Slashdot Mirror


BitPass: Micropayment That Seems To Work

Omega1045 writes "I have been following the story of BitPass for some time now. The micropayment solution provider has been featured on Slashdot before. That article focused on Scott McCloud, and his comic The Right Number. Since that story, BitPass has added a number of sites using their service. From this netizen, it looks like the idea is really taking off. Some news sources (NJ.com, SiliconValley.com) have noticed how this micropayment trend has progressed to include well known services like iTunes. I really like the idea of the artist getting a fair cut of the profits at BitPass."

180 comments

  1. Still... by UPAAntilles · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It doesn't fix the fact that most people don't want to pay for internet content in any way, shape or form. Case in point- IGN. Even though that was subscription based, it's complete "collapse" as it were was caused by moving to the pay model. Fileplanet is having the same types of troubles, as their "exclusive" downloads quickly become not so exclusive. People aren't ready to move beyond advertiser supported web content in droves. It's too early.

    1. Re:Still... by Muggins+the+Mad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > It doesn't fix the fact that most people don't want to pay for internet content in any way, shape or form.

      I think it all comes down to whether there are enough people who don't mind paying for good content to support the creators.

      I'm one of them, and while most of the content under BitPass at the moment isn't really my thing, a lot of it's certainly of high quality and well worth paying for.

      And to me, viewing ads *is* paying. In a currency I don't want to spend.

      - MugginsM

    2. Re:Still... by worm+eater · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It will certainly take time for the "internet = free" mentality to pass. Major services like Yahoo are gradually moving previously free services over to subscription models. iTunes (et al) are providing indications that people are willing to pay -- even though iTunes itself doesn't make money for anyone but the record labels, and in some cases, the artists. So yes, it will take a little while, but we'll get to the point where people think about it like television. Some people will pay a premium for the extras (cable) -- and some people will just stick with the standards (broadcast networks).

      BitPass has a nice model in that they offer a wide range of options. You can charge for specific content, charge for subscriptions to changing content, or just take donations. If they play their cards right, they'll be the next PayPal.

      --
      Maybe partying will help...
    3. Re:Still... by UPAAntilles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with comparing this to iTunes is that you're getting music out of it...not internet content, they are 2 very different things. The other problem is if we move to a "cable" way of paying things we get "content networks" like...say...IGN

    4. Re:Still... by znu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I really don't think it's just a matter of "too soon". The whole idea of micropayments is probably doomed. This presents the case far better than I could.

      The most important point, IMO, is that there are cognitive costs associated with the decision about whether or not to make a purchase that don't go away as dollar amounts decrease.

      --
      This space unintentionally left unblank.
    5. Re:Still... by dolo666 · · Score: 1

      "People aren't ready to move beyond advertiser supported web content in droves. It's too early."

      Too early? I think it's too greedy.

    6. Re:Still... by Muggins+the+Mad · · Score: 1

      > The most important point, IMO, is that there are cognitive costs associated with the decision about whether or not to make a purchase that don't go away as dollar amounts decrease.

      Which is a good argument, IMHO. However, aren't there very similar costs in viewing an advert?

      - MugginsM

    7. Re:Still... by FreekyGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think it's that people don't want to pay, they just don't want to pay for content they don't use. It's *subscriptions* that don't work, not payment in gereal. I'm happy to pay for an article I want to read, but that doesn't mean I want to have a permanent subscription of $x/month. Those can really add up.

      Personally, I don't mind at all paying for stuff on an "a la carte" basis. But, just like regular shopping, I want to walk into the store, pick out the thing I want, and buy just that.

      I'm betting that, as usual, the first industry to take advantage of a working, widespread micropayment system will be the porn industry.

    8. Re:Still... by Osty · · Score: 1

      I think it all comes down to whether there are enough people who don't mind paying for good content to support the creators.

      The opposite is just as important. With the given examples of IGN and Fileplanet, the content simply is not compelling enough for people to subscribe. I can generally find the same info on IGN elsewhere (maybe not the same editorials or previews, but I'm not hardcore enough to care), and I can find other mirrors or torrents of Fileplanet downloads. Without excellent subscription-only content (and some way to convey what kind of content you'll get with a subscription, like a free trial month), nobody will be willing to pay.

    9. Re:Still... by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1

      When will humanity evolve to the point where they'd rather pay than get it for free?

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    10. Re:Still... by silentbozo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Supply and demand. Fileplanet can only afford so much bandwidth to free downloaders. Unfortunately for them, people like me, who hate being forced to turn on Javascript so they can push ads, and who don't want to wait for overloaded servers to queue up our downloads, can now use bittorrents for the more popular items.

      I resorted to using a torrent to get the 2.0 patch for America's Army, and I'm a believer now. I downloaded the 200+ megs in about 2 hours, and left the connection on all night to help out other downloaders. By the next day, I had served out 2gb on my torrent connection for AA before shutting it down. I'd rather "pay" using my bandwidth to serve other people, and get very fast service and good d/l rate, than have to sacrifice my personal information just to feed some marketers. Sorry guys.

    11. Re:Still... by Saeger · · Score: 3, Interesting
      comes down to whether there are enough people who don't mind paying for good content to support the creators.

      In real life you often get to personally meet those starving artists when you buy their wares or pay for performances; there's a real emotional connection there - not so online (usually). In Real Life you get a feelgood for supporting local artists, and you get a more meaningful "Thank You" when handing over your cash - online it's more antiseptic.

      I would be 100 times more likely to pay for really great online content if:

      1. I was recognized as more than a number (or a /. '*') for my contribution.
      2. I had some idea of the artist's bottom line so I knew how badly they needed it vs. some other artist who's just as worthy but not as arbitrarily popular/rich. Call it an OpenBottomline, kind of like this. I don't like sending my money down paypal blackholes.
      3. The content was released under a more open license that allows everyone to stand on others' shoulders, rather than the default Disney "AllMineMineMine!" copyright.
      4. If there was some easy mechanism to pool my money with others to finance the creation of works we want.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    12. Re:Still... by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Which is a good argument, IMHO. However, aren't there very similar costs in viewing an advert?

      I doubt it. You don't choose whether or not you see an advertisement, they are always just there and you learn to ignore them or you are forced to sit through it. There is no decision made on you're part.

      There is a similiar cost in situations where you are forced to click on X number of banner ads to get where you want, but look at how popular that situation is. It's basically limited to warez and pr0n sites.

      Another similar choice situation which I've yet to see, but could be possible is making you sit through a flash animated advertisement for X number of seconds before getting to some content. I imagine the number of ads I'd willfully sit through before moving on to find another site free of ads would be pretty low.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    13. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about asking for a free blowjob while your at it! If it is my work then I get to set the terms. NOT YOU! God dam this sense of entitlement these days.

    14. Re:Still... by amRadioHed · · Score: 2, Funny

      When will humanity evolve to the point where they'd rather pay than get it for free?

      It'll be the same day humanity evolves to the point where they have no need for money.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    15. Re:Still... by iabervon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      People don't want to pay to browse a site; HTML and HTTP just aren't very good if there are costs associated with them. People complain about needing subscriptions even when those subscriptions are entirely free, just because the subscription mechanism interrupts their access to information. They can't necessarily post links and cite the work or get at it from a different computer seemlessly.

      On the other hand, people are perfectly willing to buy things over the web (consider Amazon or eBay), and they even seem willing to buy things over the web which will be delivered to them over the web (consider Magnatune).

      I think that payments will prove to work fine for items which can be tried in advance or returned, and which are not part of the normal interaction with the site. And purchases depend exclusively on the good will of the purchaser; the content will be available elsewhere, and making it less convenient to get from the original source just reduces the chance that people will spend money on the original site.

      Ironically, I think that the best model is to give away your content in a neatly indexed fashion on your site, and allow people to pay their choice of price to download exactly the same content in a zip file. Document who gets the money. People operate both as donors and as consumers, but not really both at the same time. On the web, it's hard to engage people as consumers (unless you promise to send them physical objects), so your best bet is to hook them as donors.

    16. Re:Still... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It doesn't fix the fact that most people don't want to pay for internet content in any way, shape or form.

      People are totally willing to pay for internet content. See all these consumers who put down $40, $50, even $70 monthly for high-speed connections?

      They wouldn't spend like that unless they desired internet content enough to give money for it. They only problem is that today they give this money to ISPs, not content-creators. Viewers are willing to pay for content; they're just not willing to buy content. If the cumbersome, distracting, and insecure process of paying for a website were removed, readers would have no problem forking over some cash. Removing those procedural obstacles is the quest of every micropayment project.

      I'd be happy to give slashdot $0.02 per page I read, which would cover their bandwidth and then some. (Typical rate for one banner impression is much, much less than a penny. But few readers would hestitate to give $0.01 to read a good page. The time it'd take to transfer that money traditionally is more valuable than the cash itself)

      PS. Part of the reason so many people feel guiltless about collecting MP3s off P2P is that they are paying for them already. File-sharing is an expensive hobby. They just pay Comcast and Dell instead of the RIAA.

    17. Re:Still... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      I'm still dumbfounded as to why everyone things that the "internet = free" mentality *should* pass.

