I wouldn't mind paying for most worthwhile services, actually I already pay for VPN, email, etc, but the fact is that the old adage "if it's free, you're the product" is no longer true. Even services you pay for collect and sell an impressive amount of data. I wouldn't mind paying for social media, but then I would also expect a zero collection policy on any metrics that pertains to my account or interactions with it.
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2023
30 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37717 readers
408 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A subscription fee and any kind of profiting off of user data, need to never co-exist.
Specify the cost of the service, and that should be all there is to it.
I absolutely agree, but what's stopping them from accepting your money and grab all your data at the same time?
I recently purchased an expensive samsung tv. There is no way to disable advertisements or data tracking... They're selling you an pricey piece of hardware and want to sell your data - double dipping at its finest.
(My solution has been not to agree to their tos, which means i can't use any of the apps on it. I just plug in a roku and use the tv as a monitor. Also looking at adblock/pihole once i get a proper firewall back up)
Wouldn’t it be better to simply never give the tv a wifi password? Or am I missing something here?
Also, Roku is also quite bad about data collection and selling, IIRC. ☹️ But the only real choice seems to be which company you’ll let collect the data, not whether they can.
You're not wrong. I don't give it access to my lan. The roku, we've had for so long, I'm accepting the data collection from - but it's also not a 1500 dollar device....
I pay for ProtonMail
The biggest, obvious one to me is news. Say what you will about mainstream media but some great investigative journalism still happens, and these companies are in an awkward position where no one wants to pay and everyone uses adblockers.
When I'm not living paycheck to paycheck I want to support Standard Ebooks (they're doing a great job of showing how to make ebooks that don't suck, check out their style guide) and maybe Neocities.
The more I think about how Medium works, the more I think it makes sense? While they could have done the typical thing where the people hosting content there pay for their share of the servers, by doing it in reverse the individual monthly cost can be lower (casting a wider net) and the people writing for them can actually get paid a bit for doing so.
I'm thinking about throwing some money at Obsidian, too, since I practically live in that app.
...Oh and obviously Fedora considering I rely on it to use my computer at all.
^On an unrelated note, how am I the first person to leave a comment?^
Totally agree on the news and journalism part. I subscribe to three different publications, which gets expensive, but it is worth it. Many newssites have also started to hide their articles behind paywalls, which is understandable, but also make sharing and discussing news with others on social media harder. And since most people can't afford to subscribe to several news outlets, they will be limited in their exposure to different viewpoints - unless that particular newspaper is really good at challenging its readers and not just giving them what they think they want.
they will be limited in their exposure to different viewpoints - unless that particular newspaper is really good at challenging its readers and not just giving them what they think they want.
This is why I'm a big fan of Allsides. They seem genuinely dedicated to aggregating as wide a range of takes on current events as they can, which is really helpful for sniffing out BS. Honestly it's mostly made me think there's less BS than a lot of people think, so long as you can read past leading language.
I don't like subscriptions at all because I'm very conscious that one day I may not be able to afford to subscribe and I'll lose access / data etc. So I will simply not use apps that require an ongoing subscription where my data is difficult to move. If they allow me to buy a lifetime license, I'm in.
I am happy to donate or make a monthly payment, knowing that if I stop I can still access it. So Obsidian works for me - I donate but the data is local and mine so if anything happens it's still there. Archive.org I donate too - if I don't pay I can still use it.
The other consideration I have is where is my data and what are they doing with it. For example, I host my email with Fastmail. It's a yearly subscription but the data is mine and I can move it where I want and I trust the company credentials on not mining my data.
I wouldn't pay Reddit or Facebook. Whatever you pay they're still horrendous corporations that you are the product for.
I will easily pay $2 or $3 a month for something I use. The more I use it and it makes my life easier, the more I'll pay. $2 is a no brainer to pay. More takes consideration.
You hit on something I wanted to say:- what is stopping companies from charging you money and then STILL harvesting your data transparently?
I am yet to write an essay where I'd argue how it ad-funded internet is responsible for so many problems in our society, including the increased polarization and radicalization, the destruction of civil debate and the complete dehumanization of society.
