Cost of operation

Cost of operation

Posted Sep 4, 2007 3:07 UTC (Tue) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054)
In reply to: LWN advertising update by ballombe
Parent article: LWN advertising update

ballombe notes:

I find it extremely sad the increase of ads in quality site like LWN. What would you say if apt-get displayed an ad each time you install/update a package ? Why is there a difference of standard ?

[Intervening comment]

Writing free softwares, developing a linux distribution etc. cost money. Is it that hard to understand?

No, it's easy to understand, but is an invalid comparison. Writing software, developing a distribution, &c. is done by volunteers, or those who get paid for it by a company. The volunteers (e.g., much of Debian) do it at their own pace, and are free to get money elsewhere. The paid workers are hired by companies (e.g., Red Hat, IBM) which make their money indirectly from the developer's effort.

LWN is a direct service. No third party pays for the work of Jon, Rebecca, Forrest, or Jake (did I miss anyone?) It's enough work, and under such time constraints, that it's got to be a full-time job. The only way to keep LWN a quality site is to pay the editors a living wage. The money must come either directly from its readers or from some source that depends on the readers.

That means subscriptions or ads. It's apparent there aren't enough subscribers to do the job. (And shame on the parasites. [1])

I'm certain Jon would be delighted to find some other, non-advertising, income for LWN, but that's a catch-22. [2]

So, if you object to the very thought of in-text ads [3], buy some side-line ads [4] for your favorite cereal, football team, whatever. Maybe even your Linux-related services. If enough of that shows up, in-text ads won't be a question.

---

[1] I'm not talking about the casual readers. I mean hard-core LWN readers who aren't subscribers. You know who you are.

[2] Supporting LWN makes sense only for Linux players. But income from a Linux player would give the appearance of a conflict of interest: not good. That sort of blows away the whole idea.

[3] And don't get your knickers in a twist. The ads are turned off by default for everyone, subscribers and casual readers alike. You gotta ask for them.

[4] I once asked Jon to allow higher subscription rates, not for additional privileges, but purely for those who'd like to pay more, (relatively) painlessly. He declined, and suggested buying a sideline ad instead.

---

to post comments