      I may not create as much content as I really want to, but I still do. And I see no reason to impose some kind of charge on it. The internet needs billions of people giving away a little bit for free, not 10,000 *rock stars* creating mindless consumer garbage that can be tied into marketing Pepsi or Nike.

      The attitude that it shouldn't be free, is part of a long term strategy to steamroll over free developers/artists/authors, so that the only thing left is "for money" content. It will be a sad internet (not that it's not sad as it is already).

      How do you sell water? You sell it in a desert. And if you just happen to live in a non-desert... well, get to work on the desertification process.

    18. Re:Still... by Webmonger · · Score: 3, Funny

      Go to a corner store. Look in the fridge. They're selling water. Desert not required.

    19. Re:Still... by worm+eater · · Score: 1

      I too provide free content on the internet (see my web site), but I don't think that that is the only way to do it. For me, and the artists I work with, it makes a lot of sense: we work on projects with almost zero overhead. Everything can be written, recorded, designed by a few people working in the evenings / weekends. But some artists and content providers work on huge projects that require huge amounts of time and money to complete -- and there is no way to realize these kinds of projects without commercial support or grants. And there's only so much grant money to go around. Of course there will always be plenty of free content on the internet, but that does preclude high-quality commercial content.

      --
      Maybe partying will help...
    20. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Store?!
      Use Shop. Much better.

      e.g. I went Shoping today, instead of: I went Storing today.

    21. Re:Still... by digitaleus · · Score: 1

      We live in a capitalist society where people's work is assigned value by the money people are willing to pay for it. You are saying that all the great work that people are doing isn't worth paying for, and therefore is of very little value.

      The export processing zones in 3rd world countries function because workers there have no choice but to accept the shitty wages that the employers are offering. Just because a system is set up to disadvantage a certain group, doesn't mean that it's right.

      You have to be pretty short-sightedly selfish to say that creatives shouldn't be rewarded for their work. Short-sighted to the point of offsensive.

      People should be rewarded for doing work. Micropayments is a potential way of making it feasible to get away from the "rock star" system, where very few succeed, but those that succeed phenomenally.

      And for the selfish: the quantity of quality content would increase dramatically as people are able to start living off the money they make from their work, and therefore can devote themselves full time to it. There are very few for-free creatives who would not up their output if they could make money out of it.

    22. Re:Still... by Roogna · · Score: 1

      Actually, personally the biggest problem with IGN, is that you don't really get anything for the subscription. I know I won't be subscribing again, primarily because I subscribed in the first place to get rid of the ads. All it got me was more ads, in the form of an almost daily spam to my inbox.

      It's not paying for internet content that's the problem. It's paying for anything and receiving nothing in return. It's the same reason I don't subscribe to any magazine's any longer. Why pay someone for nothing?

    23. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every credible simulation (including history) has shown that 95% of money will end up in the hands of 5% of the people (same thing will happen in communism except the people ending up with the money are supposed to have a civic responsability).

      This situation obviously does not reflect reality. 95% of work is NOT done by 5% of the people (on the contrary, those 5% don't seem to be doing anything at all).

      So whatever the reasons and "logic" you bring here should be accompanied by another reasoning, giving the reason history will not repeat itself.

      The belief that "markets" will solve problems on their own is (I think) a fallacy. If you think otherwise, enter a homeless shelter and find the difference between yourself and the average person sitting there.

      You will learn that the differences have nothing to do with willingness to work or shit like that. It's just plain luck.

      You're the lucky one.

      Think just how much it would take (or how little) to take that luck away from you.

      Then you'll realise the difference between what capitalism CAN do for you (make you rich) and what it most likely WILL do (make your life miserable). The odds favor the latter by a very wide margin.

    24. Re:Still... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      Reward? I create content too, and I find it very rewarding. It kicks ass, that anyone would want to read something I've written, or run a program that I've designed. You're the short-sighted one, that can only see $$$ for rewards. You think that there can be no reward like that, and that unless others can pilfer my pockets when I overheard music they've performed, that some sort of thievery has occurred.

      As for me being able to create more quality content, I find it offensive that in your world, I could live off of technical doodads and computer software toys, while someone labors in a field to feed me.

      Worse, that you're hellbent on creating that world.

      God, I don't even know how to respond. That I could "up my output" ? That I'm some piece of entertainment factory machinery, that if you pour more money down my throat, short stories shoot out my ass? Go to hell. And whatever you do, don't drag me there with you.

    25. Re:Still... by digitaleus · · Score: 1
      Just because you can't reach perfection doesn't mean that you can say that situation is better and another is worse.

      I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of capitalism, that's way too big a discussion, and for the next wee while, it's a reality we're going to accept.

      Micropayments lower the barrier to entry into the content market - under subscription models, you need to have a certain level of quantity in order to justify the charge - a level of quantity that is difficult to fulfil by one person.

      Anything that lowers the barrier to entry to a market improves the distribution of wealth - it gives the 5% "kings" less leverage for staying on top. Therefore, micropayments are probably a good thing.

      Of course, it could turn out that the micropayment providers are the only ones that win, as there's a big potential for a monopoly to arise there. This, perhaps, is the "history repeating itself" that you refer to.

    26. Re:Still... by digitaleus · · Score: 1

      It's clear that we're never going to agree with each other on this issue. However, I will respond, if only for the silent listeners...

      Your comment that working in a field is somehow more important that working in more abstract professional is just silly. And I'm not hellbent on creating that world - it already exists, and I quite enjoy the fact that we're not all hunter-gatherers.

      I'm lucky. I'm able to make a full-time job out of my passion. However, I know a lot of musicians / artists / cartoonists / writers / designers / etc who are forced to work shitty jobs to survive, moonlighting on their real passions. I think that this is a bad thing, and I would like to see it changed. If you're situation isn't like that, then good for you.

      There's no denying that creation has a lot of non-financial benefits - it's what many people live for. However, the people doing this need to live, and it would be nice for them to live at something greater than a subsistence level.

      As for the comment about increasing output:

    27. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It will certainly take time for the "internet = free" mentality to pass

      Uh.. it's more of a "sunday comics aren't $.25" problem. When $1 buys you the entire paper, the comics on the back page are a bonus that you read after skimming the rest of the paper. The mindset is that you buy the paper, the comics come free. And paper comics are much better value - you get several strips. Nobody ever paid money for a single issue of a serial comic strip.

      If you start charging - you need a lot of content. It almost makes me think that a colaborative pool would be the only way some of these sites (that don't have a *lot* of content) would work.

    28. Re:Still... by pointwood · · Score: 1

      I subscribe to Linux Weekly News and have done so since they started offering. Subscriptions saved them from closing. I'm not sure what the status is, but they aren't exactly earning loads of money, but so far they have survived which is very cool since (IMHO) it's the absolute best Linux news site.

    29. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Agreed totally. $0.25's about right for the whole weekday paper. Now if the comic were $0.025, that's getting closer, or $0.0025 it actually makes sense.

      And with .coms getting million-users-per-month $2500 / month sounds reasonable for an amateur self-published comic.

    30. Re:Still... by Zilch · · Score: 1
      The most important point, IMO, is that there are cognitive costs associated with the decision about whether or not to make a purchase that don't go away as dollar amounts decrease.

      I'm not sure that is true. I don't (for example) think about how much it will cost me in power each time I turn on my PC.

      Zilch

    31. Re:Still... by jpop32 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't fix the fact that most people don't want to pay for internet content in any way, shape or form.

      If the cost of watching a streaming movie is less than the price of the CD on which you would burn it, then you've got yourself a market. If listening to an album costs me 10cents per listen, I'd happily stream it every time and pay for it, insted of using up disk space.

      I believe this is only a matter of time.

    32. Re:Still... by znu · · Score: 1

      Sure, but power is a commodity. It's always the same thing. You've probably already decided that you're willing to buy however much of it you need, at the price the electric company is selling it for. With a micropayment-based web, that doesn't happen. Both the value and the price of pages will vary, so you'll have to make determinations on a case-by-case basis. And you'll have to make it without complete information, since you need to pay before you've seen the content.

      --
      This space unintentionally left unblank.
    33. Re:Still... by ACPosterChild · · Score: 1

      I had some idea of the artist's bottom line so I knew how badly they needed it vs. some other artist who's just as worthy but not as arbitrarily popular/rich. What does paying for quality content have to do with how much the creator makes? You either think it's worth it or you don't. For the logic impared: If somebody provides you content that you enjoy, you should be willing to pay a nickel to see it, no matter how much they already have in the bank. If you end up paying a nickel to some rich person with good advertising that doesn't deliver content you enjoy, then you won't go back. Also, if you were a fan of a particular "artist" who ended up getting rich from their work; would you stop paying your nickels and stop accessing the content you previously enjoyed? If the answer is yes, you're just being a drama queen and are being hypocritical to the whole micropayment idea.

  2. Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Informative

    "For items priced $0.01-$5.00, the transaction fee is 15%."

    15%! Are they crazy?

    1. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by wmspringer · · Score: 2, Funny

      15% of a penny...now THAT's a micropayment.

    2. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by cgranade · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh... no. 15% is very fair, as compared to $500/mo. account fees, $0.07/transaction, and 3.5% fees. Really, when you look at it, for a one-cent fee, paying $0.07 per transaction is f***ing insane, so I appriciate the reduced fees.

