zlacker

That's just the average internet user. They want something for nothing and often get it.

If you do ask for a few dollars a month you have to provide a ton of perceived value. That's despite the fact that they would spend it on snacks without hesitation.

>>sosode+(OP)
Then sell them snacks.

>>sosode+(OP)
That is the sad truth, the minds of most people disintegrate completely from all kind of logic or soundness when "free" is in the equation. People line up for long times to get free food that would've cost them a couple of bucks, people who are highly paid spend hours and weeks of their life arguing on the internet about why they can't and won't pay $5 for some software or online service.

As patience of creators and curators begin to run more thin, today's information society will split into tiers of those who pay and get good information vs those who demand free and will splash around in the filth of the free information sewers. The filth being ads, spyware, malware, low quality content, spiritually harmful content, government propaganda and worse.

>>sosode+(OP)
Look at the vitriol that YouTube premium gets. I get it there are a lot of people that know how to have an ad free YouTube without paying. I don't like that some basic app features like background video playing are locked behind premium.

But at the end of the day the I am sure that for a large portion of people complaining they spent the majority of their video watching time watching YouTube. If it's not worth it to you to pay the equivalent of a big mac meal month to get rid of ads that's fine but don't act all morally superior to those that do.

>>bardak+Yw
A lot of that must come from actual children with no easy way of paying. The value prop is so obvious for any adult spending considerable time on the site that’s not in actual poverty that I doubt the vitriol is coming from them.