|
|
|
|
|
by piva00
806 days ago
|
|
> How could such a site survive if it has to freely give access to all it's content to other sites without anything in return. What would be the incentive for users to stay on the paying version? Provide services on top of the protocol? Adjacent to it? Niceties that don't break interoperability of data? Ads that are relevant to the core group using your version of the site for the protocol? I'm sure business people would find many ways to monetise just like they have monetised an open protocol called "web". > This complete none-sense masquerading as deep philosophy. Don't start with this bullshit, it just makes the discussion become inflammatory, fuck off with that, please. |
|
You can't, because those features would then not be available on said open protocol making these features another "serfdom".
Or you'd have to add them to the protocol negating the differentiating factor.
Niceties that don't break interoperability of data?
> Ads that are relevant to the core group using your version of the site for the protocol?
Wait until you hear how Twitter, Facebook and Youtube get monetised.
> I'm sure business people would find many ways to monetise just like they have monetised an open protocol called "web".
This is wishful thinking and does not form a coherent end-to-end strategy.
> Don't start with this bullshit, it just makes the discussion become inflammatory, fuck off with that, please.
Lets not start calling all businesses "technofeudalism" then.
For someone as left leaning as Yanis he seems to enjoy all the "niceties" of capitalism just fine. I'll wait for his books to be open source. I'm sure this will happen any day now.