Hogan  07-15-2011
03:28 AM ET (US)
|
As a girl love beautiful, you must want to have different hair style every day. And lisseur ghd can help you to do this. Ghd lisseur can help you try different style and show your different beauty to others. Ghd is the famous brand around the world. So you can use ghd pas cher without worry.
|
|
|
Spam deleted by QuickTopic 07-16-2011 02:01 AM
|
Rob McNair-Huff 07-17-2003
08:44 PM ET (US)
|
Johnathan,
Yep, you are talking about the holy grail of micropayments that many folks have been waiting for on the Internet. At this point, I can't see it happening. The closest you can come to reality with this concept is probably the iTunes Music Store and its $0.99 per song, plus tax if you live in a state with sales tax. I would love to see smaller micropayments happen, but in the meantime the lack of such a system is locking away content that could otherwise be available for say $0.99 per article.
I love this topic, especially as someone who writes and creates and would love the opportunity to be compensated for that work rather than either giving it away for free or simply not doing the writing because it won't pay.
|
|
Johnathan Grant
07-17-2003
06:57 PM ET (US)
|
Well, I might have not been verbose enough. I wasn't really trying to imply your suggestion of $2 was bad, nor good. I wasn't attempting to make a value judgement about it. :)
I just meant that I can't wait until this sort of thing becomes more commonplace. (Either, many sites accepting one of , say, two or three micropayment systems, or perhaps subscription systems expanding to include more content.) I think Real.com has the edge here; why not add some traditional web pages to their multimedia subscription service?
And therefore I meant I was hoping to see, in the future, some sites that now want intrusive ad views (Salon) or subscriptions altogether (like many AOLTW magazines that now require a physical mag. subscription to access online content) - instead offering me access just to the one content item I want, for a quick micropayment. I'd probably be willing to pay as much as 25 cents to avoid Salon's immersive "gateway" ad that one must click through, but I think the "sweet spot" at which many people would pay (and I'd be happier) is 10 cents.
I could even see this sort of thing becoming a "browser toolbar" that one unlocks with a username & password at the beginning of a surfing session, with settings like this - say, any content that costs 10 cents or less, go ahead and buy it if I click the link to it, between 11 cents and 50 cents, popup a "sheet" asking me if I want to buy it, and 51 cents and up, assume I don't want it, so display a page indicating the price (still giving me the option if I really, really want the item). Each user would, of course, pick their own amounts in preferences - some might not care what things cost individually, but instead prefer a "monthly budget" model, where they are "cut off" after spending a certain amount on content.
|
|
Thad Hoffman
07-17-2003
02:14 AM ET (US)
|
I was just giving Rob a hard time. I read Rob's site because I respect him and his views. I wouldn't flame, I may disagree and say so, but never flame. It is a peave (;-) of mine though, the was/were thing, but nothing I would flame anyone over. I do find it amusing that a lot of writers weblogs contain such oversights (including the use of "myriad"). Yet, at the same time, I think it's the imperfections that make the user/reader connections. Edited 07-17-2003 02:16 AM
|
Rob McNair-Huff 07-16-2003
05:09 PM ET (US)
|
John, Just so you know, Thad is a longtime MNJ reader and contributor to the discussions here and I didn't take his comment as a flame. Of course, I also breezed right over his spelling error, since I wasn't in "editor mode" when I read the post.
I appreciate feedback from everyone, even the flames if and when they seem deserved...
|
|
John
07-16-2003
04:17 PM ET (US)
|
Thad: It seems to be a general rule that spelling/grammar flames always contain their own mistakes. Your message did not disappoint.
(it's "peeve")
|
Rob McNair-Huff 07-16-2003
01:00 PM ET (US)
|
Thad, as you can see, I did edit that title. I think you were right, or should that be was right? Grrrr ;)
|
|
Thad Hoffman
07-16-2003
11:04 AM ET (US)
|
Firstly, shouldn't the title of the entry use "were" rather than "was". (sorry, psychotic peave of mine, the other is leaving the "ly" off of adverbs as in "I feel bad about that") (see even I suck :-) had to go back and edit. Oh, and thanks Rob :-) ) Secondly, if I could trust an archive to stay accessible online, I'd pay a full magazine subscription price for online content. I love magazines, but they take up shelf space and I hate to throw them out after forking over five to seven dollars. Also, if I choose to end my subscription, I would expect to maintain full access to the previously paid for editions. Edited 07-16-2003 12:08 PM
|
Rob McNair-Huff 07-16-2003
10:49 AM ET (US)
|
Jonathan,
Of course I would pay less than $2 to read an article like this. I was just throwing out that number as something that I would consider at the high end of what I may pay to read something.
Thanks for the link to the synopsis, John...
|
|
John
07-16-2003
10:40 AM ET (US)
|
Rob:
As my mother used to say "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" Here's a synopsis of the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/23/stone_skip021023
And on the following page if you scroll down to the bottom, you will find a link to a pdf document that includes all the mathematical details.
http://dpm.univ-lyon1.fr/~lbocquet/
|
Rob M 07-16-2003
07:40 AM ET (US)
|
I am not a big fan of paying for news, such as the way ESPN and Salon charge for it. But I would be willing to pay a nomial fee for information content, which would be something of a how-to content session. I have mentioned them before, but O'Reilly has some great computer how-tos that would be great for this. A lot of the sport sites charge for insider information. I would never pay for this type of information myself because if it is important enough it willl be in the sports section of the paper. Basically if a site is charging for information the way ESPN does it, the content better come from their staff. I am sure that ESPN is making a ton of money though, so they probably have no intentions of changing anything. BTW, Paypal just recently added IPN service to make receiving payments for electronic documents even easier. http://www.paypal.comEdited 07-16-2003 12:12 PM
|
|
Johnathan Grant
07-16-2003
05:34 AM ET (US)
|
Well, at least one such idea exists:
http://www.bitpass.com/learn/
Soon, I hope many content providers do something like this. How about read more for a quarter, or 50 cents?
--
jegrant@clickauction.net
|
New Topic
My Topics
Views:
1720
(Unique:
694
) / Subscribers:
0 | What's this?
