Good luck sending a video over email. Both the sender's message submission agent and the receiver's mailbox have to support the attachment size, and I don't see that as likely for all common combinations of sender and recipient.
That said, you could get a VPS and install GNU MediaGoblin as an alternative to YouTube. One drawback is MediaGoblin's lack of compatibility with iPhone and iPad clients, as to my knowledge, iOS supports no royalty-free video codecs. Even once AV1 is final, I don't see it coming to older devices.
I don't see how it's practical. Even if you're not a Facebook member, Facebook knows a lot about you from your IRL friends who have you in their phone contacts or tag you in photos and from logging the click stream from sites you visit that have Facebook's like button. These form what the media has referred to as a "shadow profile". And even if you use a DNS blocklist (hi APK!) to interfere with Facebook gathering your click stream, it's hard to control what members share about you.
If a forum cannot get enough paying members, why is that my problem to solve?
It's your problem to solve if you happen to be a member of such a forum that can no longer pay its bills.
Once again, I don't care. If *YOU* care about watching videos on the internet, maybe you go and put your money into the pot for those sites you care about. The topics I care about can survive with minimal donations.
I wouldn't be so sure that affordable high-speed home Internet access can keep its economies of scale if the only topics that the Internet covers are those that "can survive with minimal donations". What's the size limit for photo attachments on forums that discuss the topics you care about? Because if people decide to cut back to dial-up in response to withdrawal of advertising-supported works, then your (presumably fiber or cable) Internet provider may not consider it profitable to continue providing (presumably fiber or cable) Internet service to your home, and the "56K warning" that used to be common on forums is likely to return.
Swipe once a year and donate $12.30 instead of $12.
Then the question becomes how to convince new members of a forum to donate $12.30 in exchange for 365 days of privilege to post to the forum.
will let you have *ONE* fulltime staff, and that person should ideally be ensuring that everything continues running.
Second, with bills like SESTA/FOSTA eroding safe harbors for site operators, I doubt that one staff member could handle even the legal compliance requirements for moderating a site with three million users.
Not a problem, host the damn thing abroad, have the single full-time staff in a third country.
That works until said third country enacts its own counterpart to SESTA/FOSTA, or until money laundering and terrorism funding laws catch up with this business model design pattern.
Once Google Search and Bing have shut down due to the loss of ad revenue, through what means shall users find the writings of said "experts" who "have chimed in on some forum somewhere already"?
You don't need a Google or Bing to spider effectively.
Then what do we need? I'd be interested to read your architecture for spidering every forum in existence on the shoestring budget of a hobbyist.
Let's say you have 4 times as many users on Android tablets as on iPad, but the average iOS user actually spent nine times as much on "bookings" (paid apps and IAPs) as the average Android user in 2015. This would mean your iOS revenue is likely to be double your Android revenue, which to some developers justifies making an app iOS-exclusive in order not to have to spend time=money working around deficiencies in the multi-platform middleware.
And I was under the impression that since the upgrade from Swift Playgrounds 1.0 to Swift Playgrounds 2.0, one could develop applications and test them on the iPad. From Apple's page about the product:
Swift Playgrounds also gives you access to iOS frameworks such as UIKit, SpriteKit, SceneKit, Bluetooth, and Metal. And because you are coding and running your playgrounds on iPad, your code can respond to touch gestures or interact with hardware such as the accelerometer and gyroscope. [...] With access to thousands of APIs in the iOS SDK, you can create amazing playgrounds that explore the web, generate 3D worlds, experiment with physics, and much more.
Then once you think your application is worthwhile enough to sell $5,000 on the App Store, either A. hire someone with a Mac to prepare your app for publication or B. take out a loan to buy a Mac and a subscription to Apple Developer Program and publish it yourself.
Disclosure: This is secondhand knowledge. I do not own an iPad nor a sufficiently recent Mac, and my specialization is on another platform.
Hosting a website with almost all text-based content like/. is possible on the $5/m droplet from digital ocean.
Then what would you recommend for someone whose works aren't "text-based"? Or would you instead encourage freelance photograhers, illustrators, and animators to give up their trade and instead retrain to become writers?
If a site's owner cannot afford $5/m, then maybe they shouldn't host the site.
