81–90 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the implied point is about it being mainstream . Which what you’re describing explicitly isn’t.
Piracy was mainstream in the early 90s/2000s. It was only when iTunes came out and the RIAA lawsuits successfully killed the p2p clients that it tamed back down.
That’s a niche. Not mainstream.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the implied point is about it being mainstream . Which what you’re describing explicitly isn’t.
It was very mainstream, at least amongst students at the time.
I had to explain it to several others students in 2001. That is not “was mainstream in the late 90s”. That’s “was breaking out” at best.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably best for civility's sake if he didn't. Would it really add much to the discussion if he did? I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideological range of the general population.
Surely the opposite is true: Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range. They are still listing Friends and Breaking Bad, you're just not furious about those.
> "Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range."
Furthermore, this is not actually the opposite of what I said. ("I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideological range of the general population.") You use the word "broader", which is a relative term, but don't specify precisely what you are relating Netflix to. I assume you are relating it to traditional television programming (I assume this since the two shows you mentioned by name were traditional television programming.) But if you'll read my statement again, you'll see that's not what I was relating Netflix to.
I related the range of Neflix content to the ideological range of the general population. Not to traditional television, to the general population. Do I really need to explain that traditional television too only covers a small slice of the ideological range of the general population? I'll do so:
There are ideas and worldviews out there in which you'll never find mentioned or catered to in any mainstream television show or any Netflix show. The reasons for this are as varied as the ideas and worldviews themselves. Some don't get on TV or Netflix because they are difficult to monetize or run contrary to corporate interests. Some are too niche to bother recognizing, and others are offensive to other larger portions of society (I assume you assume it all falls under this later category, because you're eager to act morally righteous. I assume that about you because you assumed I was furious.) Some ideas and worldviews go unrecognized by television and netflix simply because they've gone unnoticed by television and netflix executives and filmmakers.
The sum of human ideology, ideas and worldviews is MUCH larger than the sum of what traditional television and netflix has on display. It's healthy to recognize this because failure to do so necessarily means your understanding of the world is contracted to the intersection of what mass media executives think publishable (that is, what they can agree amongst themselves to publish.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny. I find WebTorrents a bliss to use compared with Netflix - you wan't me to install WHAT? And then pay how much??? Heeeell no.
Install? Netflix comes with even the cheapest TVs now. It's hard to buy a new TV without it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't want to risk spoilers. Any Game Of Thrones fan will relate to that concept.
Wouldn't then the people who can only watch one episode per week be risking spoilers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was very mainstream, at least amongst students at the time.
I was a student at that time. Common, yes, specifically with tech course students (like myself) but mainstream? No. I had to explain it to several others students in 2001. That is not “was mainstream in the late 90s”. That’s “was breaking out” at best.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give an example?
It's probably best for civility's sake if he didn't. Would it really add much to the discussion if he did? I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideological range of the general population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely the opposite is true: Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range. They are still listing Friends and Breaking Bad, you're just not furious about those.
I'm not furious about anything, did you notice that I'm not the guy upthread? Though I do find your assumption that I like Friends and Breaking Bad to be strange. Why do you assume that? > "Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range." Furthermore, this is not actually the opposite of what I said. ( "I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideologic…
I now understand your statement meant something like "Netflix content has a narrower ideological range than the ideological range of the whole population"
I recognise why you think this is an important claim here, but I don't think it is a useful comparison - no content provider can provide for the complete diversity of 7 billion people: it's not a fair comparison. A content provider can only make decisions within the resources that they have.
Meanwhile, I was saying "Netflix content has a broader ideological range [than equivalent TV networks and content providers]".
By picking those two shows, I was identifying that Netflix does not exclude people who were previously satisfied with that narrower range of content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not furious about anything, did you notice that I'm not the guy upthread? Though I do find your assumption that I like Friends and Breaking Bad to be strange. Why do you assume that? > "Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range." Furthermore, this is not actually the opposite of what I said. ( "I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideologic…
Thank you for clarifying. I now understand your statement meant something like "Netflix content has a narrower ideological range than the ideological range of the whole population" I recognise why you think this is an important claim here, but I don't think it is a useful comparison - no content provider can provide for the complete diversity of 7 billion people: it's not a fair comparison. A content provider can onl…
Personally if I'm going to sit down and passively consume media, I usually like it to be about people making things, ideally with constrained resources. Preferably nonfiction. At any point in time Netflix may have a handful of documentaries that fit the bill, but compared to a platform like youtube it's basically nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Handmaid's Tale is great, and here in the UK is shown on Channel 4 (free to air, only a TV licence is required). Then there's Billions, my current favourite show, which is on Sky Atlantic (subscription, about £30 per month) - also home to Game Of Thrones and everything else HBO. If you add Prime for Mr Robot and Netflix for Stranger Things, it starts to get quite expensive.
Not sure about sky Atlantic, but channel 4 has adverts, thus dramas aren't watchable.
I record and skip the ads at ×30. Not ideal but what options are there that don't involve DVDs?