Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> They can try to solve that problem

Well, they could always try actually paying content creators. Unlike - for instance - StackOverflow.



StackOverflow as built back in the days of Web 2.0 where the idea was that user generated content formed in the days of the (relatively) altruistic web.

There isn't any clean way to do "contributor gets paid" without adding in an entire mess of "ok, where is the money coming from? Paywalls? Advertising? Subscriptions?" and then also get into the mess of international money transfers (how do you pay someone in Iran from the US?)

And then add in the "ok, now the company is holding payment information of everyone(?) ..." and data breaches and account hacking is now so much more of an issue.

Once you add money to it, the financial inceptives and gamification collide to make it simply awful.


Stack Overflow is making money by selling its database to AI companies. It chose not to reimburse the people who built that database.


https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Stack+Exchange...

You can download the database for free.

Trying to say "give us your payment and tax information so that we can pay you $0.13 for your contributions" would be even more insulting than not paying anyone.

Doing renumeration for people in some countries could get legally challenging too.


Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? But they adopted it as their new business model nonetheless. Just one more stupid decision on the pile.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: