-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 05:36 PM 7/15/98 -0400, you wrote: >The NYT has a fairly good OpEd on encryption today, >written by a novelist, who makes a good case for >the citizen's need for the privacy protection, now that >there are a zillion ways computers pry into private >affairs. > >=A0=A0 http://www.nytimes.com > >For those outside the US: NYT today began its free >worldwide online service, so the whole world can log >on to its prying computers. (Non-USes heretofore >had to pay for privacy loss.) It claims to have 4 million >daily online consumers and is happy to run an advertiser >drivern operation to suck in millions more around the >planet. > >Take note, Slate. > How many smaller sites will be able to break even with advertising subsidies, let alone make a profit? Advertisers are going to head to the big sites and you'll see a media concentration on the Internet just like TV and print, unless small sites can find a creative way to charge for content. If people aren't willing to pay for on-line New York Times, they sure as hell aren't going to pay much if anything for Mom and Pop's Independent Media/Content. If they were willing to pay, they probably wouldn't want to use an unfamiliar and exotic technology like digital cash and they don't want to ring up $1.00 charges on their Visa for the smaller bits of content wanted from these other providers. How about consolidated third-party content billing, with monthly payment to the billing company by any form (check, cash, digital cash, credit card, gold coins)? Full anonimity available when paying with cash or the like. Give the consumer easy credit and they will come. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.2 iQA/AwUBNa7vh3boo5vy7gslEQIdrgCgt4pceZMvqLApbKHt/y/yhDZeTY4AoMQe +6rV1sFP4mGmJXNd/lNa3WTR =fc8V -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----