Then who, other than the site's owner, would host the site? I don't see each of the billion-plus Facebook members joining the IndieWeb movement and subscribing to a $15 per year domain and $60 per year VPS just to run his own website. Where would a minor even come by that sort of money, especially if other kids have already swallowed up all the lawn mowing jobs in the neighborhood?
the best quality content is user generated content not full-time writer content.
The prevalence of major platforms built for wide distribution of user-generated content, such as Facebook and Twitter, has led to the use of said platforms for disinformation campaigns, such as the "fake news" battles during the 2016 U.S. election season. In a scenario dominated by user-generated content, who pays for the fact checking?
Besides, nowadays, "user-generated content" often includes video for all screen sizes and viewer processing capabilities. When the user who generated the content uploads a high-definition video, who pays to "selectively spin up more VMs" to transcode it to lower bitrates for users of small battery-powered computers or slow or metered Internet connections? Vidme shut down because it could no longer afford to serve the load.
If you have more than a few million registered users, a 1% donation-rate of $1 per month
Of which the credit card network would pocket 0.30 USD per swipe. The Bitcoin miners would pocket even more, as average transaction fees surpassed the equivalent of 55 USD in December of last year, though for the past month, they have stayed between 1 and 3 USD. Who pays for the research and development of a practical micropayment network?
will let you have *ONE* fulltime staff, and that person should ideally be ensuring that everything continues running.
First, how many of these registered users are active, as opposed to users who haven't posted in months? Second, with bills like SESTA/FOSTA eroding safe harbors for site operators, I doubt that one staff member could handle even the legal compliance requirements for moderating a site with three million users.
How to do $FOO? Yeah, experts have chimed in on some forum somewhere already.
Once Google Search and Bing have shut down due to the loss of ad revenue, through what means shall users find the writings of said "experts" who "have chimed in on some forum somewhere already"?
What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read? [...] B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money
B. This was the internet before 1999
Except "the internet before 1999" was 0.05 Mbps dial-up, or sub-Mbps DSL if you were rich enough to move to one of the cities where the local incumbent phone company chose to test-market it. Even if you would be willing to go back to dial-up, what fraction of other Internet users would? And even though modern high-speed home Internet access is available right now, how long do you think demand therefor would continue without the availability of commercial websites?
You can develop real Android apps on an Android tablet using AIDE. If iOS as a host or target is an important feature to you, what features are you missing in Swift Playgrounds?
That checkbox is offered only to users near maximum karma. Stack Overflow has a similar model of presenting fewer ads once a user reaches a particular reputation level. But what would you do between signup and reaching the karma threshold?
What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button
I wouldn't mind A since that would mean we're going to be treated as customers instead of as products and search engines/browser extensions would adapt to it
How many pages on The Wall Street Journal can I read with a subscription to The New York Times? Zero.
Let's assume that over the course of a month, you read two articles on each of 20 different pay sites, each of which demands (say) $5 for a 30-day subscription or $5 for 150 page views. How many people would be willing to pay $100 per month only for most of the subscription to go to waste?
Exactly. Such an ad will pause on the first frame and cover up the page until the user clicks to start the ad playing and waits for the ad to finish playing. This is a prestitial, and Chrome would likely automatically block it because countdown prestitials before a non-video payload violate the Better Ads Standards, but a publisher* can deploy anti-adblock to send more people to the back button.
And, last but not least, they shouldn't track you.
In order for an ad not to track the viewer across websites, it would have to be hosted by the publisher, as opposed to going through an ad network or ad exchange. Sites that have adopted this more print-like model include Daring Fireball and Read the Docs. But for sites with less reach or less homogeneous readership than those two, how is a publisher supposed to find willing advertisers without having to hire an in-house ad sales team?
* In adtech jargon, a "publisher" is the operator of a website that carries advertisements.
I set media.autoplay.enabled in my copy of Firefox ESR 52 (default browser on Debian 9) to false, but this horse was still animated. What did I do wrong?
Good luck finding a way to "provide users with a way to block video auto-play that doesn't break websites", especially if it's muted. Site operators will fall back to less efficient methods to display video, which include a canvas displaying video decoded in JavaScript, animated GIF, or even a pure CSS motion JPEG player.
Let's say the web were to lose all advertisements tomorrow. What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money C. Some other option, which you plan to explain
I'd appreciate it if people replying "Whoosh!" gave more details on what exactly I missed. If GNU/Linux can't run needed apps nor run on laptops in major showroom chains, GNU/Linux won't displace Windows. Likewise, if Gab can't stream to iOS devices, Gab won't displace YouTube.
