i meam the payment for a domain name is kinda worth it. as well as a functional vpn
Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
just cancel all subscriptions. None of them are worth it
Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
gregor@gregtech.eu 1 month ago
Agreed. Mullvad is absolutely epic. A question: why do we have to pay for domain names? And why do some providers offer a domain at a lower price than others, while offering the same services? it doesn’t make sense to me, an explaination is welcome
Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
a couple of reasons, some being that 1, ip addresses are limited on the internet, and making it free would instantly fill it up. another is that there is still some work involved,because once you register for a domain, internet service providers and DNS providers around the world need to also add your newly established domain to ip to their DNS so that people get redirected to your domain correctly. the domain endings also have a cost attached to them due to popularity and who is allowed to hand them out. e.g country related domains (e.g .kr for korea, .fr for france has their reasons to charge or without handing a domain out, but some countries may get lucky and happen to have a domain thats desirable (e.g Anguilla has .ai) and thus will charge more
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
And it’s really not that much, it’s like $10/domain/year, though it varies by TLD (vanity TLDs are more, less desirable ones are less).
I have about 10, and I’ll probably free up half of those the next time I need to pay for them (they were for a business idea that I’ve largely given up on).
gregor@gregtech.eu 1 month ago
Thanks for the explanation!
theneverfox@pawb.social 1 month ago
Because it’s a monopoly created by international agreement. It’s like a phone number - it needs to be routable in the system, but if you follow the standards, you can get integrated into the system as a registrar
The top level domains are owned by countries - the UK has .UK, the US has .com and .gov, the UK has .io (because they stole it), but most countries have just one. They charge a fee to register a secondary domain, and the registrar can charge whatever they want to their customers to register on their behalf
This is just the centralized system though - you could build your own, AOL tried to do that through “keywords” back in the 90s
BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I pay for my email (Proton) password manager (last pass), and VPN (nordvpn).
I’d say subs that maintain your privacy and security are well worth it - there is no such thing as a free lunch and instead the tech giants are dining out at the expense of users.
Googles ad monopoly needs to be torn apart. Because YouTube premium prices may actually represent what it really costs to maintain video sites like Google, but Google have managed to destroy all competition with the free model and now there is no one realistically able to compete on content or price.
forgotaboutlaye@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Sorry if you get this a lot, but have you tried Bitwarden? It’s been a while since I compared but last I checked I found it miles better than LastPass.
gregor@gregtech.eu 1 month ago
Or Proton Pass, they already use Proton for email
kambusha@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Proton has a password manager and VPN. May be worth bundling over paying for all 3 separately
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
email
Same, but Tuta and Bitwarden (don’t currently use a paid VPN, I host my own).
dmtalon@infosec.pub 1 month ago
So, steal everything or something else? Content isn’t free. The ad model exists, but only works if people see the ads.
If everyone blocks all ads, and doesn’t pay a subscription, how’s that work for those providing the service?
I’m not defending YouTube here, just curious what your solution is to have a service and not pay for it.
I do pay for YT family Premium in the US. I watch mostly YT, and it is my music streaming service. I definitely liked it more when it was costing me $15/mo for that and was mad when that went to $23. I even tried switching to Spotify and using ad blocking on YT. I didn’t jive with Spotify, and while ad blockers work for YT, it’s a bit of a pain installing them on TV boxes and managing subscriptions across devices, asking with which videos you’ve seen etc.
ugo@feddit.it 1 month ago
Youtube revenue in 2023 (before these price hikes) was 31.5 billion USD.
The revenue for the entirety of alphabet in 2023 was 307 billion USD.
Youtube alone generated 10% of the entire revenue of alphabet’s portfolio in 2023.
Yes, revenue is not profit, but I could not find profit figures for youtube.
Alphabet’s operating income for 2023 was 84.3 billion USD. Assuming a similar proportion of revenue to operating income (I know, hella extrapolating, but again no direct sources for youtube) that would pur youtube’s operating income in the ballpark of 8 billion USD.
