What are we doing here? Looking for a website that aggregates online content or having our first smoke?
"Come on man, all the COOOL websites look like this." Step 1) You say you want online services to function like an actual free market, where we the consumer looks at the available options and decides if they want to pay for it or not. Step 2) You provide a recommendation for a service. Step 3) the consumer considers the service and decides they don't want to pay for it based on their metrics. E.G. consumer driven free market capitalism. Step 4) You shame the consumer using peer-pressure tactics. "they all look like that" implying that the consumer doesn't know what actually matters Step 5) I make a bag of popcorn and watch the childish stupidity begin to unfold. Richard, out of curiousity, do you have a budget for an online search engine? How much are you willing to spend per month for such a service? A while back I wrote a simple frontend application that performs google searches on behalf of a user (using the google search API). For the right price I may be pursuaded to go dig that code back up. -Ben On Saturday, September 14th, 2024 at 9:20 AM, Daniel Hückmann <[email protected]> wrote: > lol 🙄 > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024, 09:09 Richard Owlett [email protected] wrote: > > > On 09/14/2024 10:24 AM, wes wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 6:10 AM Richard Owlett [email protected] > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On 09/14/2024 07:23 AM, Daniel Hückmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > Kagi. It's $5 - $10 a month, but you aren't the product. I switched > > > > > last > > > > > year and never looked back. > > > > > > > > I'm not opposed to a search engine being ad supported. > > > > > > the problem with that is that supporting a service purely from ad revenue > > > is no longer possible. > > > > That I've seen in the realm of email and USENET. > > I don't recall ever using a "free" email provider. > > I currently use both a paid and "free" USENET service. > > > > > the only reason that ever worked was by taking advantage of weaknesses in > > > user understanding of how web pages worked. they made ads look just like > > > search results so people would click on them unintentionally. as the > > > general populace has grown wiser to tricks like this, they fall for it > > > less, to the point where it now costs more to run the ad network than > > > they > > > make from it. > > > > > > the only way to avoid charging for a service is by selling your data. > > > it's > > > so lucrative that there is more money to be made from it than by charging > > > for a service directly. > > > > > > > In any case their homepage is so disgusting that I'll not consider them. > > > > Reminds me of old hamburger ad "Where's the beef". Its all their version > > > > of visual "glitz" - without content. > > > > > > judging a book by its cover. > > > > As the saying goes "You have only one chance to make a first impression". > > > > > disregarding a direct report of personal experience. > > > > Not really. He said he was a happy customer but did not say why. > > Thus I did a DuckDuckGo search. I read the ~20 resulting site snippets > > and visited the linked Wikipedia page. The comments were favorable but > > didn't mention anything that got my attention. > > > > > site design is right in line with current design trends. > > > > Major point against it! > > I have vision and perception issues. Therefore I surf with JavaScript, > > cookies, and some items SeaMonkey's Preferences menu allows me to ignore. > > When using machine at public library, I've generally found sites that > > don't display aren't worthwhile. YMMV ;/ > > > > > -wes