Why were people upset with Microsoft's shenanigans, when Linux was always an option?
Because not everybody is in a position to purchase Linux-compatible hardware to replace Windows-compatible, Linux-incompatible hardware, nor to evaluate and purchase licenses for Linux-compatible proprietary applications to replace Windows-exclusive, Wine-incompatible applications that have no free replacement. In your analogy, it's as if only YouTube could stream in the format that a major browser requires.
It's a vicious cycle. With early adopters adopting cell phones, fewer pay phones remain in operation. This decline in pay phone availability causes a cell phone to become even more of a necessity for those who need to occasionally make an urgent call* and would previously carry change to deposit in the nearest pay phone. This leads even those who lag behind in adoption of new recurring services to get a cell phone.
But some people are claiming that a cell phone is still a luxury, even one on a prepaid plan for $5 per month or less. And I can't really tell whether all of them are sarcastic or not. damn_registrars thought cell phones were still a luxury in 2015 just as they had been before they were invented. This AC would turn down jobs in order not to have to give out a cell phone number. ncc74656 thinks planning a whole day in advance built discipline in people before easy access to phones was common. Others, such as this AC and Zero__Kelvin, appear to claim that there exists enough "herd immunity" of cellular subscription among the population that in an urgent situation, one should expect to be able to bum a call off someone else.
if you're going to use my work in a commercial product, I fully expect to be paid.
Consider a case in which your work will be distributed as free software and/or free cultural works. By these definitions, downstream reusers of free software and free cultural works have the right to distribute copies for a fee. From what initial source of revenue should your payment come?
Slashdot Mirror
Let me rephrase it to reduce the chance of sarcastic pedantry:
What is a good alternative to each point of functionality that Facebook provides without the use of Facebook?
Good luck sending a video over email. Both the sender's message submission agent and the receiver's mailbox have to support the attachment size, and I don't see that as likely for all common combinations of sender and recipient.
Polygon reports that Pornhub is considering expanding its safe-for-work section for videos with grown-up themes that aren't erotic, such as demonstrations of firearm operation or maintenance.
That said, you could get a VPS and install GNU MediaGoblin as an alternative to YouTube. One drawback is MediaGoblin's lack of compatibility with iPhone and iPad clients, as to my knowledge, iOS supports no royalty-free video codecs. Even once AV1 is final, I don't see it coming to older devices.
I don't see how it's practical. Even if you're not a Facebook member, Facebook knows a lot about you from your IRL friends who have you in their phone contacts or tag you in photos and from logging the click stream from sites you visit that have Facebook's like button. These form what the media has referred to as a "shadow profile". And even if you use a DNS blocklist (hi APK!) to interfere with Facebook gathering your click stream, it's hard to control what members share about you.
If a forum cannot get enough paying members, why is that my problem to solve?
It's your problem to solve if you happen to be a member of such a forum that can no longer pay its bills.
Once again, I don't care. If *YOU* care about watching videos on the internet, maybe you go and put your money into the pot for those sites you care about. The topics I care about can survive with minimal donations.
I wouldn't be so sure that affordable high-speed home Internet access can keep its economies of scale if the only topics that the Internet covers are those that "can survive with minimal donations". What's the size limit for photo attachments on forums that discuss the topics you care about? Because if people decide to cut back to dial-up in response to withdrawal of advertising-supported works, then your (presumably fiber or cable) Internet provider may not consider it profitable to continue providing (presumably fiber or cable) Internet service to your home, and the "56K warning" that used to be common on forums is likely to return.
Swipe once a year and donate $12.30 instead of $12.
Then the question becomes how to convince new members of a forum to donate $12.30 in exchange for 365 days of privilege to post to the forum.
will let you have *ONE* fulltime staff, and that person should ideally be ensuring that everything continues running.
Second, with bills like SESTA/FOSTA eroding safe harbors for site operators, I doubt that one staff member could handle even the legal compliance requirements for moderating a site with three million users.
Not a problem, host the damn thing abroad, have the single full-time staff in a third country.
That works until said third country enacts its own counterpart to SESTA/FOSTA, or until money laundering and terrorism funding laws catch up with this business model design pattern.