It’s not that they aren’t making money because people are “stealing” as you say from poor little indie company youtube. It’s just that they want more more more MORE MORE MONEY.
Because of course they do. It’s never enough.
dmtalon@infosec.pub 1 month ago
YouTube is but one, and as I said while the story is about yt I was talking Mir in general. How do you pay for content/services in general?
Right now with via ads or a subscription.
ugo@feddit.it 1 month ago
It’s one thing to pay, and another to be squeezed dry.
When ads were mostly static banners ok websites almost nobody was blocking them, because they were mostly unobtrusive.
However, they would often link to shady websites that would install random crap, so the usecase for blocking them was already there.
Then they became animated, and they multiplied. It was one at the bottom of content at first. Then a couple. Then two vertical banners on the sides too. Then more rectangular banners here and there for good measure.
Then they became unkillable javascript popups, then proper new browser windows. Then autoplaying videos with audio were added. And this is just the visible stuff. Add tracking pixels, tracking cookies, browser fingerprinting, and tons of other spying technology deployed under the guise of “but the content is free”.
After every step the use of ad and tracking blockers became more legitimate as serving ads moved further and further away from paying for free content and squarely in the space of selling user data collected without consent for huge profit margins.
If ads and subscriptions were enough to just make a normal amount of profit, very few would be blocking ads or pirating content.
But since everyone wants to make a 1000% markup on the content they generate, they will drive their very own paying customers away.
Youtube could have served me a couple ads per video and I would have kept using it forever. Instead they served me a minimum of 20 ads per video, so now they will serve me zero, forever.
Netflix could have gotten 12 euros every month out of me for their dwindling and dwindling content selection. Instead they wanted 14 after a while. And 17 after a while. And 19 after a little while more. All the while refusing to serve me the 4k content I paid for.
So instead they now get zero too.
I am very happy to pay for content, and a lot of people like me. But the comment you originally replied to was in reference to youtube increasing the price of their subscription by ludicrous amounts. You replied there content isn’t free, and I replied that youtube has no problem making money. The increases are not to keep youtube afloat, is to make youtube make 10 billions in profit rather than 8 next year.
It’s not about paying a fair amount of money for content, it’s about making you pay all that you can give and suck you dry.
So to your question “how do you pay for content/services in general?” I answer “with money”, but that is not what is happening here.
TechAnon@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Not op, but I think a solution would be having AI watch the videos and tracking what the people are saying, wearing, using etc and posting links to purchase those things in the description. They get a cut of sales and can also sell links for competing products if companies want more exposure. This could be effective and noninvasive. Give a cut to content creators and it may be even more effective.
dmtalon@infosec.pub 1 month ago
How’s that work on tvs?
TechAnon@lemm.ee 1 month ago
They’d have to modify the tv app.
gregor@gregtech.eu 1 month ago
Bitwarden is worth it. (Yes, I know, I should self host it. I do, but I still see it as a good deal. Also Hetzner is a good subscription. So yes, some are worth it
Engywuck@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Agreed: Bitwarden Storage Share ControlD Real debrid
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Backblaze as well. Can’t believe they let me store 20TB of backups for $10/mo.
kratoz29@lemm.ee 1 month ago
So, only cheap services are worth it?
Are there some expensive services that are worth it? not just that they increase their price just because.
Don’t get me wrong, I want more examples (and I am a happy subscriber of Real-Debrid for years already).
Merlin404@lemmy.world 1 month ago
By there site its more like $120 a month?
gregor@gregtech.eu 1 month ago
That’s an insanely good deal! I should move pict-rs to backblaze on my Lemmy server
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
I like SimpleFIN ($1.50/mo IIRC) + Actual Budget. I can pull in transaction data from multiple sources into my self-hosted Actual Budget service, which is super nice (or I can DIY if I want).
I used to use Tiller ($80/year I think?), which is basically the same, but it pulls transactions into a spreadsheet (Google Docs or Microsoft Office) and they have some budgeting tools around that. I’m trying to move away from Google and Microsoft, so I ended up cancelling, but I really liked their service.