      --

      #define DRM chmod 000

    3. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      Uh... no. 15% is very fair, as compared to $500/mo. account fees, $0.07/transaction, and 3.5% fees. Really, when you look at it, for a one-cent fee, paying $0.07 per transaction is f***ing insane, so I appriciate the reduced fees.

      I can get a flat rate at $0.30 a transaction, with a $60 monthly fee if I provide my own merchant account. What the hell providor are you using?

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    4. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Tell me, can you complete a transaction for 0,01$*15& = 0,0015$? Just the machinery, bandwidth, disk space, CPU time (hell, even electricity bill) will eat that up.

      There's a reason most charge a minimum fee which are orders of magnitude higher. Personally, I can't see how this could be profitable at all.

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      and if you go with something as mainstream as PayPal, their fees are.. 2.2%+ $0.30 USD per transaction. Send $1 with paypal, the seller receives more of the money than they would with BitPass.

      I think the whole point of all micropayments is that they work out cheaper for very small payments, but when $2 at BitPass rates is $0.30, and PayPal is $0.35, its looking like you want to use BitPass only for *really* small transaction costs, but when the difference is so small, you might as well give out more for $5 and use paypal.

      PayPal also has the benefit of more advertising, and more general acceptance, and you don't need to load your account just to give out a $1 charge once.

    6. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by NineNine · · Score: 0

      $500/mo. account fees, $0.07/transaction, and 3.5% fees

      What in the HELL are you talking about? This is by far the most expensive CC processing service that I have EVER heard of. That's not even in the ballpark of reality. REAL CC merchant accounts (and yes, I have one) cost about $0.00/transaction + 3.5% to about $0.06/transaction + 2.5% with no monthly fees.

    7. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Hey, reply and let me know where you found those. After hunting around to replace the POS terminal where we work ($80/mo "rent"+$20/mo insurance+% depending on card type but around 2.5%) with a computer and a CC "wedge" we could only find ones like authorize.net with a monthly charge, plus % of each transaction.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by NineNine · · Score: 0

      Hell... any of them. I get offers every day. My rates are even a bit high because I'm locked into one merchant account vendor because I have a special POS terminal. I pay 2.45% + $0.05/transaction for Visa/MC, and I think 1.5% for Discover and I think around 3% for Amex. (I don't have my statements in front of me right now). Either way, there are tons and tons of places that are cheaper, too. I just turned down one guy who was cheaper because it wouldn't integrate in with my POS stations. Take a look at Wells-Fargo to start with. They have a program that integrates with the Intuit QB POS system that's nice and cheap.

    9. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, I don't know where you get your merchant account from, but you're being ripped off. The one I use is quite a bit cheaper than that, and a lot cheaper than BitPass or Paypal...

    10. Re:Not cheap, very high cost per sale. by natmsincome.com · · Score: 1

      Hmm, the I get it about 20c a transaction although I must admit it took me almost a year to find it :-) That being said it's still a pain to type in all the information for a 50c transaction which was the main point of micropayments - convience.

  3. Too early ? or never come ? by aepervius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there is chasm of quality between paid content and free content (like national subventioned tv and cable tv where I live) then people will go for the highiest quality because they have the feeling they get something for their money (I take the tv example as it is what comes as near in mater of content as of web). But if somebody is Offering the same or equivalent conent at same or acceptably same quality then people will not go to pay for service. This is especially true if the free content is in a greater mass than paid content.

    The tendence might invert itself. But it will take a lot of time. And I even think maybe never because they will always be a drove of talended people making something for free.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Too early ? or never come ? by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      NO
      stop comparing tv and the internet
      it is NOT the same
      it is quite difficult for the average joe to produce tv content for the masses
      it is trivial to produce web content
      there will always be the openinfo/opensource mentality people who will provide reasonable content for free, for the love of it.
      for a premium service to survive it has got to be VERY premium
      itunes is not a webservice or internet service
      its a music store
      its selling music
      over the internet
      like amazonsells books

    2. Re:Too early ? or never come ? by bitmason · · Score: 1

      >it is quite difficult for the average joe to produce tv content for the masses

      True.

      >it is trivial to produce web content
      It's easy to produce crap. It's also relatively easiER to produce writing and still images than broadcast production-grade video. But that doesn't make it trivial. The Web is a delivery mechanism. An in-depth written study of some topic (or work of fiction) aka a book is no (well not much) easier to produce for the Web than any other medium. Now, it may be easier to get published, but that doesn't make it any better or easier to write.

      >there will always be the openinfo/opensource mentality people who will provide reasonable content for free, for the love of it.

      "Reasonable"? Perhaps. However, even today, a lot of the best open source content is being produced as a sideline to more commercial ventures. This is even true of open source code. How many open source projects are being done primarily by programmers on someone's payroll?

      >for a premium service to survive it has got to be VERY premium

      I think that's probably true -- although if micropayments ever became prevalent, it might mean that only some individual pieces of content had to be very premium (easier than a whole service).

      >itunes is not a webservice or internet service

      As I said earlier, the Web is a distribution medium not the content itself. The same could be said of iTunes.

  4. Another micropayment solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    can be found at www.kopek.net

  5. Not if they round up... by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Then it become a MACROpayement ;).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Not if they round up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "pavement", not "payement"

  6. "...really taking off."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You really don't know the true scale of business in this country, do you?

    All micropayments this year don't equal what Warren Buffet loses in the wash each week.

  7. Something on topic by Omega1045 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the moderators, instead of simply leaving some happy comments alone are nailing me, I will add something very much on-topic.

    I think "home grown" service like BitPass are just the key for up and coming artists. Offering a service at such a small amount of money is very marketable. This is possible for the artist because the they gets such a large portion of that take. On an average CD, the artist makes much less than a dollar. That is a very small percentage @ $12 to $15 for a new cd!

    Imagine a YOUNG Metallica level artist on their way up. Instead of using traditional means, they offer their LP at $2, on BitPass via MP3. They make much more per album than they would through traditional means. They don't have to sell near as many albums to be a huge financial success, and continue to make their music or whatever.

    Sounds like success to me! I can think of a few local bands that I wish were still around, but simply could not afford it. A succesful BitPass style service could have really helped them!

    --

    Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    1. Re:Something on topic by fermion · · Score: 1
      First, i assume by YOUNG Metallica level artist you mean a band that is quite good at giving a large percentage of the public what it wants and therefore has the potential to sell lots of albums.

      But how are they going to sell millions of albums? The major labels provide one avenue. The labels will select a few groups from the thousands with a suitable level of talent, a marketable signature, and a strong desire to be famous. They will then market the group strongly, placing them above other groups with similar talent and credentials. If the group takes, millions of albums can be sold. If the group remains cognizant of it's aging audience, sales will continue.

      I suppose instead of the traditional labels some sites might grow, in the fullness of time, to be arbitrators of what is cool and what is not. In that way certain groups may have the opportunity to rise above the dina and be allowed to become famous. If such sites would offer the opportunity on more favorable terms to the artists than a label is a question to be answered.

      The reality is that many artists exist outside the label structure. The hold concerts for free, win awards at festivals, and sell self produced and self paid for CDs. Their money comes from people who prefer to support artists to celebrities. These artist compete on equal footing with the thousands of other artist with comparable talent and credentials. The market may have the same value, but the number of participants means each receives a smaller share.

      I do not see how micopayments would help these artists. From what I see in the advertisements, the cost of producing manufacturing a CD has fallen to the point where any motivated band can buy a small lot for sale. On larger lots the cost of production seems comparable to the bandwidth cost necessary for a download. If they want to do the internet they can give away a track or two for free. Sales of CDs can be handled through current online outlets. I suppose such bands could list tracks on some consolidated web site and compete with thousands of other artists, with no way to differeniate.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  8. Obligatory PA Link by Trillian_1138 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Penny Arcade responded to Scott McCloud's origonal comic on micropayments. They didn't quite agree with him.

    -Trillian

  9. Re:Of course by ksandom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if it doesn't succeed, it lays the ground work for ideas to spawn off that might lead to something better later on. On the net there is a culture of take what you want. Open source works well with this, but economics based on scarcity does not. Thus leading to piracy. If piracy is reduced it's still a step forward.

    --
    Funnyhacks - Wierd, unusual, and fun hacks
  10. Where does it end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't believe micro-payments will ever catch on. Will we all be teased with only first 2 sentences of an article, and then have to cough up $0.02 for the rest? $0.01 for the first 10 search results, and $0.01 for every 100 results after that? $0.01 to view the FAQ section of technicial support, $0.02 to search the FAQ for a keyword. Hell I could rack up a $50 tab in an hour of surfing.

    1. Re:Where does it end? by yoshi_mon · · Score: 1

      And what about the possabilities for fraud? You are teased with some form of header that you are intrested in and then go on to click though the artical. Meanwhile the "micropayment" has gone from $0.01 per click to $0.50 with micro-fine print at the bottom of the page informing of you so. (Or none at all.)

      Next thing you know your paying out the nose for something that once was free. (Ad supported.)

      The idea of micropayments is nice in theory but there are many pitfalls that must be fleshed out before I see myself ever using such a thing.

