• SaltySalamander@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    It would be better, yes, but you’d be sacrificing 90% of your userbase going that route. The vast majority aren’t going to pay a monthly fee for a social media account. One or the other is inevitable, though. Server infra ain’t free, after all.

    • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      How about it starts free + ad based like any other network but offers a premium tier that removes ads and gives full control of feed that current networks don’t offer. They don’t offer this because manipulating people is apparently far more lucrative than any reasonably priced premium tier. But this is only because they’re a ‘profit at any cost’ company. If an alternative ethical social network advertised the fact that it only makes a modest profit so that it’s free tier is ad based but not unhealthy and the premium tier is reasonably priced. I wonder if such a thing is possible.

      Obviously no current network does this because they’re investor funded and committed to max profits.

      • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah that’s the scary thing. Ads work so well you can’t even buy your way out in many cases. I wish micropayments caught on instead of subscriptions. I’m ok to pay a reasonable cost per use, but I hate blood suckling subscriptions for things I rarely touch. I’d STFU and post much fewer and more meaningful comments on Lemmy for example if it was 0.1 cents per comment or something.