Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I'm done with Google

deijin.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 327 posts

Re: I'm done with Google

#171

Post by charcircuit »

bo1024 wrote: post #148
charcircuit wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are buying a license to watch the movie. You are not renting it.

Those aren't exclusive -- isn't renting an example of "buying a license"? But I would be okay if they had to change the misleading "Buy Movie" to a phrase like "Buy a Limited License to Watch Movie". Or "Buy Limited Access to Movie".

Personally, I think those would be overly verbose for how buying movies has worked since they were invented. Consumers are already well aware that buying a movie only grants them a license.

Re: I'm done with Google

#172

Post by plaguepilled »

dxuh wrote: post #97
usui wrote: post #16

> So I pirate the movie (please don't arrest me, it's google's fault) I really like the frank tone of the article and I wish people in general would just write unabashedly more often when it comes to stuff like this. Writers online love to dance around the idea of "pirating" their digital goods when communicating on the topic: "Ooh my 'friend' may or may not have downloaded 'xyz' movie from 'abc' website, but I don't…

Music and movies are very, very different. While there is no site I know of that provides purchase of DRM free downloads of popular movies, there are many alternatives for music. I purchase most of the music I like from Bandcamp and I think even Amazon allows purchase of DRM free downloadable music. I feel ZERO regrets about pirating movies, because I am not given any option worth purchasing, but I would feel bad pir…

Not all music is available on Bandcamp or Amazon - the availability from what I have seen is quite poor. Its the same issue but the can has been kicked down the road for music a little.

Re: I'm done with Google

#173

Post by veltas »

nine_k wrote: post #119
veltas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask for open mindedness that I bring religion here, I feel it necessary to discuss this question of ethics/morality: "Who gives a fuck?" I quote Mark 12:15. > But, knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, “Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” And they brought one. And he said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said to him, “Caesar’s.” Jesus said to them, “Render…

With all due respect, the OP has bought the movie legitimately. He has paid for it. It was legally his. It was Google's technical ineptitude that did not allow him to use his legitimately bought movie, which had been readily available before. So he obtained an illegally made copy of the movie which he had legally obtained before, which he had every right to keep in his possession, formally. I don't see anyone's inter…

I was addressing the commenter who said they just pirate. I think the article is another matter.

Re: I'm done with Google

#174

Post by rock_artist »

Digital age isn't about owning stuff. We can "subscribe" to stuff, rent them as long as we don't violate terms and pay in time.

The pros - you're paying for "all-you-can-eat" like approach where everything is available (as long as you pay)

Sadly, Digital media was never to be owned. (it to be - grant rights to use) If it's open without no DRM - it can be copied, no real ownership.

It's only rights, unlike physical goods where copying can be more complex to accomplish meaning - we can own something.

Re: I'm done with Google

#175

Post by yawboakye »

i pirated my first book on programming. circumstances forced me to: not affordable for a young african surviving on ~$50/mo, no debit/credit card (these payment instruments won’t become popular until mid 2010s), thee general availability of resources via torrent sites. now i don’t pirate my books anymore, or i haven’t found it necessary to. but sometimes piracy agrees with the intentions of the author of the work, disagrees with the distribution mechanism. as distribution becomes worse, as demonstrated in the article, the elegant simplicity of piracy can only become more and more attractive.

Re: I'm done with Google

#176

Post by kelnos »

charcircuit wrote: post #117
rapht wrote: post #58

There's a language issue which has not been tackled by regulators and which is actually the mere definition of what happens when I choose to "buy" or "purchase" something. This is because until recently (by the timescale of "buying things") there were no intangibles to be bought or sold. An intangible is mostly a right to something - in other words, it's paperwork. But some things are both tangible and intangible, i.…

You are buying a license to watch the movie. You are not renting it.

I don't think any average consumer, when they click a "Buy" button next to the movie they want to watch, understands that they are only buying a license to watch the movie. Most believe it's just like buying a Bluray disc, but "on the computer".

And yes, I know people are restricted in what they can do with Bluray discs, but as long as you have a functioning player, you can watch the disc. I think that's all anyone has ever expected out of physical media. DRM'd digital media comes with much more uncertainty, and that should be reflected in the terminology used to "buy a license" for it.

Re: I'm done with Google

#177

Post by mindcrime »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #154
mindcrime wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an example: I believe in supporting those who create media, and don't mind at all paying for streaming services that provide quality content for a fair price. As such, I happily subscribe to Amazon Prime (with several "add on" channels), Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, and HBO Max. Then one day I decided, "hell, I think Peacock TV has some stuff I might want to watch." So I signed up for a paid account, like any other…

But that's the case with the others, too. I'm not familiar with HBO, Disney and Hulu, but Prime and Netflix don't allow you to watch high-def content on Linux. Hell, even on Windows with their app, Prime won't let you watch more that HD. For UHD, you need their stick or some other device. [0] Netflix supports UHD on computers, but only on some browsers, of which Chrome is not one [1]. But, to your point about Peacock…

but Prime and Netflix don't allow you to watch high-def content on Linux.

I don't know (or care) about "high-def" but I can assure you that Prime and Netflix work just fine on Linux.

Netflix supports UHD on computers

That's not really relevant to me. I don't care about UHD, I just care about being able to watch. I'm not that picky.

Peacock, on the other hand, doesn't work at all.

Re: I'm done with Google

#178

Post by makach »

from the article "You do not own the things you pay for."

That is right! You buy a license that gives you right to consume the content. It is not just Google's fault, everyone is doing this! I believe reason it is so is because of greed and incompetence.

The incompetence becomes apparent when you try to use the content you have access to and it doesn't work.

I am more than willing to pay for content, but once availability breaks down, a use case for piracy/free use is created.

Re: I'm done with Google

#179

Post by vladvasiliu »

snowwrestler wrote: post #80
scambier wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Piracy is a service problem" means that most people pirate because they don't have access (or difficult access) to the product/service they want. They would gladly pay for it, but they can't, or can't be hassled to. I don't know if it's been backed up by real data, but services like Steam and Spotify tend to confirm this intuition.

Spotify confirms that piracy was in fact a pricing problem. With a Spotify subscription, you get way more music for a far lower price than under the previous “buy it to hear it” model a la iTunes or CDs. And artists make way less money now from recorded music than they used to. Studios only agreed to the Spotify pricing model because the alternative was rampant file-based piracy. They figured that getting something i…

Sample size of one and whatnot, but I remember when I was a kid, it was pretty darn hard to find the kind of music I liked (think heavy metal that you won't hear on the radio). Sure, a CD was relatively expensive for me at the time. But mostly, it was hard to actually find.

Sure, the latest top 40 and a bit of "common niche" albums (like the usual suspects when it comes to classic music or classic rock) were easy to find. But black and death metal? Not a chance.

I wasn't even living in the middle of nowhere, mind. Just a fairly populous suburb of a major European city. But as a teenager, it was extremely unpractical to travel to the city center, and to even learn about the stores where this music would be sold.

With piracy or Spotify, that issue evaporates.

And actually, Spotify is much better. Because it's much quicker and practical to just search Spotify and click play, than it is to browse dubious trackers, not knowing if or when I might get my download. Plus, with Spotify connect, they can be sure I won't be cancelling my plan anytime soon.

Re: I'm done with Google

#180

Post by wtk »

Isn't it that downloading is not illegal if you own the content already? If you're downloading and uploading at the same time it's different since you might be facilitating a download for someone who hasn't purchased it. That will be different between countries.
Post reply on HN