      --

      Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
    2. Re:Where does it end? by Doyle · · Score: 1

      Dude, that's 5,000 FAQ's an hour! You must have a helluva lot of unanswered questions ;)

    3. Re:Where does it end? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And this is exactly why it won't work. Content on the internet is even less reliable than content in the real world. You don't know what is going on to determine search results, and you don't know if they could put the one you want as 101 just to make you pay more. This isn't the real world where you can pick a product off the shelf and look at it.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  11. Pointless, and here's why by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We initially volunteered for the trial, but didn't bother once we heard of the terms- basically, 15%, same as paypal. Our users would have objected to keeping a balance they couldn't use anywhere else. Worse, we'd loose ANOTHER 15% because they(at the time) only supported PayPal for transferring funds. Worse, they only do the transfer when it gets to a certain size. Micropayments, macrotransfers, mean that not only are they ripping you a new one on the 15% fee, but they're ALSO getting your interest.

    Call me silly and slap me stupid, but the point of micropayments was to make small payments economically viable. I don't call "three times a credit card processing fee" viable for what amounts to nothing more than a proxy service.

    All Bitpass does is play "mini paypal", and that's neither original nor novel. Next, please. That technology involving random numbers+statistics looked far more promising....

    1. Re:Pointless, and here's why by piranha(jpl) · · Score: 1
      Next, please. That technology involving random numbers+statistics looked far more promising....

      Do you mean Hashcash? Keep in mind it does not provide any monetary or reusable value to those that accept Hashcash, it only proves that a "purchaser" has spent an amount of time doing CPU work. The purpose is to artificially increase scarcity of a service, not to compensate service providers. Useful, but a completely different purpose than BitPass.

    2. Re:Pointless, and here's why by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 1

      No, he meant the one where the tokens are worth 100 times as much, but only 1 out of 100 gets cashed. It would work quite well in theory, but in practice users don't understand randomness, and wouldn't buy it.

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    3. Re:Pointless, and here's why by happystink · · Score: 1

      Just for clarity: paypal doesn't charge 15%. Maybe on very small fees it works out to 15% though.

      --

      sig:
      See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.

  12. Well most people using the net have no money by Adolph_Hitler · · Score: 1

    You are talking about teenagers and college students. The teenager or the college student has the most free time yet the least amount of money so they surf the web and use the net all day because they have no job, duh. Now to the few who do have a job, they will most likely only visit just a few sites and these people already use Itunes. Last problem is, we dont have a major problem with paying for content. When the economy was good advertisements paid for content, when the economy picks up ads will pay for most internet content just like it pays for radio, tv, and all other devices. This isnt new, most people do not like to pay for radio or for tv, why would you expect us to pay for the internet? Micropayments will never work, only rich people will support something like this and most young people who are from working class families do not have the money and would be simply priced out if slashdot or ign goes micropayment.

    --
    People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
  13. Marketing Cost by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Not that i agree with the amount the *IAA takes from bands, but please remember that part of a bands success is tied to marketing.

    If you have never heard of a band, and cant beaucse they arent marketed beyond their town, what difference does it make if they get more % back on an album.

    There IS a cost to market, and the bands cant do it on their own when they first start out..

    Micropayments wont help that a bit.

    But like i said above, taking 99% of the money fronted and claiming it was 'for marketing purposes' is also wrong...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Marketing Cost by Omega1045 · · Score: 1

      nurb,

      These are really good points. I agree with your point. Record companies and their expertise in marketing new artists have a big influence on the success or failure of the artist.

      However, I think that an artist could hire a marketing firm on their own, or do less traditional marketing. Look at the success of the Blair Witch project. Much of their hype started from their web site. I think there will be other ways to get "big" in the future, than going through the Nazis at the RIAA.

      And the real point is that if users are even giving up 15% of their take to BitPass (or some other service), they are still way ahead of the current situation. Artists won't have to "hit it big" to make a very good living like they do now. I think we are going to see music diversify much more than it is even now.

      --

      Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    2. Re:Marketing Cost by starm_ · · Score: 1

      But the internet is not just a cheap medium for transferring music; it is also a cheap medium for advertisement. AND it is a global medium. The town barrier is completely broken. Micro payment might just be the missing link in the chain to make music a balanced and reasonable industry unlike the way it is now.

      And I'm sure if this commercial model takes place there will be web sites dedicated to finding new interesting music, make reviews etc. There are already sites that promote all kind of products this way. These sites will help the users find artists that match their tastes, they will get comments and reviews from others, etc.

  14. This is not new! by DeathBunnyRanger · · Score: 3, Informative

    Company called Bee-Tokens.com has been a micropayment provider for over 3 years. they payout 80%, I don't know how bitpay can do 15% commission. chargebacks are a bitch, and credit companies want something like 5% on all non tangleable internet transactions, including server uptime etc. oh well, I have been using Bee-Tokens for a while, works for my photographs.

  15. Thats not the problem, the problem is by Adolph_Hitler · · Score: 1

    If you have alot of money you already do pay for information, and if you go to IGN.com or the internet its usually because you dont have the money to subscribe to the magazine, buy the expensive books or afford the satelite tv services. Most people using the net are college students and teenagers and in the current economy these groups of people have no jobs. I'm making $8 an hour and you expect me to pay for the internet? Go to hell.

    --
    People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
  16. Kind of Pricey by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For items priced $0.01-$5.00, the transaction fee is 15%.
    For items priced $5.00 and higher, the transaction fee is 5% + $0.50.


    15% is one helluva chunk to take for being the clearinghouse for micropayments, and the over $5 fee is roughly twice what you'd pay through a US commercial gateway.

    1. Re:Kind of Pricey by danharan · · Score: 1

      Commercial gateways in Canada usually charge a transaction fee around CAD$0.2-0.35, and a monthly fee ranging from CAD$38 and up. Set-up fees are pretty hefty, and discount fees usually start around 3.5%-5%, going down slightly with large volumes.

      For a band wanting to sell songs online, BitPass makes the most sense, though they could also offer the whole album via credit card - the transaction fees alone would make BitPass a better deal on most sales.

      --
      Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    2. Re:Kind of Pricey by maskatron · · Score: 1

      It's better than any alternative that I know of. I like the fact that they don't charge a setup fee. As others have pointed out, it's good for a band wanting to sell songs because you don't need to be selling 100 songs a week to make it profitable for you.

      maskatron
      htpp://curvedspace.org

      --
      Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
  17. Re:Where does it end? Where it begins... by adzoox · · Score: 1

    But what if you could earn micropayments yourself by adding to the websites you visit. IE, on /. you might earn premium pageviews for high moderation. On eBay you might earn listing fee credit or some of their eBay Points if both parties use Paypal and post positive feedback.

    I honestly think this will be incentive some day for the small voice to be heard and the small journalistic/news sites to make some server/staff support money.

    I actually think that Micropayments should be very small 1 and 2 cents and then cashed out / payable only once say $5 were reached.

    Would you pay to send email if it meant a drastic reduction in SPAM?

    --
    Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
  18. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see your future Fagsalot, and it says, "GET A LIFE!"

    Add this 3 comment history numbskull to your foes list as well.

  19. Re:Where does it end? Where it begins... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Would you pay to send email if it meant a drastic reduction in SPAM?
    NO!
  20. Where's Visa? by kognate · · Score: 4, Informative

    What I don't understand is how these companies can even exist? The credit card industry (in the US anyway) has been building itself up for years and years.

    What I'm trying to ask is a two part question

    1) These services are going to have to go through the same growth problems all new financial services go through. Not all new financial servers are viable economically, and it's possible that micropayments are not viable.

    2) Why doesn't AMEX or Visa offer some sort of micropayment system? They've already got the basics for one right now: it's pervasive, easy to use, familer, and cost effective for many transactions. You just add an aggregator account for micropayments along with a dab of crypto and there you go: instant micropayments.[1]

    -jbs

    [1] the aggregator account would work like a till. Each micropayment get's tagged and signed by the payee's pubkey. At the end of the month, everybody get's paid and billed, just like they do now. The user can manage their micropayment wallet by adding/removing cash/credit (that way you can't just rob someone blind). The merchent get's the % taken out of the total of the aggregated account for processing fees. You could even use this on vending machines, cardswipe+pin and the charges get aggregated daily instead of monthly (all cryptocash emptied from this machine daily).

    1. Re:Where's Visa? by mwooldri · · Score: 1

      I can't say where Visa are but from my limited experience working for American Express I can see where my employers are at. The nearest thing approaching micropayments is ExpressPay which is more like the Exxon/Mobil SpeedPass. The Amex system to my knowledge is considered to be in trial status, mainly around Phoenix, AZ, at this time

      To my knowledge there isn't any thing else in development. But if American Express at the corporate level were to see value in micropayments and that it would prove useful as a service to its premium cardmembers (and that it would generate profit for the company and fit in with the company image), I'm sure that they'd go for it.

      But as other posters have said, Paypal is quite suited for micropayments as it is, and what ever happened to using your cellphone for them micropayments?

      Mark.

      PS: Disclaimer: The views expressed here (if I did express any) are mine, not of my employer (American Express).

    2. Re:Where's Visa? by scrytch · · Score: 1

      2) Why doesn't AMEX or Visa offer some sort of micropayment system? They've already got the basics for one right now: it's pervasive, easy to use, familer, and cost effective for many transactions. You just add an aggregator account for micropayments along with a dab of crypto and there you go: instant micropayments.[1]

      Why it's that easy, just slap some aggregator here with a dab of crypto there, and a little magic sprinkle here, a handwave there, and presto, instant micropayment architecture. Simple.

