Reddit CEO Says Paywalls are Coming Soon

[thspfc]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

That's about 3 levels above the degree of thinking the user in question is operating at here.

[SEWIGuy]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

[Max Rockatansky]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

Calrog tried to make a splash on some Facebook road groups (California specifically).  I took action with our page account and my personal profile to ensure he wasn't aware of our presence.  I never interacted with the guy, but his unsavory reputation proceeded him.

[SEWIGuy]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

Calrog tried to make a splash on some Facebook road groups (California specifically).  I took action with our page account and my personal profile to ensure he wasn't aware of our presence.  I never interacted with the guy, but his unsavory reputation proceeded him.

Which is the exact reason that usenet faded away. Moderated forums (like AA Roads) and Facebook groups kept the spam and riff-raff out.

The glory days of usenet were wonderful. Kind of a wild west part of the old internet. But it can't really come back now.

[SectorZ]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

Calrog tried to make a splash on some Facebook road groups (California specifically).  I took action with our page account and my personal profile to ensure he wasn't aware of our presence.  I never interacted with the guy, but his unsavory reputation proceeded him.

Which is the exact reason that usenet faded away. Moderated forums (like AA Roads) and Facebook groups kept the spam and riff-raff out.

The glory days of usenet were wonderful. Kind of a wild west part of the old internet. But it can't really come back now.

It could come back, but with the polarization of the world right now it would be 10X more wacky than it already was. It would only attract the most extremist of weirdos because any sane person would nope out of there in days.

[kphoger]

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

They could make some content require payment to access and roll out a paid sub-Usenet.  These private areas of exclusive content would, by design, have much less spam.  This could be one of the new, key features of a Usenet renaissance.

[GaryV]

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying

True, but singing about a little bush isn't nearly as annoying as designating only certain floors for elevators to stop or inventing new saints days on a calendar.

[kurumi]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

What's interesting is that (> 10 years ago) Carl and I had a mutual friend, and I went to lunch with them. I was bracing for an entertaining yet arduous time, but face to face, Carl was (by Bay Area techie standards) a normal guy. Either he was consciously code-switching, or there's something about being online that changes some people (and not just him).

We talked about work and road stuff, and I did not try to stir the pot with m.t.r drama. Nor did he.

[kphoger]

or there's something about being online that changes some people

Is there even any question?

[vdeane]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?  Everyone supporting Reddit's CEO seems to be acting like it's a new site with unstable finances or something, but no, by internet standards, it's actually quite old, and practically an integral part of the experience these days (especially given that Google's traditional web search has gotten worse and worse in recent years, to the point where many people habitually append "site:reddit.com" to their queries).

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

[Max Rockatansky]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?  Everyone supporting Reddit's CEO seems to be acting like it's a new site with unstable finances or something, but no, by internet standards, it's actually quite old, and practically an integral part of the experience these days (especially given that Google's traditional web search has gotten worse and worse in recent years, to the point where many people habitually append "site:reddit.com" to their queries).

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

I tend to question how integral Reddit given how much money they have lost since their IPO.  While the site might cater to road fans and AARoads users does that actual transfer outside this demographic?  I don't picture Reddit being all that popular with people who use more mainstream social media platforms.  I also doubt most people think all that deeply over what search engine results they get. 

[kalvado]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?  Everyone supporting Reddit's CEO seems to be acting like it's a new site with unstable finances or something, but no, by internet standards, it's actually quite old, and practically an integral part of the experience these days (especially given that Google's traditional web search has gotten worse and worse in recent years, to the point where many people habitually append "site:reddit.com" to their queries).

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

I tend to question how integral Reddit given how much money they have lost since their IPO.  While the site might cater to road fans and AARoads users does that actual transfer outside of demographics?  I don't picture Reddit being all that popular with people who use more mainstream social media platforms. 

For one, Google right now provides reddit results as first choice for many searches. Quite a few review sites were heart when the policy was implemented.

[thspfc]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?  Everyone supporting Reddit's CEO seems to be acting like it's a new site with unstable finances or something, but no, by internet standards, it's actually quite old, and practically an integral part of the experience these days (especially given that Google's traditional web search has gotten worse and worse in recent years, to the point where many people habitually append "site:reddit.com" to their queries).

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

I tend to question how integral Reddit given how much money they have lost since their IPO.  While the site might cater to road fans and AARoads users does that actual transfer outside of demographics?  I don't picture Reddit being all that popular with people who use more mainstream social media platforms. 

By most measurements it ranks between 5 and 10 in terms of the most popular social medias in the US.

To me it seems like its user base is Twitter except younger, more progressive (not saying that's a good or bad thing, just something that is), and somehow even more negative.

[Max Rockatansky]

The harm is how it affects the users of the site and makes their lives less convenient than before.  The fact that society doesn't seem to care is not my problem.

Are you seriously suggesting that making a customer's life less convenient is harmful? Harm means damange to someone's property, finances or well-being. Reddit moving from a free to fee model does none of those things. Customers would engage in a willing transaction.

Apparently, it is more harmful to the customer that he (a) be charged for something that once was free than (b) for the company to shut down entirely because it can no longer afford to continue providing something for free.