Business models that depend only on monetizing eyeballs do not care about the individuals. They care only about the masses, the tribes, the identity groups and demographics. On the other hand, businesses that makes a living out of receiving a monthly payment from their customers need to care enough about their customers to the point where they can not lose them to a competitor.
I believe so much so in this, this is exactly why I've started Communick. Like you, I've always wondered why people are okay with paying $10 for some extra power up on Mario Kart, but would balk at the idea of paying $10/year for a social media service that is based on open protocols and does not put in a walled garden.
no. I will steal everything
This is the first I've heard of kagi. It looks interesting and I'm sick of scrolling past a page of "sponsored links".
How have you found it?
Yet I often tend to think way too long on even smaller digital expenses, like an app for €2, but I will happily pay €10 for a coffee and a croissant at a train station like it is nothing.
I think about this a lot too. I spend $10 on a drink I'll never remember having months from now, but spend lots of time questioning whether it's worth it pay for apps I use daily.
I regularly pay for a VPN, cloud storage, and music/video streaming. I find myself most willing to pay extra for no ads on streaming services I use a lot, even if I only pay for a month here or there (YouTube, Peacock, Hulu). I used to pay for Proton (VPN, Email, Cloud Storage, and Calendar) before iCloud implemented E2EE. Sometimes I'll pay for news.
I find a lot of the apps I use I wouldn't benefit from paying for extra features for, and if I would benefit from them, I wouldn't have enough free time to use it to justify paying for it. A lot of my needs are covered by the free and/or stock apps.
I think the important thing is that our services should not REQUIRE you to pay monthly. Some people can afford to maintain these things but many cannot. A paywalled service is less useful for everyone, including those who can afford it.
before the whole "everything is free on the internet" you had to run your own server, know someone or pay a huge bill for special network services.
it was VC money being thrown at people for 20+ years trying to make them think the place was just "supposed" to be free and funded entirely by spam. It does not work, this is not PBS this is communication, and each user has to make a certain amount of input to keep it operational.
What you are seeing is the internet returned to its intended designs and interactions. We aren't supposed to be tied to providers, only protocols.
I think it depends on the company.
If you think about paying big ones to have an ads-free experience, you have to keep in mind they still track you and sell metrics for ad targeting, that is they sell "your data" even if they don't show you ads, why should I pay them if they don't pay me for my data?
Different matter IMO if we talk about smaller companies (or small developers) that are still focused on providing a good service or app, I pay for protonmail for example, in some cases, paying a little bit might make a big difference to those developing.
Even more different if we talk about supporting opensource projects, that can't be even considered "paying", it's donations to make it so those projects can go on since they don't monetize them in any way.
I pay for Proton Unlimited (Email+vpn; ongoing), a couple of Android apps (once) and that's it. The thing you said about spending 2$ on an app vs 10$ at the coffee stand is very relatable.
Even if we get used to paying for our online services, that shouldn't bring us back to proprietary networks like Facebook. We should rather get used to paying for the free alternatives. With the recent surge in interest for the fediverse, keeping it grow will eventually lead to users needing to pay for it, since the servers are already overloaded and there are no ad revenues to cover the maintenance. But it's a good thing we start paying what we can for networks (and software in general) that serve common interests rather than corporate ones, because that's the most effective way to mitigate the negative impact of the social internet.
I would pay a reasonable amount to use Reddit if their true issue is not being profitable enough. If they lowered the API access fees to a reasonable figure, I would pay for a third party app. I would also pay for Reddit itself if it continued to allow third party access to the API like they have been. Maybe I'm in the minority, but if the argument is "if it's free, then you're the product" then I would, as dystopian as it sounds, pay for Reddit.
I happily pay for discord nitro. I have a bunch of servers that I'm in and interact with daily. Discord has been an amazing tool for me and my friends, for fostering community growth, for facilitating community involvement.
People like to shit on discord, but it is one of the only services that hasn't done some massive f u to it's users.
The name change thing was stupid and a self own, but not that big of a deal really.
I absolutely agree. Hell, I would pay some companies to not show up to me anymore.