Menu
Home
Forums
Visual works
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Info & rules
Site rules
Server list
Sanctuary Discord
Sanctuary FAQ
Sanctuary's origins
Staffing policies
Sanctuary YouTube
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Banned members
User verification codes
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Welcome to the edge of the civilized internet! All our official content can be found
here.
If you have any questions, try our FAQ
here
or see our video on
why this site exists at all!
Home
Forums
Main Sub-Forums
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
Louis Rossmann's Grayjay/Harbor Apps - What do you guys think of these?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
Reply to thread
Message
<p>[QUOTE="Houseman, post: 14565, member: 7"]</p><p>Funding "Public art" is kind of an already solved problem, and has been for years. A small number of people, possibly even one individual, a patron, funds an artist. They then live off that funding and release their art to the public. They don't need to be funded by everyone who enjoys their art, and if you tried to force everyone to pay before they can enjoy the art, you would be unsuccessful.</p><p></p><p>Even with ad-blockers, this system works. Google is the patron for many full-time youtubers, and a small number of people (those who don't block ads) make this possible. This is, however, a great time to launch a competing product that promises to strips ads.</p><p></p><p>These patrons aren't just throwing money away either, they get something out of it, whether that be market share, a personal musician to call upon when hosting parties, or <em>personal satisfaction</em>. It's been a mutually beneficial system that has been working for a thousand years.</p><p></p><p>Helping people send money directly to artists is fine, but it isn't necessary. Taking control away from big companies (and funneling that profit towards yourself) is arguably laudable, because you're a "good person" and those big corporations are "bad people", but it isn't necessary.</p><p></p><p>The common person might like the "all the videos across all the platforms in one app!" feature, but the common person also doesn't know what "open source" is, so it's being marketed to two different, often exclusive, demographics, which inevitably ends with losing a good portion of both.</p><p></p><p>tl;dr, I don't see this taking off.</p><p></p><p>edit: it seems my signature has expired.</p><p></p><p>edit2: futo sounds like another naughty word.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Houseman, post: 14565, member: 7"] Funding "Public art" is kind of an already solved problem, and has been for years. A small number of people, possibly even one individual, a patron, funds an artist. They then live off that funding and release their art to the public. They don't need to be funded by everyone who enjoys their art, and if you tried to force everyone to pay before they can enjoy the art, you would be unsuccessful. Even with ad-blockers, this system works. Google is the patron for many full-time youtubers, and a small number of people (those who don't block ads) make this possible. This is, however, a great time to launch a competing product that promises to strips ads. These patrons aren't just throwing money away either, they get something out of it, whether that be market share, a personal musician to call upon when hosting parties, or [I]personal satisfaction[/I]. It's been a mutually beneficial system that has been working for a thousand years. Helping people send money directly to artists is fine, but it isn't necessary. Taking control away from big companies (and funneling that profit towards yourself) is arguably laudable, because you're a "good person" and those big corporations are "bad people", but it isn't necessary. The common person might like the "all the videos across all the platforms in one app!" feature, but the common person also doesn't know what "open source" is, so it's being marketed to two different, often exclusive, demographics, which inevitably ends with losing a good portion of both. tl;dr, I don't see this taking off. edit: it seems my signature has expired. edit2: futo sounds like another naughty word. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Preview
Name
Verification
What is the first letter of the site name?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Main Sub-Forums
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
Louis Rossmann's Grayjay/Harbor Apps - What do you guys think of these?
Top