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

My husband was right about DVDs

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 428 posts

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#411

Post by dwild »

I learned that quite early, mostly because I'm from Quebec, there's so many of our translation that get lost (I guess it's a question of rights, the translation and original content have 2 different owners). The one that made me realize that first is Pokémon, there's just no way to get the original Quebec version (and funnily enough, it's the same French translation, just with the English Pokémon names). I had to buy the original VHS to be able to get it, and still just the first season seems to have been made in VHS.

Piracy doesn't help much either as theses translations were never digital in the first place. There's many show from my youth that I can't find with Quebec translation, even some that I can't find in their original language.

If I had the cash and time it's something that I would wish to try, getting the distributions rights of a few of theses old shows. There's no way it would be that expensive (probably take quite a bit of time though) and nostalgia would works quite well I believe to attract enough viewership to support it.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#412

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

chownie wrote: post #401
LawTalkingGuy wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because while Dylan sometimes says that, the rest of the time they talk about the miraculous changes to their body, etc, and participate in female sexual health panels. They're trying to have it both ways as convenient. If you feel that this is incorrect, go to Wiki and try to edit Rachel Levine's entry to remove the word female and you can personally see how the community views this.

Ok, so what you said was in fact untrue? Dylan says she has tampons for other women, in separate other videos she talks about changes to her body. With regard to female sexual health panels this also appears to be a fabrication. I googled this and your comment was one of the first results, unless you mean the NowThis News panel with Biden? That being a progressive news org having a media moment with the president, no…

My point in this is that the official word on high and filtering down to all levels is that transwomen, males who claim to be women, are female and I think I've shown that regardless.

But yes, I did have the names wrong. The White House's Lesbian day of Visibility was with Richard Levine and Charles Clymer, the two male "lesbian females" at the table. https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/90533/tims-charles-charl...

This is Dylan Mulvaney who met Biden https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/94756/disgustingly-shall...

Thanks for the correction.

> With regard to female sexual health panels this also appears to be a fabrication.

"Rachel" Levine is the assistant health minister so that's every day for them.

> Dylan says she has tampons for other women, in separate other videos she talks about changes to her body.

"Her" body. Exactly.

> You're operating from a place of discomfort and then working backwards toward rationalisation,

It is very uncomfortable watching women being beaten https://www.gulf-insider.com/us-transgender-activists-attack... simply for asserting their rights to single-sex spaces.

I am very uncomfortable watching institutions that my daughter appreciated, such as girl guiding, being appropriated by crazy gun-toting men https://www.womenarehuman.com/women-interviewed-by-police-fo... and for the women who complain to be targeted by false reports and doxing.

I'm horrified watching politicians give women's identities and rights away to men if they claim to be women https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/01/labour-to-c...

I would be as uncomfortable watching Rachel Dolezal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal being appointed presidential advisor for Black affairs.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#413

Post by ValentineC »

npteljes wrote: post #360
ValentineC wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss Google Play Music: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Play_Music

Looks similar to YouTube Music, from what I can see on the screenshots. What is there that you miss about it?

Google Play Music didn't commingle your uploaded music with YouTube, and their discovery algorithm was much better.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#414

Post by maxwell »

lrvick wrote: post #274
maxwell wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think members of the U.S. military would side with the government and execute orders against American citizens on American soil?

They are trained to do anything they are told. Anything. Remember the Chinese military had no problem mowing down protestors if their bosses give the order. That said, it is easier and safer to defend yourself from a government in modern society with information and free uncensored communication than with guns.

What sources are you citing here?

You seem to be completely off-base.

No, in the United States, the military and all federal employees explicitly swear an oath to the Constitution, and are forbidden from executing illegal orders, regardless of the chain of command.

Yeah, PLA goons in Communist China certainly do things differently.

In the United States, the people are the government. Where are you?

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#415

Post by maxwell »

harvey9 wrote: post #399
maxwell wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think members of the U.S. military would side with the government and execute orders against American citizens on American soil?

No. But the police and FBI have fighters (I should have used the term agents in my first post, and I am using it to mean anyone exercising force on behalf of the govt).

Don't police officers and all federal employees take an oath to the U.S. Constitution?

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#416

Post by zirgs »

pilotneko wrote: post #378
zirgs wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if they are not on spotify then where are they? I don't know anyone who buys CDs these days and torrent sites definitely don't pay artists anything.

Sometimes directly from the publisher. Anecdotal example, I like an album by a band Tap Tap. They were short lived and based out of the UK. US Spotify does not have that album, but I can purchase it from their publisher at the time (ironically named Stolen Records).

But how many people buy directly from publishers? Maybe some hardcore fans - but who else?

And another thing - I've discovered lots of artists through Spotify and Youtube. If they weren't there - I would't even know that they existed.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#417

Post by _l7dh »

schmichael wrote: post #264

I wish this article had mentioned the greatest thing about DVDs: You can lend them. Have a friend over and find out they have never seen before?! No need to quick search and figure out if it's on a streaming service they have, just walk over and snatch it off your shelf and hand it to them. In the 00s the trade in media lending was so brisk my friends and I would keep spreadsheets and little databases of who-borrowed…

Absolutely. Another less thought of aspect is simply power consumption and hence ecology. Running so many remote servers for movings and shows one already have at home is absurd I find.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#418

Post by Fnoord »

scintill76 wrote: post #409
Fnoord wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me neither, but there are some exceptions. The original Star Wars trilogy, LOTR, Dune, ... My wife loves Harry Potter. So we got these ripped. We ditched her DVD collection after ripping everything. Legal copies, saving space. Don't even think we brought them to some second hand store.

IANAL but I don’t think your rips would be legal if you gave the discs to a second hand store or any other person. Circumvention clause of the DMCA probably makes DVD rips illegal in the US, even if you keep your original copy and don’t otherwise violate copyright law.

In The Netherlands, yes I am quite sure they are legal copies. They'd been even legal copies if you rented them and made a copy. You don't need to own the original, all you need is that the source was both legal and legally in your possession. You're then allowed to make a copy of it for private use. You're not allowed to distribute it further, you don't have a license for that.

My US ex did the same. She'd rent Netflix DVDs, rip them, and bring them back. Tho that was a long time ago as Netflix DVDs suggests (2005).

Furthermore, I do not feel morally bad about the practice, and the chance of getting into legal trouble with such (if it were illegal) is so small that I simply wouldn't care. You'd have to face a civil court, and how would any party know about your collection if you keep it private?

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#419

Post by pxc »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #392
pxc wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah dude. I recently re-watched the whole show, and while I liked certain parts of it... it's a very transphobic show. And it's not just that episode; that episode gets callbacks in future episodes all the time. It's a mean spirited gag, and the mere fact of being transgender is the punch line, over and over. It sucks. It makes revisiting the show more cringey and less fun.

I don't recall the episode, been probably 10 years since I watched the show, but lots of things "suck" if you watch them through your 2023 eye. Whether a show came out in 1955 or 1999, I just enjoy it as a product of it's time.

Definitely true. I'm not here to say that no one else can or should enjoy the show, or that it's unique in having aged poorly in some respects. But the problems with that episode and later ones (which are not entirely one note about Douglas' relationship with the transgender woman, despite the very painful fight scene and the overwhelming fact that being transgender is the punchline) are real and not made up, and I can understand why they'd be deeply uncomfortable to many people.

> Whether a show came out in 1955 or 1999, I just enjoy it as a product of it's time.

This is great when one can do it, and I think it's a fine approach. But of course, if you were gay in 1955 or trans in 1999, there's probably a lot of shows where certain issues— common enough at the time— would have really diminished your enjoyment and maybe even triggered some dysphoria, even 'at the time'.

Re: My husband was right about DVDs

#420

Post by scintill76 »

Fnoord wrote: post #418
scintill76 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL but I don’t think your rips would be legal if you gave the discs to a second hand store or any other person. Circumvention clause of the DMCA probably makes DVD rips illegal in the US, even if you keep your original copy and don’t otherwise violate copyright law.

In The Netherlands, yes I am quite sure they are legal copies. They'd been even legal copies if you rented them and made a copy. You don't need to own the original, all you need is that the source was both legal and legally in your possession. You're then allowed to make a copy of it for private use. You're not allowed to distribute it further, you don't have a license for that. My US ex did the same. She'd rent Netf…

Fair, I should have said my comments were US-specific.
Post reply on HN