No, something approaching 100% of users will still say yes, adding that robust economic foundation is the content providers' problem, not the users'.
The content providers will then close down or find alternative business models.
Who do you think "users" are? HN denizens?
Users -- most especially those using Internet Explorer -- are average people who are entirely unconcerned about tracking cookies. They really aren't. They don't care whether you know that they visit Facebook and TMZ. They care that they can access those sites for free, and anything that threatened that would be a threat to them.
There is a serious detachment from reality that occurs in discussions like this.
Of course, if you ask them, "Do you want to pay for this or do you want it free?", they'll choose free.
But if you don't ask and just charge for it, I don't think most people would mind. It's the way things worked for thousands of years. It's the way things still work for every product in the world except online content. Maybe it's a huge issue for you, but most people just don't mind paying for products and content they find worthwhile.
Maybe it's a huge issue for you
Except that I've made the opposite painfully clear over and over again. But you apparently thought this would work as some sort of position antidote, pretending that I'm some sort of abnormally cheap person?
I am actually aware of the world around me. I watch how things work. I pay attention. My observations are not personal.
Sites and services that charge from the beginning, and/or offer a very clear value added payment option from the beginning are usually successful. Success being defined as self-sufficient without violating user privacy and whoring themselves to advertisers.