      AMEX is probably closest in that they're giving away smartcard readers with their blue cards. Still, AMEX is legendary for taking great ideas like single-use and limited-use CC numbers, and burying them in obscurity. The companies got burned on smartcards before, and til they can give the pizza delivery guy a smartcard reader instead of a zipzap box (the mechanical doodad that makes carbons), we're stuck with the old system for quite a while.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    3. Re:Where's Visa? by kognate · · Score: 1

      My point is that we already have the structure of a micropayment system already extant in the credit card processing system. It would take some work to make it functional for wide-spectrum micropayments but it's less work to alter than to create-from-scratch.

      not only is it less work, but the companies like AMEX have a _LOT_ of experience dealing with the issues merchants have. And the bottom line is that merchants are the key. Payment systems are a real supply-siders dream argument.

      -just another kognate in the machine

  21. BitPass trust and legal problems by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting
    BitPass has a prominent "Certified by Entrust" logo on their web site. It means very little. Read their certification practices statement, which guarantees almost nothing, disclaims liability for almost all cases, limits liability to $1000 per certificate (i.e. everybody scammed by one site), and even calls for the "relying party" (the customer) to indemnify Entrust.

    This is even weaker than Verisign's lower class of SSL certificate. Verisign at least requires a Dun and Bradstreet number.

    There are far better seal programs, such as the classic Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. That's an actual warranty. "If a product bearing the Seal proves to be defective within two years of purchase, Good Housekeeping will replace the product or refund the purchase price." "Entrust" doesn't come anywhere near that.

    Then there's the question of whether BitPass is a payment service or a reseller. iBill, for example, is a reseller. When you buy something through iBill, the actual "merchant" is iBill, and if you want a refund, you can get it through iBill's customer service operation. Getting it back from the site operator is iBill's problem, which is why they take a big cut and hold back payments for weeks.

    BitPass doesn't seem to be set up that way. BitPass is, in a sense, "selling money" That may create problems. Credit card issuers don't allow merchants to "sell money"; that's a loan, which comes under banking laws. Also, the U.S. Government has a monopoly on money. Casinos in Las Vegas used to take each other's chips, but that was ruled to be a "currency" years ago, and they had to stop.

    Worse, the BitPass site does not disclose the name and address of the business before asking for a credit card number. They've set things up so it's hard to get a refund. They don't disclose their refund policy. That's a criminal offense in California (B&P code 17538), where BitPass apparently is located. That's good for six months in jail. Here's the law, which is very specific, so sleazy operators can't hide the required info and claim they comply.

    • (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other electronic means of communication shall do all of the following when the transaction involves a buyer located in this state:

      (1) Before accepting any payment or processing any debit or credit charge or funds transfer, the vendor shall disclose to the buyer in writing or by electronic means of communication, such as e-mail or an on-screen notice, the vendor's return and refund policy, the legal name under which the business is conducted and, except as provided in paragraph (3), the complete street address from which the business is actually conducted.

      (2) If the disclosure of the vendor's legal name and address information required by this subdivision is made by on-screen notice, all of the following shall apply:

      (A) The disclosure of the legal name and address information shall appear on any of the following: (i) the first screen displayed when the vendor's electronic site is accessed, (ii) on the screen on which goods or services are first offered, (iii) on the screen on which a buyer may place the order for goods or services, (iv) on the screen on which the buyer may enter payment information, such as a credit card account number, or (v) for nonbrowser-based technologies, in a manner that gives the user a reasonable opportunity to review that information. The communication of that disclosure shall not be structured to be smaller or less legible than the text of the offer of the goods or services.

      (3) The complete street address need not be disclosed as required by paragraph (1) if the vendor utilizes

  22. Not really micropayment, but... by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Instead of the micropayment route, I've always preferred the idea of paying one monthly fee then getting unlimited content for that fee. It's like those "adult passes". You pay them a monthly fee, then when you visit a member page, they pay the page for you.

    With a pay-per-view thing, I'd always be asking myself "do I REALLY want to see this, or can I live without it?" and end up missing a lot of stuff.

    1. Re:Not really micropayment, but... by NineNine · · Score: 0

      You pay them a monthly fee, then when you visit a member page, they pay the page for you.

      No, it doesn't work like that. Member pages get paid for convincing somebody to buy a pass, and then get paid for ads inside of their own member sites. We don't get paid anything for just having visitors with say, an "AdultPass" visit our sites.

    2. Re:Not really micropayment, but... by Dan+Crash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're not mutually exclusive, though. Any content seller can offer their content both via subscription and micropayments. Buying ala carte may be the step that eventually convinces a user to subscribe.

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    3. Re:Not really micropayment, but... by Psychic+Burrito · · Score: 1

      You might take a look at Ipaya. They haven't started yet, but they look promising.

    4. Re:Not really micropayment, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Damn, I could have sworn that I read somewhere that was how it worked. Thanks for cluing me in.

  23. NOTE TO MOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm meta-moderated your moderation "uninteresting", may you lose your ability to moderate soon. Let that be a lesson to all of you.

    BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!

  24. Shirky: "BitPass Will Fail" by gilgongo · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Clay Shirky, the undisputed king of thinkers about the Internet (well, almost) says micropayment systems are doomed in a paper he wrote a couple of months back.


    I have to say I agree with him on this. He makes several very good points about micropayments, free content, and how the Internet shifts the balance of power from publishers to consumers.

    --
    "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    1. Re:Shirky: "BitPass Will Fail" by maskatron · · Score: 1

      I agree that Shirkey makes some good points, but personally I think the biggest stumbling block is getting people to sign up for the Bitpass service. Once a defacto standard emerges and people are used to the idea of spending money in such a way, I think things will gel together. It will take time though.

      maskatron
      http://curvedspace.org

      --
      Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
  25. iTunes uses bitpass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Some news sources (NJ.com, SiliconValley.com) have noticed how this micropayment trend has progressed to include well known services like iTunes.

    Funny, I didn't seem to notice being able to pay with Bitpass on iTunes.

  26. How about Wallie? by Pflipp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was surprised that this never got discussed on /., but there is a *very active* campaign going on in Holland to promote pre-paid cards for use on the Internet. It's called wallie, and at least we are interested to use it on our little web sale project.

    --
    "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
    1. Re:How about Wallie? by stereoroid · · Score: 1

      The Wallie card looks very interesting - along the lines of the pre-paid phone cards, and available in the same places - corner stores, gas stations, etc.

      It appears to fulfil the basic requirement (in my opinion) of any micropayment system: anonymity. I don't want records kept of every little purchase I make - a horrible idea.

      Only quibble: who's behind it?

      --
      (this is not a .sig)
  27. Credit cards... by Kassiopeia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm seventeen. I wouldn't mind paying for stuff if its good, but there's always one thing I run into that I can't do anything about. I'm underaged, so I can't get a credit card. Internet payments would be its only use, so getting one to the family wouldn't be meaningful either. And when I become a poor student, no bank in their right mind will want to give me one either. Nor am I sure I want to even get one, with the trail it leaves behind.

    Add to that that I'm not from the United States, and it all amounts to just too much trouble to go through for the possible benefits and warm-and-fuzzy-feeling. What I'd like to see are some sort of bitpass cards that anyone can buy from a store. Before that happens, micropayments won't work on that meaningfully. Internet users under eighteen aren't that far and inbetween, although I admit that most just play CS and no little else. :)

    1. Re:Credit cards... by Graymalkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most banks offer debit cards with credit backing now. You can use the card as if it were a credit card without any charges. The money comes out of your checking account instead of a credit company's coffers. If you're serious about paying for things online these sorts of debit cards are readily available, even when you're underage.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    2. Re:Credit cards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Credit card companies love giving cards to poor students. I can't get them to stop. They're hoping that while you're young, poor, and immature, you'll abuse the card and rack up debt. That way they own you for life.

      On the other hand, using a credit card wisely while a student is a good way to build a credit history. Just remember to only spend what you have, and pay it off at the end of the month.

    3. Re:Credit cards... by ChaoticLimbs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here in the USA you can get gift cards which are VISA cards, and have only the vendor's name on them. They're prepaid. Simon Properties offers them at several malls in the US. They are the perfect anonymous payment.

    4. Re:Credit cards... by mandalayx · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm seventeen. I wouldn't mind paying for stuff if its good, but there's always one thing I run into that I can't do anything about. I'm underaged, so I can't get a credit card. Internet payments would be its only use, so getting one to the family wouldn't be meaningful either. And when I become a poor student, no bank in their right mind will want to give me one either. Nor am I sure I want to even get one, with the trail it leaves behind.

      Actually, it's really easy to get a VISA. You can get a checking account from Washington Mutual and have a card with VSIA on it for free. All of my transactions are free--it's beautiful. And I've had it since before I was 18.

      And you'd be surprised how EAGER CC companies are to get you a credit card in college. I guess the idea that parents will probably bail you out prevails in their head. Seriously, I walk to school and mastercard and visa are competing trying to give me freebies to sign up for their cards.

  28. Filters by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 2

    Why should I pay to stop spam when my filters have already caught all of it?

