this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
23 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

1574 readers
267 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.

Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
BrikoX@lemmy.zip
23
Bluesky teases paid subscription, Bluesky+, in new mockup (techcrunch.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.zip
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Social networking startup and X competitor Bluesky is working on subscriptions. The company first announced plans to develop a new revenue stream based on the subscription model when detailing its $15 million Series A back in October. Now, mockups teasing the upcoming Bluesky subscription, along with a list of possible features, have been published to Bluesky’s GitHub.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Honestly, this doesn't bother me at all. The list of features they will provide to premium users sound like good premium features for content creators and companies, and doesn't affect the lives of simple content consumers. I think it's great they are trying to find revenue streams to stay alive.

Asking users for money isn't entshitification. Running a website isn't free. But if they are already asking for venture capital, now that's scary. Losing control of your vision to investors, that's what causes entshitification.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

As long as their posts don't get artificially higher visibility

[–] BearGun@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yea this seems like the best way to support the site tbh. Let people who can afford it pay for running costs in exchange for benefits that don't negatively affect free users. Much better than being beholden to people who have no interest in you providing a good service.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Very reasonable take, I approve

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago

That's why I initially thought twitter charging for blue checks was a good idea, because I thought they'd still be validating people's identities.

[–] MisterCurtis@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Let the enshittification begin.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Asking users for money is not entshitification.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Then you do not know what enshittification means.

https://www.vioffice.de/blog/enshittification/

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago

You should probably read that yourself. Monetization and premium features by themselves are not entshitification.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That didnt take long to 💩

[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Isn’t it the opposite of getting shitty? Sell something of value?

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem is that in the process of monetizing something, the tendency is to handicap the service that made you popular to begin with by either moving some features into the paid tier or degrading the service in order to steer users into a paid tier. If demand existed for a brand new, guaranteed to never enshittify, Twitter clone that costs $10/month, then we would have one.

The fact is that social networks have to give away access to their systems because the real product is community and engagement, and you cannot have that without significant user volume. Once the users have freely given the company the product, then the company can start monetizing their means of transport, and the only way they can do that is by paywalling quality of life features. Thus, enshittification begins.

[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

The current status quo is also not sustainable, so they have to try some solutions. There’s an opportunity to go from actual federation to paid subscriptions and none of those will solve everything.