Once Google Search and Bing have shut down due to the loss of ad revenue, through what means shall users find the writings of said "experts" who "have chimed in on some forum somewhere already"?
You don't need a Google or Bing to spider effectively.
Then what do we need? I'd be interested to read your architecture for spidering every forum in existence on the shoestring budget of a hobbyist.
Or what am I missing?
Let's say you have 4 times as many users on Android tablets as on iPad, but the average iOS user actually spent nine times as much on "bookings" (paid apps and IAPs) as the average Android user in 2015. This would mean your iOS revenue is likely to be double your Android revenue, which to some developers justifies making an app iOS-exclusive in order not to have to spend time=money working around deficiencies in the multi-platform middleware.
And I was under the impression that since the upgrade from Swift Playgrounds 1.0 to Swift Playgrounds 2.0, one could develop applications and test them on the iPad. From Apple's page about the product:
Then once you think your application is worthwhile enough to sell $5,000 on the App Store, either A. hire someone with a Mac to prepare your app for publication or B. take out a loan to buy a Mac and a subscription to Apple Developer Program and publish it yourself.
Disclosure: This is secondhand knowledge. I do not own an iPad nor a sufficiently recent Mac, and my specialization is on another platform.
Hosting a website with almost all text-based content like /. is possible on the $5/m droplet from digital ocean.
Then what would you recommend for someone whose works aren't "text-based"? Or would you instead encourage freelance photograhers, illustrators, and animators to give up their trade and instead retrain to become writers?
If a site's owner cannot afford $5/m, then maybe they shouldn't host the site.
Then who, other than the site's owner, would host the site? I don't see each of the billion-plus Facebook members joining the IndieWeb movement and subscribing to a $15 per year domain and $60 per year VPS just to run his own website. Where would a minor even come by that sort of money, especially if other kids have already swallowed up all the lawn mowing jobs in the neighborhood?
the best quality content is user generated content not full-time writer content.
The prevalence of major platforms built for wide distribution of user-generated content, such as Facebook and Twitter, has led to the use of said platforms for disinformation campaigns, such as the "fake news" battles during the 2016 U.S. election season. In a scenario dominated by user-generated content, who pays for the fact checking?
Besides, nowadays, "user-generated content" often includes video for all screen sizes and viewer processing capabilities. When the user who generated the content uploads a high-definition video, who pays to "selectively spin up more VMs" to transcode it to lower bitrates for users of small battery-powered computers or slow or metered Internet connections? Vidme shut down because it could no longer afford to serve the load.
If you have more than a few million registered users, a 1% donation-rate of $1 per month
Of which the credit card network would pocket 0.30 USD per swipe. The Bitcoin miners would pocket even more, as average transaction fees surpassed the equivalent of 55 USD in December of last year, though for the past month, they have stayed between 1 and 3 USD. Who pays for the research and development of a practical micropayment network?
will let you have *ONE* fulltime staff, and that person should ideally be ensuring that everything continues running.
First, how many of these registered users are active, as opposed to users who haven't posted in months? Second, with bills like SESTA/FOSTA eroding safe harbors for site operators, I doubt that one staff member could handle even the legal compliance requirements for moderating a site with three million users.
How to do $FOO? Yeah, experts have chimed in on some forum somewhere already.
Once Google Search and Bing have shut down due to the loss of ad revenue, through what means shall users find the writings of said "experts" who "have chimed in on some forum somewhere already"?
What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
[...]
B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money
B. This was the internet before 1999
Except "the internet before 1999" was 0.05 Mbps dial-up, or sub-Mbps DSL if you were rich enough to move to one of the cities where the local incumbent phone company chose to test-market it. Even if you would be willing to go back to dial-up, what fraction of other Internet users would? And even though modern high-speed home Internet access is available right now, how long do you think demand therefor would continue without the availability of commercial websites?
You can develop real Android apps on an Android tablet using AIDE. If iOS as a host or target is an important feature to you, what features are you missing in Swift Playgrounds?
That checkbox is offered only to users near maximum karma. Stack Overflow has a similar model of presenting fewer ads once a user reaches a particular reputation level. But what would you do between signup and reaching the karma threshold?
What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button
I wouldn't mind A since that would mean we're going to be treated as customers instead of as products and search engines/browser extensions would adapt to it
How many pages on The Wall Street Journal can I read with a subscription to The New York Times? Zero.