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?  Everyone supporting Reddit's CEO seems to be acting like it's a new site with unstable finances or something, but no, by internet standards, it's actually quite old, and practically an integral part of the experience these days (especially given that Google's traditional web search has gotten worse and worse in recent years, to the point where many people habitually append "site:reddit.com" to their queries).

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

I tend to question how integral Reddit given how much money they have lost since their IPO.  While the site might cater to road fans and AARoads users does that actual transfer outside of demographics?  I don't picture Reddit being all that popular with people who use more mainstream social media platforms. 

By most measurements it ranks between 5 and 10 in terms of the most popular social medias in the US.

To me it seems like its user base is Twitter except younger, more progressive (not saying that's a good or bad thing, just something that is), and somehow even more negative.

That negativity has kept me away from both Reddit and Twitter.  I just never felt like I need to talk about politics or complain about like stuff on a daily basis.  We did try a GN Twitter account but it never caught on.

[kkt]

People really care that much about Reddit?

Might be a good time for Usenet to make a comeback. 

I'd like that.

[kkt]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

[kalvado]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

In a grand scheme of things, you are not eliminating costs here, you are redistributing them
It is not impossible that once a big player like reddit does it, many others would follow. Free emails may become a thing of a past pretty quickly.
"Who pays" is a long and difficult conversation. And the ultimate answer is "you do"...

[SEWIGuy]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

 But that's no different than a message board right?

[kphoger]

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence?

Not profitably.  Q3 2024 was literally the first time it turned a profit.

People also seem to be missing that I care more about not being able to browse without being signed into an account more than the financial aspect.

But those two things are linked together, because users that are signed in with an account are more financially advantageous for Reddit (more data for better-targeted advertising, the possibility of paying for Reddit Gold, actual interaction creating greater overall attractiveness to potential new users, etc).  That is to say, requiring people to have an account in order to see certain content is a key component of Reddit's financial strategy.

[hbelkins]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

I never plonked Calrog, as he was comic relief most of the time. But I did end up plonking Randy Hersh and all his sock puppets because he/they were genuinely annoying and abusive. But that's the beauty of Usenet. The onus is on the reader to determine what content he or she wants to see.

But to the broader Reddit discussion, let me first say that the only times I've ever visited the site have been when someone sent me a link to view. But having said that, the time has apparently come that the site owner can no longer operate the site without some level of fees.

Let me bring this home. Right now, we all enjoy AA Roads, and especially this forum, free of charge. Alex Nitzman foots the bill and deals with the hassles. What happens if or when he makes the determination he can no longer afford to pay the associated fees?

Just some food for thought.

[SEWIGuy]

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence? 

Mostly due to venture capital covering its losses. It just went public last year.

[Max Rockatansky]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

I never plonked Calrog, as he was comic relief most of the time. But I did end up plonking Randy Hersh and all his sock puppets because he/they were genuinely annoying and abusive. But that's the beauty of Usenet. The onus is on the reader to determine what content he or she wants to see.

But to the broader Reddit discussion, let me first say that the only times I've ever visited the site have been when someone sent me a link to view. But having said that, the time has apparently come that the site owner can no longer operate the site without some level of fees.

Let me bring this home. Right now, we all enjoy AA Roads, and especially this forum, free of charge. Alex Nitzman foots the bill and deals with the hassles. What happens if or when he makes the determination he can no longer afford to pay the associated fees?

Just some food for thought.

I've never asked Alex the details about how this forum and site are funded.  Assuming the AAroads Facebook page is monetized though (which I don't know for certain) there ought to be a pretty decent return for the amount of engagement it generates.  I base that assumption off of what our Facebook page usually generates. 

[hotdogPi]

This site has ads if you don't have an account, or if you do but have fewer than 3 posts.

[kkt]

HB's Usenet renaissance is the best idea he's ever had.

The problem with usenet is that it just got too spammy.

That and Carl Rogers was very annoying.

With a good newsreader, blocking a few annoying users was easy.  There were also moderated newsgroups, in which a group of moderators could mark a post as blessed, and only blessed posts would come through.  I don't remember exactly how it worked, but it was subtle enough to stop spammers from duplicating the blessing on their spam.

 But that's no different than a message board right?

With usenet, you or your ISP stored the messages.  If a message board goes away and the Wayback Machine doesn't happen to have a snapshot, it's gone.

[vdeane]

So how did it stay online for the first 18 years of its existence? 

Mostly due to venture capital covering its losses. It just went public last year.

Honestly, the idea that a website can launch with no plan for profitability, just an assumption that they'll develop one, and then a kid who was born when the site was launched would be old enough to vote by the time it does turn a profit, and not only did nobody see an issue with that, but it was so normalized that a huge swath of the internet ran on the same model, and that this all happened after the .com bubble (which caused a minor recession when it burst) was caused by the exact same thing, is wholly ridiculous and doesn't say anything good about humanity.  But I guess I should probably just forget that and drink some Brawndo (the Thirst Mutilator) for my sanity.  It's got what plants crave.