this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
573 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

61081 readers
3559 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (31 children)

How hard is it to run a platform charging a couple dollars a month so that you don't need to turn into a ghoulish capitalist nightmare? Like, really. If even one of them went the "no ads, ever, just a tiny monthly fee" wouldn't that be better? Wouldn't everyone flock there? Is everyone so dumb that they think these huge sites will run for free?? No.. wait I think I've answered my own question..

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (5 children)

social media depends on having a critical mass of users, and that's only going to happen with a free model.

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Yes. I perhaps should have stated the other way round.

What about "ethical" social network. That's free and ad based if you want that. And the ads are present but less manipulative because the goal is to cover costs not maximise profit.

And then that's a premium option if you want to have no ads and full control of your content feed.

The reason Facebook and co don't offer this is because they apparently make massive amounts from each user ($68). And that only because they engage in whatever ghoulish behaviour get people locked in enough to deliver that

An ethical social network wouldn't have to drive as much per user, because it would publicly limit itself to modest profit. Covering free use with ads presumably possible. Cost of premium being running cost + modest profit seems like it wouldn't be that high surely?

[–] WimpyWoodchuck@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

There is a completely free, add-less social network: Mastodon. But for some obscure reason, "nobody" wants to use it. Instead, everyone is moving to BlueSky.

I don't think costs are the reason for people not using certain social networks. Simplicity and ease-of-use is. And federated networks suffer hard from this, because simply explaining the way they work is too much for people. They want to read and post stuff, and not think about which server to pick so that they can get the biggest audience.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)