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  29. Pay what it's worth by CGP314 · · Score: 2, Informative

    What about the 'pay what you think it's worth' model. That's what I use on my London Blog. If people like my writing and want to help pay my school bills then they can drop a pound or two. This way everyone is happy, those who want free content can get it, and every once in a while I get some support from the people who enjoy my work the most.

    1. Re:Pay what it's worth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because 99.9999% of the content on the internet isn't worth paying for.

      On the other hand, I wish I could pay $50 to shut down each self-indulgent, long-winded "blog" operated by a man that expects to be paid for his "efforts."

    2. Re:Pay what it's worth by CGP314 · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the other hand, I wish I could pay $50 to shut down each self-indulgent, long-winded "blog" operated by a man that expects to be paid for his "efforts."

      But I don't expect to be paid... that's the whole point. I put up my blog because I like doing it, and if someone wants to give me some money for my efforts, then I'm happy to take it. : )

  30. Plain and Simple... by danielrm26 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is a culture of ignorance among regular users that dictates that anything that costs money on the Internet is some sort of scam, so they avoid most of them. Not only that, but many are still very nervous about moving money online.

    Among the geeks, however, many still think that actually *buying* things online makes you some sort of sellout. I have been made fun of before for buying shareware - since the person making fun of me had the same software but didn't have to pay $29.99 for it.

    Until both groups (standard users and geeks) come to accept that it is quite ok to spend money for something online, we are going to continue to see resistance to these sorts of services.

    -danielrm26

    --
    dmiessler.com -- grep understanding knowledge
    1. Re:Plain and Simple... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      If people are so reluctant to buy things online, then why is ebay so popular? And could you explain how every geek in the world uses pricewatch? You didn't get made fun of for buying something online, you got made fun of for paying for something you could have avoided.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Plain and Simple... by danielrm26 · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, I should have been more clear. When I say that people are reluctant to buy things online, what I mean is that they are reluctant to do so when they can get the same thing for free, or, at least they think the should be able to - eg. my shareware story.

      This brings me to my main point, which is that until this mentality is eliminated, services like BitPass will face major resistance.

      -danielrm26

      --
      dmiessler.com -- grep understanding knowledge
  31. Re:Next time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's up with the pumpkin bullshit. I want the normal picture back!

  32. Doesn't really take into account small sites... by thrill12 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Small sites usually do not control their own webservers and are hosted along with other sites.
    What BitPass is asking is to install a 'gateway' to allow their service to work. They claim the service will thus work in 30 minutes. In the majority of cases, with small sites, there will however be extra hassle because of the way BitPass has to be installed.
    It could even be impossible to install BitPass on cohosted sites, who knows ?

    Ofcourse it's still a beta, but they got to do better than that...

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Doesn't really take into account small sites... by maskatron · · Score: 1

      It's actually not that hard, although I'm sure some people will not be able to use this system. They offer PHP and Perl solutions. You do need a little technical skill, but I assume the next step will be for ISPs to offer it as a service.

      maskaton
      http://curvedspace.org

      --
      Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
    2. Re:Doesn't really take into account small sites... by SuperFrink · · Score: 1

      As someone who added BitPass to a site a couple weeks ago. I found it confusing at first because I didn't find any docs on how the system works or what the 'earner' configuration options were. I think (hope?) this is because the sytem is still 'beta' though. After sorting that out it was dead easy. (I installed the PHP gateway script.)

      If there ends up being a difficult part installing the PHP gateway I expect it would be keeping your content outside of your htdocs directory. Keep in mind there are concerns with mass hosting such as one user's PHP scripts reading another's content even if it is outside of the htdocs directory.

      As an aside I've written patches to linux and apache to prevent files being readable by other users to deal with just this issue.

  33. Agree, other people do it to... by thrill12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    whenever I go to a big shopping mall, I see people making music. They work according to the same model, even though they are not really earning much by it, and even though they use a hat-way instead of a BitPass way to get money. Some people are really interested in the music they make, and throw in some money.
    There are people who, however, rather would like that only the stores were there in the mall. These people call in the local mall-security or the law-enforcement people, who make sure they are thrown out.
    Now only the big stores are left. Why? Because they pay rent to be there.
    You are not paying rent, or can't pay rent of the little money you earn, so you have no right to be there.

    I hope that analogy will not have any place in the internet...

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
  34. Nice, but we want to buy from our homes... by thrill12 · · Score: 1

    I know Wallie, I see the posters when I walk across the street.
    Wallie makes it easy to purchase little things under 50 euro's, depending on which Wallie-card you buy.
    But you have to buy Wallie in a store. So it will be something like:
    "what a cool CD, I am going to get me that right now with wallie"
    "oops... my wallie only has 20 euro's, the cd costs 21 euro's"
    "oops... it's 10 pm... and its sunday... no more stores to buy new wallie"

    Wallie was born out of safety concerns, not out of ease-of-use. You would rather like to flip something out right away I think, a credit-card perhaps .... ?

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Nice, but we want to buy from our homes... by Handyman · · Score: 1

      It would be perfect if they would only supply you with a way to buy Wallie cards online using a credit card. That way, they incur a credit card fee once, but it's probably cheaper than selling them in stores because stores want a profit too! I'd certainly be interested in this if they would do it like this, because it saves me from having to give out my credit card number to everyone and his dog...

  35. yes but... by mantera · · Score: 1



    micropayment has to include the ISP providers too in some form or another; why pay extra for stuff on the internet when you're already paying for an ISP.

    i think it's in the hands of ISPs or someone to sort out a deal with them, so that people pay for the content they use through their ISP bill... that may entice people if there's a chance that the bill for some of them might be less than they already pay.

    However, a major problem with that might happen to be privacy. Your ISP will have a list of sites you've visited - well, they probably already do - and then the folks who use anonymous services such as proxies and etc.

  36. Money Tied Up With One Company by Belgand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I recall when eSheep posted the new installment of Apocamon there was some small fee to access it tied to BitPass. The problem was that the cost to access the material was rather small, about $0.25 (a bit large for something I'll only have limited, temporary access to, but that's not the point here) however the user was required to make a minimum purchase of a $3 "virtual cash-card" from BitPass just to be able to spend that $0.25. Rather than functioning like PayPal where any amount can be sent and pulled back to your bank account BitPass requires you to toss in a set amount. Can't find someplace else to spend you $2.75? Well, looks like you just paid $3.00 (The current going rate for a comic book with 22 pages of story) for an online comic you have no physical access to and will lose the ability to read after 666 times or 30 days, whichever comes first.

    The way that BitPass operates is thus the biggest problem here. As much as I chafe at having to purchase the latest installment (great, get me hooked on something free then wait forever to continue it and start charging) and the micropayments idea in general having my money locked up by one company is a problem. Even if there were multiple places accepting BitPass it would still be a bad idea unless they had a clear monopoly. Regardless of whether micropayments are good or bad, BitPass is a terrible implementation.

  37. Logic & Viability by LiquidFun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A short, but interesting read on the:

    Logic & Viability of Micropayments

    http://www.gammafrog.com/node/view/2

  38. Bitpass is cool, but I won't buy your blog. by Robotron2084 · · Score: 1

    I don't really have enough time to get into the whole 'micropayments suck' flamewars, but since I have BitPass content I figure I should say something.

    Will people pay with micropayments? The word 'micropayment' itself is so stupid, that I can't believe it really exists. People will inevitably buy stuff on the internet for less than a $1. Everyone will laugh that people even bothered arguing about 'micropayments'.

    Do I need statistics? Do I need statistics to notice that my atypical 12-year old sister uses the net more than watches TV? She's primed to buy off the net casually like its the corner shop. Just wait till she's old enough to get a credit card.

    The thing is, if I make Good content, and the customer pool is big enough(its not but its getting bigger) making a living as an independent artist is feasible. Arguing over HOW I get paid is a waste. And, unlike being an 'independent' animator selling my animations to a distributor, I really am independent. I'm not recieving a trickle-down perentage. I'm not making royalties off a distributor, Bitpass is getting a percentage off me.

    The big questions for me are "What are the benefits for early adoption?" and "What is BitPass' killer app?". Every month, from now on until I die, I'll profit off animations I've made. And so as I add my own non-free content to my site, when micropayments finally hit, my back catalogue should sell, and hopefully recoup being in the red. For me early adoption is critical to having enough sustainable content for when smaller payments become mainstream.

    Paypal had eBay, but BitPass needs something like iTunes, to increase the pool of content creators and customers. It's a typical network economy model, faxes need other faxes. Hopefully something like this should happen soon.

    So just shut up, sign up for BitPass and buy my stuff!!! :)

  39. Yes, but not all art is commoditzed yet! by melquiades · · Score: 1

    But if somebody is Offering the same or equivalent conent at same or acceptably same quality then people will not go to pay for service.

    The key phrase there is "the same or equivalent content" -- in other words, commoditized content.

    It is loosely true that a market tends to push the price of a commodity towards its marginal cost, which is nearly zero in the case of digital information. The trick is that not all art is a commodity. Some is, to be sure -- does the public really care which boy / boob band is cranking out the latest schlock?

    Not so with all art. The sorts of work I've seen (and paid for!) on BitPass so far have all been unique, idiosyncratic little works of art. Sure, I can also get online comics for free -- but they're different, and even if I've read one, I haven't read them all. Some are mediocre; some are good; a few are very good. All leave me looking for more. While there is some limit to the number I want to read, having read one doesn't stop me from wanting to read others.

    For art like this, which is not a commodity, it's entirely possible that people will be willing to pay for some even though they can get others free.

  40. micropayment ? we have this for years ! by jean-guy69 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    .. in france ..

    you may have heard about the minitel, some sort of videotext terminal that iss distributed for free.. its nominal speed is 1200/75 bits/s, but you now have faster ways to access it. anyway it was sufficient for its semi-graphic interface.

    the main use of the minitel was to connect to some "kiosk" and then type the name of the service you want to access. you don't have to subscribe, eventually you do not pay the services directly. you are billed by the operator (france telecom) according to the time you spent on the different service, and their respective rates (from free to something like 1.5 dollars per minute). the billing is made in the same invoice as the usual voice calls. the operator charges, collects the money, keeps some for himself, and give the remaining to the providers of the different services.

    a lot of companies made a lot of money with this, with different kind of services: chats (some very sex-oriented), games, value-added professionnal databases..

    minitel was launched in 1984, and it was very popular, years before most of us ever heard about internet:

    http://www.ust.hk/~webiway/content/France/history. html

    more than 6 million terminals were distributed as of 1994. more than a billion connections in 2002, not too bad for a 60 million ppl country and for a medium that is slowly fading away.

    if you are curious you can even try it using your internet connection:

    http://www.minitelfr.com/home/index.html

  41. Obligatory follow-up by melquiades · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That was a funny PA -- quite clever, if you've read Reinventing Comics. However, I think Gabe & Tycho made real asses out of themselves in the accompanying commentary. They responded to McCloud's optimistic (if starry-eyed) willingness to imagine a bright future for cartooning and put out creative new ideas by basically, as he put it, kicking him in the teeth.

    G&T are hilarious, but heavens, they do shoot their arrogant little mouths off sometimes. Micropayments may not work, and Scott McCloud may not be right about everything (or even anything), but (1) as a hard-working veteran artist who was drawing comics when the PA crew was in diapers, he deserved more respect than they gave him, (2) as a veteran embracing change, a creative mind trying to test out new, risky ideas, he deserved more respect than they gave him, and (3) as somebody who is -- hello! -- trying to figure how they can make a living from their craft, he deserved one heck of a lot more respect than they gave him.

    They ended up eating a bit of crow over that comic -- mostly because McCloud himself responded by being persistently civil to them until they realized what a couple of assholes they were. But they did realize, and came back with the kind of civility their satire ought to have carrier from the beginning. Tycho: "Reader response to Friday's thingy was profoundly, powerfully negative (Which Scott even apologized for - can you believe that?) ... Your responses were deft and had the weight of punishment, and I feel as though I have been taught a valuable lesson by a bloom of aluminum baseball bats. At the root of it, I misjudged the man. For his part, he says that he has not made himself as aware as he should of the way online comics are progressing - and the ways they are endeavoring to support themselves. ... My conversation with Scott was fascinating, and clarified many, many issues."

  42. success in micropayment by nsebban · · Score: 1

    Many people seem to be amazed when a micropayment firm successes in the USA. I'm in France, and here micropayment is a reality, with several firms offering this service to webmasters so they can sell their content.

    Most of theese French/European firms can process (overpriced) phonecalls and SMS/SMS+ payments, and some of them make a lot of money (see allopass.com for example). And of course, 99% of their money comes from p0rn-sites.

    --
    ____
    nico
    Nico-Live
  43. *yawn* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    yup I saw this on diesel sweeties. couldn't get it to work because of some browser/javascript issue. what crap.

    it would be so much easier just to use paypal. in fact when this takes off, paypal will eat them alive.

    but the real problem is it takes too long to make a payment. it needs to be *part of the browser* .. an indicator on the browser needs to light up and say "this site accepts BrowserPay" (or whatever) and when the site says "please make a donation, pretty please" you think "yeah, I like this stuff" and you click the button, blam, it makes a (refundable) debit from your account and you're *done*. No need to authenticate in all the different sites and go through the hoops.

    of course, the only way this will happen is if somebody has the balls and the marketshare to do it. I guess microsoft has to do it, and we know how much fun it is when microsoft does this stuff (privacy issues anyone?).

    but basically stuff like bitpass is just for a small group of people who really want micropayments to work. outside of that group, good luck.

    I believe the "public radio" model will work wonderfully for a lot of web sites...... but I'm not going to spend 5 minutes trying to get the site to load just to spend $0.10, and then do it all over again because the other sites use different systems.

  44. Cost of delivery by cherokee158 · · Score: 1

    I've been exploring various options for delivering a short movie on the web in a pay-per-view format, and have found that the costs for bandwidth consumed make it unlikely that I can make it economically viable. It is cheaper for me to deliver it by mail on a DVD than to offer it for download.

    So much for micropayments being a leg up for the little guy...

    1. Re:Cost of delivery by Dan+Crash · · Score: 1

      It is cheaper for me to deliver it by mail on a DVD than to offer it for download.

      How do you figure?

      Bandwidth is around $2 a gig, at least it is with my web host. Your movie is presumably less than a gig. You said it's a short movie, but let's be charitable and call it 500 megs. 500 megs should set you back about $1.

      So why not charge $1.50 for the video online and make 50 cents each time someone downloads it? If it's good, charge a little more, like these guys are doing.

      Just wondering how you decided that you couldn't make a profit by distributing online, considering some people already are.

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    2. Re:Cost of delivery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because if 20 people are trying to stream that all at one time he will need a fatter pipe. Even if you are using a 3rd party hosting service, if you are using a T1's worth of bandwidth you will be charded closer to a T1 price. ~$800 per month is a big jump for a 'little guy'

    3. Re:Cost of delivery by Dan+Crash · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about streaming? Streaming is wasteful and pointless for anything but live video. Even with a cut in download speed, your customers are still going to get the video way faster than USPS, and it's still going to be cheaper for you, too.

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
  45. Rebutting Shirky by danharan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I too was convinced after reading Shirky's essay. Then I read Scott McCloud's rebuttal, and I have to say it is quite convincing.

    --
    Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
    1. Re:Rebutting Shirky by gilgongo · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Seems inneresting. We'll know who's right if/when BitPass folds!

      Given the current investment climate, I think we'll know either way in about 2 years time.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
  46. Re:YOUR REPORTO CARD IS DOWN, NIGGA! by ahaning · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yay Tokyo Breakfast!

    --
    Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
  47. My BitPass experience to date by TragicLad · · Score: 1

    I've posted about my experiences as a BitPass enabled site in a number of places.

    One of the unexpected places that BitPass has been a boon to my site has been in terms of donations. I've had several dozen donations ranging from a penny to several dollars. But what is really nice is that nowadays when I recieve a donation, it's an honest to gosh tip and not some begged for handout.

    I've made a little money from Google ads, and have had the odd PayPal donation - but let me tell you, none of it is anywhere near as satisfying as when someone hands me a shiny new nickle for the letter 'O' or one of my other short comics.

    In the three months or so that I've been on BitPass I've made enough to cover two month's hosting and a cup of coffee. Not very much, I'll admit, but for a little promoted site with daily traffic of maybe a dozen or so - it's certainly better than I could have hoped for otherwise.

    --
    --- No Boom? No Boom today. Boom tomorrow, there's always a boom tomorrow.
  48. Your Remarks Worth 10 cents !! by pg--az · · Score: 0

    If there were some way to attach an Amazon Honor System thing to your post, I think I might honestly plunk 10 cents in for this cool info - I never heard of that refund disclosure law before ! Specifically, if your post stopped after the "B&P code 17538" and said "10 cents for remainder of article", I *DEFINITELY* would have plunked 10 cents. Call me super-visionary, but that's a good business model I think. Half of an article, 10 cents for the remaining half. Hmm ?

    1. Re:Your Remarks Worth 10 cents !! by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      That SOUNDS like a good idea.... but I see it as leading to a lopsided article. Sort of like what the nightly television news programs do: "Something happened today that affects you and your family. Find out what it is tonight at 10."

      Then it turns out to be a story about an increase in property tax for homeless people.

  49. Not even attempting to be competative by KalvinB · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Paypal is 2.2% + $0.30 USD to 2.9% + $0.30 USD. The higher rate is for foreign transactions.

    Unless you have a personal account in which case it's free (but you can't take credit card payments). The only way BitPass beats PayPal is under $2.35 for a transaction. For a $5 transaction I pay about 41 cents to PayPal where I'd be charged 75 cents for BitPass.

    I don't like micropayments and although I could save all of 19 cents in fees per $1 account, there's no way I'm going to use two on-line payment companies for my site. Especially since the next tier of my subscription is $4 in which case PayPal is cheaper. I charge for a time period of unlimited access. Not per file or other such garbage that people are attempting to do micropayments for.

    I'm with Penny-Arcade on this one. If what you're selling isn't worth paying at least a dollar for, then don't sell it.

    I'm not going to pay you a quarter to read your comic but if it's good I might pay you $5 to get access to all the old comics for a year.

