These services will likely not be around in 5 years if things continue as they do today. I work with clients who ban any ASN that hosts these kinds of services. Not sure what Mullvad can do to not become a new Tor or North Korea. At many companies they already are. I am not for it. Just the way the lands lie right now.
are your clients consumer ISPs? or are they like edge CDNs doing www stuff? the impact on these VPN services would be tremendously different in each case.
We are removing the option to create new subscriptions
451–453 of 453 posts
Re: We are removing the option to create new subscriptions
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your theory is that Netflix isn't selling entertainment, they're selling boredom insurance? That somebody might have a sudden, unexpected, and catastrophic need for sitcom reruns that might cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars, so to mitigate that risk they pay Netflix just in case? If you really can't tell those classes of product apart, I don't think I can help you.
>Your theory is that Netflix isn't selling entertainment, they're selling boredom insurance? That somebody might have a sudden, unexpected, and catastrophic need for sitcom reruns that might cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars, so to mitigate that risk they pay Netflix just in case? Don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything even approaching that. Netflix sells a service (a pretty useless one, in my vi…
Re: We are removing the option to create new subscriptions
#453Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Your theory is that Netflix isn't selling entertainment, they're selling boredom insurance? That somebody might have a sudden, unexpected, and catastrophic need for sitcom reruns that might cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars, so to mitigate that risk they pay Netflix just in case? Don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything even approaching that. Netflix sells a service (a pretty useless one, in my vi…
The business models are not the same. Insurance is deeply different in an economic sense than selling videos. Willfully ignoring that distinction is ridiculous, and I tried to make the difference apparent in the comment you're quoting. If you're not getting it, that's fine, you are free to carry on not getting it.
I was inexact (business vs. payment model) in my previous comment. My apologies.
But my point still stands: Subscription payment models aren't inherently exploitative; rather they can be implemented/administered (or not) in an exploitative fashion.
Don't like Netflix/NYT and others' implementation of said payment model? I'm not surprised. I'm not very high on them either.
But just because you don't like the specific implementation, doesn't make them a different payment model. That payment model being: "pay a monthly fee, get whatever product/service you've paid (and continue to pay) for.
You appear to be claiming that because different companies sell different stuff, that the payment models are not the same.
Which is akin to arguing that since automobiles with ICEs[0] serve a different purpose than automobiles with electric engines. They don't.
And likewise, subscription payment models are subscription payment models, regardless of the product/service being offered.
>If you're not getting it, that's fine, you are free to carry on not getting it.
And you're free to continue making wildly inaccurate statements. Have fun and a good day!
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine