Software engineers who measure their income in multiples of median household income refusing to pay $3 for an app that has been entertaining people for over a decade now never ceases to surprise me.
Maybe if you're considering changing your user agent to play with this, you're interested enough to spend $3. I did about 5 years ago and still get enjoy that app.
Personally I would love a world were a tiny trickle of the revenue software developer generate would trickle down to people making cool things for fun. Who knows, if that happened we might have more developers out there doing thing other than trying to sell ads.
I refuse to use the web without adblock but most of the websites (or apps I use) are supported by ads. What do?
A few have a "pay to remove ads" option, but most do not, and the ones that do, I use infrequently enough that I can't justify the price. There seems to be no good solution for paying for the "long tail" of content and services.
Clay Shirky wrote an essay (I forget which one) on this subject like 20+ years ago, about how the main issue with micro transactions isn't even technical but it's the mental cost associated with each transaction.
I think this could be solved if the system were "set it and forget it" -- you give it a weekly budget and it just distributes it among the sites you spend the most time on.
Brave browser actually tried something very similar with their BAT (with their own ads instead of user provided funds), but it never caught on.
Maybe if you're considering changing your user agent to play with this, you're interested enough to spend $3. I did about 5 years ago and still get enjoy that app.
Personally I would love a world were a tiny trickle of the revenue software developer generate would trickle down to people making cool things for fun. Who knows, if that happened we might have more developers out there doing thing other than trying to sell ads.