[tehlike]

Feel free to pay money, I applaud that. For the content you benefit from, if you are willing to pay, that's amazing. I do pay for content too (i have yt premium, netflix, blutv etc). But not everyone wants to pay for the content. You certainly wouldn't pay for a game you play for two weeks and get bored. How do you think a mobile game on a device would get the word of mouth they do without initial monetization etc?

How do you think you'd get to know your neighborhood burger joint without some form of advertising (either word of mouth, or through real paid advertising). how would you know the burger joint somewhere else?

Short of a micropayment solution that pays out proportional to the value you get (flattr? maybe), ads is the only viable option. But that only solves the content creator pov. It doesn't help the advertiser - the business that need your money to survive.

[rland]

The burger joint did absolutely fine before ads and the internet. That's kind of my point. Nobody is inventing a micropayment solution because doing ads pays. (Like, maybe we can put our efforts towards updating payments to the 21st century instead of just outsourcing everything to VISA and paying their 30c tithe...? Maybe we can have some kind of publicly funded digital cash thing?)

What I'm getting at is that some things are better for giant tech companies and corporations and worse for regular people and some things are better for regular people but worse for giant corporations and tech companies.

I'm not even saying that I hate that this is the case, I understand our reality. The lack of creativity, the lack of imagination on this from anyone at all, but especially our best and brightest -- that is the worst part about all of this.

The absolute depth of monoculture on these issues is "oh for sure, it's messed up, but like, fixing it is too hard because of how messed up it is. Better double down before this whole thing implodes!"

[AdrianEGraphene]

A shared prosperity micropayments solution is entirely possible. I am testing one version of this in regards to phone spam.[1] Your bigger picture is what I am addressing with my micropayments as a service platform.[2] We are relatively now & still creating our path, but I just wanted you to know that there are people working on micropayments solution as an alternative to the traditional ad model.

[1] https://myrobocash.com

[2] https://fyncom.com

[ogre_codes]

> if you are willing to pay, that's amazing.

Here's the difference: If I am paying for a thing, I have a choice. I am never presented with the choice over whether I want to get tracked online. Or between apps. Usually tracking is invisible and completely obfuscated in such a way that even if you want to know who is tracking me and what is getting tracked you can't.

> How do you think you'd get to know your neighborhood burger joint without some form of advertising

It's in my neighborhood, I see it when I drive by, friends recommend it. Sometimes I do a web search. I don't think I've ever found a restaurant (grocery store, pub, etc etc) due to an advertisement. About the closest I get is when the local paper runs their people's choice awards for local businesses. (and I know, the local paper gets revenue from advertising)

[buran77]

> If I am paying for a thing, I have a choice.

The only choice you have is to stop paying for the thing. In reality it's more likely that you'd end up paying with money and with the data that's being collected. Businesses always want to grow revenue so at some point collecting data again or serving you ads in a paid product constitutes low hanging fruit.

Look at Samsung and the ads they force on you after you paid thousands on their TVs, look at Amazon who crams some ads in movies and shows you already pay for with Prime, look at Google who still collects info on you even if you pay for YouTube Premium.

This isn't about paying with money or your data. You may get something for your money at first, until you don't anymore.

[egsmi]

> Samsung and the ads they force on you after you paid thousands on their TVs

TV manufacturers were forced to add AD revenue because they reduced their purchase price to levels that were less than sustainable so there is a trade off being made there.

https://www.in2013dollars.com/Televisions/price-inflation

[buran77]

That's an explanation, not a justification and it just goes to show that "paying for a product" does not guarantee anything anymore. Today the assumption is that a "free" service is paid with ads and personal data, with the implication that you could pay money instead. I just posit that you'll and up paying money also.

[tehlike]

Browsers (starting with apple) and regulations (ccpa etc) will give you a choice.

The area is ripe for disruption. But sadly, that's the world we have to live in. I am pretty sure google would have prefered if you paid for the services you get (i suggest you sign up for google one, if you use gmail/drive/etc). But until that's ubiquitous ads is what we have.

re: neighborhood burger joint - web search implies someone is providing you this for free. or through ads. or you pay.

[Arelius]

> You certainly wouldn't pay for a game you play for two weeks and get bored.

I certainly would and have. I highly suspect that's the majority (or at least a significant percentage) of money made in the gaming industry.

[tehlike]

You are taking "you" as literal you. Not everyone is literal you. IAP revenue probably is on par with or more than ads. But ads is on top of that. There's a difference.

[imtringued]

There is this common meme that people buy tons of games during steam sales and never play them.

[disgruntledphd2]

I think the OP was talking about mobile, whereas the replies are talking about console/pc games.

Very, very different markets.

[Arelius]

I mean but I don't think it's really fundamentally different right? Among other games, I played Alto's adventure, bought the Plus version, and got bored in a week.