← Back to context

Comment by devilsdata

9 days ago

Easy. No corporate social media networks. Hobbyists run local light social networks (such as forums) again (like they do currently; see Mastodon, Lemmy), with super efficient SSR HTML that is cheap to host.

That doesn’t answer their question, like at all.

  • Yes it does. Hobbyists are willing to spend their own money, hence their blog doesn't need ads.

    Businesses make money by selling products/services, so they don't need money.

    Wikipedia is donation supported.

    GP is pretty much saying - if it can only survive by running ads, let's do without it.

    • > Yes it does. Hobbyists are willing to spend their own money, hence their blog doesn't need ads.

      Until it is unsustainable which is the majority of cases due to no funding.

      > Wikipedia is donation supported.

      The majority of websites are not as big as Wikipedia, let alone having donations in the tens of millions.

      The GP talks about Mastodon which hobbyists run and users sign up to instances to have their social identity on.

      toot.community, mastodon.cloud and many others are closing down this month due to no funding.

      And even some organisations don't want to run instances due to it being expensive. (1.)

      Even mozilla.social shut down.

      Sure, these services wouldn't run ads, but they can't charge users either which leaves donations as the only way to fund it, and 9.9/10 times it doesn't work.

      Using Wikipedia as an example to prove a point about donations makes no sense for everyone else who also contribute to the open web for free.

      1. https://gfsc.community/why-we-discontinued-our-mastodon-serv...

      5 replies →