Let's assume that over the course of a month, you read two articles on each of 20 different pay sites, each of which demands (say) $5 for a 30-day subscription or $5 for 150 page views. How many people would be willing to pay $100 per month only for most of the subscription to go to waste?
They shouldn't auto-play if they're video based.
Exactly. Such an ad will pause on the first frame and cover up the page until the user clicks to start the ad playing and waits for the ad to finish playing. This is a prestitial, and Chrome would likely automatically block it because countdown prestitials before a non-video payload violate the Better Ads Standards, but a publisher* can deploy anti-adblock to send more people to the back button.
And, last but not least, they shouldn't track you.
In order for an ad not to track the viewer across websites, it would have to be hosted by the publisher, as opposed to going through an ad network or ad exchange. Sites that have adopted this more print-like model include Daring Fireball and Read the Docs. But for sites with less reach or less homogeneous readership than those two, how is a publisher supposed to find willing advertisers without having to hire an in-house ad sales team?
* In adtech jargon, a "publisher" is the operator of a website that carries advertisements.
They already make shady money off of profiling people through all sorts of tracking methods.
They can just use that
What use is there for such profiles if they cannot be used to improve specificity of an advertisement campaign?
I set media.autoplay.enabled in my copy of Firefox ESR 52 (default browser on Debian 9) to false, but this horse was still animated. What did I do wrong?
Good luck finding a way to "provide users with a way to block video auto-play that doesn't break websites", especially if it's muted. Site operators will fall back to less efficient methods to display video, which include a canvas displaying video decoded in JavaScript, animated GIF, or even a pure CSS motion JPEG player.
Let's say the web were to lose all advertisements tomorrow. What replacement for the lost revenue would you prefer as a way to cover the cost of writing and hosting the articles that you read?
A. Paywalls on most websites, causing your web searches to result in a lot more clicks on the back button
B. Shutting down commercial websites in favor of those run on hobbyists' pocket money
C. Some other option, which you plan to explain
I'd appreciate it if people replying "Whoosh!" gave more details on what exactly I missed. If GNU/Linux can't run needed apps nor run on laptops in major showroom chains, GNU/Linux won't displace Windows. Likewise, if Gab can't stream to iOS devices, Gab won't displace YouTube.
Why were people upset with Microsoft's shenanigans, when Linux was always an option?
Because not everybody is in a position to purchase Linux-compatible hardware to replace Windows-compatible, Linux-incompatible hardware, nor to evaluate and purchase licenses for Linux-compatible proprietary applications to replace Windows-exclusive, Wine-incompatible applications that have no free replacement. In your analogy, it's as if only YouTube could stream in the format that a major browser requires.
As I understand it, it's Dell's responsibility to triage problems reported by Dell customers and aggregate them for escalation to Microsoft.
Because that's what Microsoft expects of its OEM licensees.
Turned my 8 month old 900 dollar dell laptop into a piece of junk.
What was Dell's reply when you sought warranty service?
It's a vicious cycle. With early adopters adopting cell phones, fewer pay phones remain in operation. This decline in pay phone availability causes a cell phone to become even more of a necessity for those who need to occasionally make an urgent call* and would previously carry change to deposit in the nearest pay phone. This leads even those who lag behind in adoption of new recurring services to get a cell phone.
But some people are claiming that a cell phone is still a luxury, even one on a prepaid plan for $5 per month or less. And I can't really tell whether all of them are sarcastic or not. damn_registrars thought cell phones were still a luxury in 2015 just as they had been before they were invented. This AC would turn down jobs in order not to have to give out a cell phone number. ncc74656 thinks planning a whole day in advance built discipline in people before easy access to phones was common. Others, such as this AC and Zero__Kelvin, appear to claim that there exists enough "herd immunity" of cellular subscription among the population that in an urgent situation, one should expect to be able to bum a call off someone else.
Who's right?
* "Urgent" is more general than "emergency".
if you're going to use my work in a commercial product, I fully expect to be paid.
Consider a case in which your work will be distributed as free software and/or free cultural works. By these definitions, downstream reusers of free software and free cultural works have the right to distribute copies for a fee. From what initial source of revenue should your payment come?
Both the wired.com and emeraldinsight.com articles are paywalled.