• IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Because you have not set up that agreement and the vast majority of people don’t pay outside of ads or a singular monthly sub.

    The next best thing is nebula which has 600,000 monthly subs at $5. Which means a maximum payout pool of 18M a year.

    Look at the number of users vs donations. The only reason this place works is low traffic and low bandwidth. The vision you describe would be great but it’s not going to happen. ESPECIALLY once users are forced to pay rather than getting shit for free.

    • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You don’t need all, or even most users money. Plenty of people make enough money off of the portion of their fanbase that pays them to not only survive, but thrive and grow.

      You don’t need all, or even most. You don’t need this to be the norm for it to be sustainable.

      • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh right, in the magical world where people are giving their money away. The majority of content creators would of left your platform. But it’s okay it’s easy to steal their right to distribution and handwave it away as not a problem.

        • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          This isn’t some magical world, this is how most open source software projects and even online content creators make their money.

          Creators make way fucking more from patron than AdSense, even if its only a percentage of their audience. Do you know how much fucking watch time it would take to match the $5 a month I give to several of my favorite producers of online video?

          A lot more than either your or I have time for, certainly more than the content they create.

          You need only a sliver of your audience to pay, and platforms like patron prove this works.

          The fact you’re baffled by even a small percentage of people donating to gratis projects says a lot about how you value volunteer labor, and its pretty fucking sad.

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The large majority of open source tools that are used in mass have significant commercial backing.

            Yes many users could make more money from patron only. Very few do in the tall world. Their primary source of income is YT. Because people don’t use the patrons.

            • magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              What are you fucking on about lmao? Most channels that run a patreon, use it as their main source of income unless they also sell merch.

              Everyone from giant channels like Linus Media Group, to medium and small-sized ones like Technology Connections, and Cathode Ray Dude.

              I mean pretty much everyone I watch that has talked financials has mentioned how important patron is.

              Some of them like Botgrinder literally for the most part, only make money through patreon because of YT’s restrictive demonetization guidelines. Yet despite the lack of ad-revenue the guy is able to live off of a 50k sub channel where he pretty much smokes weed and flies FPV quads.

              As for FLOSS, that heavily depends the projects. Huge ones used by corporations sure, but who’s footing the bill for newpipe, Yt-dlp, Jellyfin, Pihole, And pretty much every video game emulator ever written? People like you (probably not considering your attitude), and me.