be a revenue stream. If all that’s left is irrelevant pages no one cares about, so be it.

        You keep responding as if I’m saying we can continue the current model of the web by simply removing ads and replacing them with nothing. I’m not. I’m saying the web as it is should burn.

        And don’t call me “dude”.

        • CHEF-KOCH
          link
          -42 years ago

          So you say we should give up on independent journalism and only let bots on Google news post important infos. I mention Google news to provoke because Mozilla has no own news network that comes close. I am not even telling something new here, the own community came up with ideas for social networks, email systems, news systems - not pocket btw, vpn systems, etc pp. Things Google successfully established. There are also drawbacks like Google+ but you cannot always win. You need to know when its best to review you options and cut things when they become a burden.

          I’m saying the web as it is should burn.

          … impressive solution…

          • @Whom
            link
            32 years ago

            Why are you just pivoting into “Mozilla bad” and summarizing Google projects? What are you even talking about?

            And yes, the web should burn. If it cannot exist without squeezing money out of people and generally being abusive, it should not exist.

            • CHEF-KOCH
              link
              -5
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              If it cannot exist without squeezing money out of people and generally being abusive, it should not exist.

              Wishful thinking, this would be in a Star Trek world, believe me I also want such a world too but reality is people are selfish, egoistic, ignorant and god knows what… The whole NFT thing showed us clearly, to name one example … this is what the web cares about … not idealism or good faith and wishes…

              Lets assume you are disabled, your only option is to make money over the web … what then … so your logic here cannot be applied, you want that this person starves to death rather than make some cash or what …

              Everything has downsides, always…

      • krolden
        link
        22 years ago

        OK then by your logic then how is Lemmy functioning without ad revenue?

        Furthermore why are youusing a platform without ads if you like ads so much? Go back to reddit.