Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981) • Hacker News Board

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#331

Post by titzer » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 1:19 AM UTC

rollingbarreler wrote: post #211

titzer wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old? I feel like a dinosaur because I still watch shock DVDs. Still no ads. No DRM. No funky software needed, though, TBH, the bits are encrypted. Not sure how long optical media lasts, but I am hoping these things last a few more decades.

I believe CDs and DVDs used organic compounds for their data layer, which begins physically rotting and destroying the data later Later disks like M-disc type DVDs and Blu-ray don't use living components and don't really age

Printed CDs and DVDs have nothing but plastic and aluminum. If you are referring to CD-R(W) and DVD-R(W), these use phase change materials, the exact composition of which I am not sure. https://volga.eng.yale.edu/teaching-resources/cds-and-dvds/m...

Also remember organic != living. Organic is basically hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen and carbon chains in molecules. They vary greatly in their durability and may or may not be useful to carbon-based life.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#332

Post by swilliamsio » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 2:42 AM UTC

titzer wrote: post #121

bovermyer wrote: post #24

If advertising ever intrudes on streaming the way it did on cable, I'll just transition out of watching TV altogether. I don't care near as much about keeping up with the zeitgeist as I used to. Maybe I'm just getting old.

Old? I feel like a dinosaur because I still watch shock DVDs. Still no ads. No DRM. No funky software needed, though, TBH, the bits are encrypted. Not sure how long optical media lasts, but I am hoping these things last a few more decades.

Your DVDs don't have unskippable anti-piracy ads and ads for movies that released decades ago?

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#333

Post by Talanes » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 2:44 AM UTC

0x202020 wrote: post #254

Talanes wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Catering to the customers least interested in keeping the service isn't a great business strategy. Those who do only want to pay for one month to watch the whole show still have the option of subscribing during the last month of airing. Or any time after that.

For sure. It’s one of those things that my use case is probably a very, very small percent of users but it would be nice to be a bit more viewer friendly from that point of view. Right now since they have limited new content it feels like they are stretching them to keep subscribers as long as possible.

That's 100% what they're doing. I imagine most their money is in people who aren't re-evaluating the subscription month to month, and just need some drip of new content to keep justifying inertia.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#334

Post by BurningFrog » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 4:25 AM UTC

drevil-v2 wrote: post #200

nolok wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the exact same commercial for anti-AIDS drugs sixteen times per hour. European here, I will go over my surprise / weirdness about having ads for chronic disease medication like that, to ask : do you actually, you as the patient, choose which medication you receive for disease like that? Does your opinion override that of the doctor? Is it not ultimately a moot choice both by you and the doctor because the one you w…

Every time I am visiting USA, I am flabbergasted at the medication ads on TV. Not just for off-the-counter stuff like paracetamol or anti-inflammation medication but actual freaking prescription only drugs. And they actually ask you to speak to your doctor about the drug. Haha what? Shouldn't my doctor morally and by default be suggesting the best treatment for what I have? And if I don't trust his/her treatment plan…

> Shouldn't my doctor morally and by default be suggesting the best treatment for what I have?

Of course. But how does the doctor know about my problem if I don't ask about it?

There are a lot of people with treatable conditions who have no idea that it's (1) a medical condition and/or (2) now treatable.

These ads will cause some of these people to go get treatment. That's undeniably good. How big that effect is, or if it's outweighed by bad effects, I can't say, of course.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#335

Post by sangnoir » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 6:16 AM UTC

xxpor wrote: post #271

nolok wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the exact same commercial for anti-AIDS drugs sixteen times per hour. European here, I will go over my surprise / weirdness about having ads for chronic disease medication like that, to ask : do you actually, you as the patient, choose which medication you receive for disease like that? Does your opinion override that of the doctor? Is it not ultimately a moot choice both by you and the doctor because the one you w…

As an American, what shocked me in the UK was the amount of ads for sports gambling. Literally every commercial during games was for a betting site. It felt pretty gross.

The only reason sports gambling isn't as big (or bigger) in the US is due to a historical aversion to gambling (thinly veiled piety in government), and because Major league sports orgs are still figuring out how to get the most money out of it.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#336

Post by alexmingoia » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 7:01 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #175

alexmingoia wrote: post #44

The market is big enough for ad-free options. HBO built a business providing ad-free TV entertainment. The Economist built a business selling ad-free news periodicals. YouTube provides a paid ad-free option. You could look at the Web and say “it’s littered with ads” or you could look at the Web and say “it’s the largest collection of free information on the planet.”

> YouTube provides a paid ad-free option. It's an "ad-free ", with a large disclaimer under asterisk. > you could look at the Web and say “it’s the largest collection of free information on the planet.”* Or you could look at the way advertising influences curation of information, and how the viability of ad-based business models mean there's incentive to create sites with things that promise, but not deliver, informa…

I have a different perspective and experience.

Ads have enabled me to access information at little to no cost to me. Ads enable us to search the Internet.

I learned to exercise, eat healthy, and much more from watching YouTube. I’ve learned a lot from newspapers and blogs. I’ve learned a lot from people on Twitter. Do I enjoy advertising? No, usually not. But from my perspective it’s a win-win. Companies promote their products and I get to read things for free.

Look on the bright side.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#337

Post by PunksATawnyFill » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 7:41 AM UTC

Funny how far things have gone. "Basic cable" had ads, but it was "free," as in included with your base-level subscription. But then basic-cable channels like MTV decided to try to charge for their viewership, AND have commercials. So now you're supposed to PAY to watch commercials.

But let's face it: The stupidity of the public seems to have no bottom. Look what Apple gets away with.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#338

Post by tonyedgecombe » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 7:50 AM UTC

wmeredith wrote: post #212

xbmcuser wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can pay the $10~ per month for premium and get rid of the ads. Many people here on hn complain about the ads but are unwilling to pay to support non ad version at the same time.

I pay for the premium version and there are still some ads.

I was going to sign up for premium, I don't think I'll bother if it does work.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#339

Post by tonyedgecombe » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 8:00 AM UTC

cheschire wrote: post #118

hacym wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they just raise prices like they have done multiple times now.

Eventually this kind of approach would torpedo their company's growth. Every price hike alienates part of their base who, for whatever reason, cannot or will not accept the new higher price and they will jump to another provider who is the same or cheaper in price even if the product they receive is worse. At some point the price difference between the quality product and the cheap product becomes so vast that the qu…

Do ad-free subscriptions a higher price work, we don't see many of those offers.

I suspect the problem is although everybody sees the ads the value comes from the wealthiest section of subscribers. These are the people most likely to pay to block the adverts. Lose those and you will lose your advertisers.

Re: Will cable TV be invaded by commercials? (1981)

#340

Post by tonyedgecombe » Mon, Apr 27, 2020, 8:06 AM UTC

mortenlarsen wrote: post #155

res0nat0r wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix per dollar is about the cheapest entertainment you can get. Frankly it should be MORE expensive for the amount of high quality content they release constantly.

The three subscriptions available here in Denmark are: SD: $11.46, HD: $14.37, UHD: $18.72 (UHD is a bit of a joke with that birate, but that is another matter). For low income households that can be quite a lot. Combine that with Netflix having significantly less content in Denmark than the rest of the world, and it might not be such a good deal the begin with after all. So I guess it depends on where you live and y…

I suspect most low income households in Denmark are going to be able to afford that, just because it can displace other much more expensive forms of entertainment.