    A quarter is an annoyance. Five bucks is a real amount of money which people will pay for quality merchandise.

    Ben

  50. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    whether this works or not depends on how many people use it. Time will tell if it suceeds or fails.

    Wow!

    See, I was first figuring, if nobody uses it, then it would be a success. But then I thought, no, wait, instead, if everybody uses it, then it would be failure. But that didn't sound right. So I was stumped until you pointed out that whether it works depends on how many people use it.

    Thanks!
  51. Eliminate spam. by bradipo · · Score: 1

    If I could charge $.01 per spam that I receive and everyone else were to do the same, we could effectively shut down spammers (or at least benefit from receiving spam).

  52. ot: BitPass has a nice site (for once!) by emars · · Score: 1

    somethis is amiss. no snazzy flash? no in your face dhtml? gee... a site I can actually navigate. good work BitPass.

    now back to your regularly scheduled program...

    --
    ...18...19...20 Submit
  53. BitPass works by Brian+Flemming · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been using BitPass to sell a number of things:

    1. My feature film, "Nothing So Strange."
    2. Open-source clips from that film.
    3. Songs from "Bat Boy: The Musical."
    4. My play, "Fair & Balanced."

    With regard to some questions and comments here about BitPass:

    --Ease of use. I didn't install the gateway, but I do most of the listing and configuring the pages to work with BitPass myself. I'm not much of a techie at all (which is why my hands are trembling slightly as I post on Slashdot) and I found the process easy from the start. The previous poster is right that the gateway installation complexity puts BitPass selling out of the hands of those who can't control what their host does, but I know that BitPass has specific plans to make becoming a BitPass seller much easier.

    --Refunds. Getting a refund is actually quite easy. In the first days, some people had trouble downloading "Nothing So Strange." All they had to do was register a complaint at BitPass.com, then we read their note and either solved the problem or issued a refund. Often, this whole process was completed within minutes. (And we've fixed the majority of downloading problems now.)

    --Are people willing to pay? God, yes. We've been dying to make "Nothing So Strange" (a faux documentary about the assassination of Bill Gates) available to all of the people who write in and ask how they can see it. So far, it has only been at festivals, so if you didn't live where it played a festival it was impossible to see. The demand we knew was there did translate into sales. Now, with any luck, we can use the proceeds from the online venture to finance a DVD run and make it available that way, too. Additionally, the most popular "Bat Boy" song download is the one recording that is available nowhere else--an early version of a song that is currently on the album in stores. To "Bat Boy" fanatics, an exclusive like this is pretty special. I agree with the poster who said that people won't pay for stuff they can get for free elsewhere on the Web. The trick is to have stuff that isn't anywhere else. Nothing I've put up on the Web with BitPass is something I would have put up for free--the bandwidth costs alone would have made that impossible.

    --PayPal competition. As far as I know, PayPal doesn't offer secure access to online content. That's the key advantage of BitPass.

    --High buy-in. It's true that to buy something for 25 cents you need to spend at least $3 if you are not currently holding a BitPass card, and that is a disadvantage. But as more and more content gets up on the Web using BitPass, I think this will be less of an issue. And the items that are already priced at $3 or $5 (like, oh, say, my play or "Nothing So Strange") will help put a BitPass card in people's hands without their risking anything.

    --BitPass fees. To paraphrase another poster, you can see it as a 15% fee or an 85% royalty. I have no problems with their terms. For what they do, it's worth it.

  54. The question then is... by hansg · · Score: 1

    >And to me, viewing ads *is* paying. In a currency I don't want to spend.

    If viewing ads is spending a currency you don't want to spend, why are you not a subscriber?

    /Hans

    --
    I don't have one
    1. Re:The question then is... by Muggins+the+Mad · · Score: 1

      > If viewing ads is spending a currency you don't want to spend, why are you not a subscriber?

      I am in other places, but slashdot quality is much too sporadic. I'd much rather have micropayments and pay when there's something interesting to read.

      - Colin

  55. -1: Spam. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Buy an add....

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  56. Why should I sign? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    If I can get the same (or good enough equivalents) for free?

    You did not read Shirky's article or did not get the gist of it.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Why should I sign? by maskatron · · Score: 1

      Don't sign up if there's nothing compelling for you, or if you can get "good enough equivalents". That's your call.

      --
      Have you seen Ironstayn vs Supergovernment yet?
  57. Then come 100 people that do the same for free. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    One or two are as good as you are (asuming you are any good to begin with) and then you realize that you have put an artificial barrier of entry for people to have access to your work.

    What is going to work IMHO is to cultivate the loyalty of a small close circle of followers that will be convinced to help once in a while to donate (not pay, donate) in order to allow you to continue providing free content for free.

    Say you are charging and you'll be doomed.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Then come 100 people that do the same for free. by Greg+W. · · Score: 1

      What is going to work IMHO is to cultivate the loyalty of a small close circle of followers that will be convinced to help once in a while to donate (not pay, donate)

      Like Geek Culture is doing.

    2. Re:Then come 100 people that do the same for free. by Robotron2084 · · Score: 1

      Granted, it's a barrier, in the same sense that a cash register is a barrier. But if you've used Bitpass, you'll see that once you've set up an account, the artificial barrier is the one in your head. As people figure this out, just like they did with Amazon and eBay, people will use it.

      Who's going to make Matrix grade movies for free? Who's going to draw an X-Men Unlimited comic series for free? If 100 people look at a 10MB animation on my site, that's a gig of bandwidth. Who's going to be able to give that away for free?

      Sure, a 100 other people might come along and blog better for free, but beyond text the ability to create quality work for free becomes phenomenally more expensive.

      Even if you were to cultivate a loyal throng of patrons, there's no way they can financially support larger scale quality work. Besides the hard part of finding such loyal super-nice people, you'd have to keep them interested while you are working. Say you are working on a short work that spans 2-3 months. How are you supposed to hold interest and keep people donating?

      Additionally, you are quickly digging yourself into a hole because you are essentially being paid for your time instead of your work and operational costs. Say you release a short comic a month, for free, relying on your close circle. Each comic you create increases traffic to your site, but the amount of money you recieve isn't necessarily proportional to the amount of money you are making. And so the more work you make, the higher your costs become.

      People donate sitewide. The kind and generous people who do donate(did i mention these people are earthbound angels, too?), will generally pay you for all your work, not individual work. It's a perceptional thing. So if you suddenly do an Oscar-winning short film, and your site's back catalogue is suddenly getting a million hits a day, you aren't going to see enough donations to cover costs.

  58. "king of thinkers"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Clay Shirky, the undisputed king of thinkers about the Internet
    He seems much better at repackaging other people's thoughts and presenting them as his own than coming up with them himself.
  59. Abstract vs Half-of-Article by pg--az · · Score: 0

    Indeed the issue of reputation never goes away. For an organization with excellent reputation such as Arizona's 12-news, if they give a brief abstract I *DO* indeed trust that I'll get something like that at 10, and they rarely dissapoint me. It is perhaps even more feasible for an organization or website to police against lopsided articles, than for example medical organizations must today verify that articles live up to their abstracts, or people would stop clicking to pay huge bucks for the full text. Why "more feasible", because I think the definition of "lopsided" is more unambiguous than the definition of "abstract matches article". For example if slashdot allowed people to collect bitpass-bucks in this way, the reader could give a "bad karma" point for lopsided articles. The number of "bad karma" points for each article could simply be posted WITH THE FIRST HALF, a-la-Amazon "3 of 20 buyers found this article lopsided". Thanks for your feedback, I had not actually thought it through that far, but the instantaneous review sounds good, no ? Amazon basically has me as customer-for-life, because indeed I have been saved from wasting bucks by negative reviews, which Amazon seems to not censor, that's a nice reputation-issue because naively you'd think they are simply interested in maxing short-term sales, but no, they leave the quality-negative-reviews prominently up there, rah !

  60. I've worked with BitPass by ibanix · · Score: 1

    I've setup Bitpass for a client of mine, and we're working with it on a trial basis. We're lucky to have total control over our leased server -- I had to install PHP for the BitPass gateway. We also had a mod_perl option, but the bitpass guys suggested it was a harder route.

    I have some beef with how you have to set it up as an admin. In short, you have to generate a gateway file from their site and install it; then you have to register every bit of "content" (pdf, jpg, page, whatever) seperately via their site. If you change payment or content options, you need to go through the registration process all over again. I also had a number of relative path vs absolute path issues installing the gateway. The instructions didn't make clear where once was supposed to be used -- and the gateway uses BOTH relative paths and absolute paths in different places.

    On the other hand, BitPass worked with my client to make sure he got the most out of the service, suggesting price changes, examing weblogs for service patterns, drafting help pages for end-users.

    I'm not sold on the idea, but it may yet work. Can't fault these fellows for using PHP, either.

    --
    What came before the Big Bang? Hum, it must have outside of time...
  61. Microbilling first... by skyhawk0 · · Score: 1

    No one will pull out their credit card to put a quarter on a third-party account to pay for anything. People aren't likely to pre-pay, either.

    Micropayments won't happen until (slowly) a model is developped where ISPs act like phone companies and bill you for the extras. One pop-up (Pay quarter?) will work, account info and logins won't.

    And this is coming from a Canadian, and we use our bank cards to buy gum!