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

Update on Sharing

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 325 posts

Re: Update on Sharing

#71

Post by deepzn »

Netflix once had an advantage, mostly tech and UI based, as well as network effects. I feel all of it has subsided. They did well to weather the studios and networks pulling their content into their own services. While deciding to invest in original content early, they built a pretty decent library, but they're still way behind with other networks who have 50+ years of content.

While their focus now to cover the breadth of programming like cable as opposed to quality content, means they will likely stay where they are (lose selective subs, and gain cable subs) but just not as an emerging tech co. with new ideas that was once the N in FANG, but just as a legacy media network, while their consumers have a wealth of choices fighting for their time including social, gaming, real world events, etc.

Re: Update on Sharing

#72

Post by joemi »

deltarholamda wrote: post #53
zamadatix wrote: post #13

Honestly, I wouldn't have minded something like "buy an extra member" if it were introduced years ago. Introducing it now just seems to be a trigger to re-evaluate "is Netflix really worth that much" at a time their content selection doesn't look as amazing as it once did. I'm coming from a background of having recently cancelled my account though, and may be biased in thinking along those lines as a result. Overall…

I wish they had done this from the get go. My family has never shared a password with anybody, and I'm pretty confident that some of their price hikes reflected the reality that they had to deal with password sharers. All I know is that with the fracturing of the streaming landscape, where everything requires a separate $8.99/$11.99/$15.99 (or whatever) monthly fee, downloading Linux ISOs starts to look more and more…

> downloading Linux ISOs starts to look more and more attractive

Is that a veiled reference to piracy? If so, why not just say piracy?

Re: Update on Sharing

#73

Post by shrimp_emoji »

joemi wrote: post #44
questime wrote: post #22

Ahoy there, mateys! I be here to say that I be leaving Netflix. They be raising their prices too high, and they be taking away all the good shows. I be sailin' the high seas for my entertainment now. Arrrr!

Why be coy and simply (heavily) imply pirating? Just say outright that you're going to pirate stuff because you for some reason believe you have a right to view their content and not pay for it?

Pirating is seizing a ship for material goods. People get hurt or killed when this happens. And the economics of material goods are literally otherworldly from those of digital goods. (You can't download a car -- copying a car for practically free.)

Torrenting is just choosing the most convenient distribution mechanism for data that you own. You can buy DRM-free music, but not DRM-free shows or movies unless they're bound to physical media. The reasons why have to do with backdoor meetings and lobbying by the MPAA, and I don't care much about them. And Netflix expects me to own nothing and be happy while leasing tenuous network access to compressed streams of content by paying indefinitely. Cute.

I think it's funny they got us to implicitly condemn solving their greed-based distribution problem with a term as hyperbolic as "pirating" though. They want to remain in meatspace, where the old economic model makes sense -- scarcity, wear and tear, manufacturing costs per unit, so they try pretending we're all still there in cyberspace by guilt tripping us with meatspace vocabulary.

Re: Update on Sharing

#74

Post by bsder »

CraigJPerry wrote: post #54
Paul-Craft wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... " To better serve our customers, here's how we're making things worse for you. FTFY.

Corey Doctrow has a good term for this, or at least it’s him i heard say it: enshitification. I think it just captures the dynamics beautifully, it’s almost poetic.

Oy, double T. It's "enshittification". And that's even the way Doctorow spelled it.

The root word is "shitty". Double T.

I've seen this a couple of times now without the double T, and it pains me.

Re: Update on Sharing

#75

Post by willcipriano »

brookst wrote: post #38
galleywest200 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I have my other households VPN to my local network to bypass this?

Not if they’re looking at SSID. But if that’s really the case you can just use the same SSID on both places, and maybe use the same IP address space and router MAC. If they’re fingerprinting the home network that should do pretty good?

I don't think they have SSID on most devices.

Re: Update on Sharing

#76

Post by nomel »

xbmcuser wrote: post #60

I still have a Netflix account as my family in another country use it. If get this letter I will probably close the account

These types of comments completely justify Netflix’s actions, in my mind.

Re: Update on Sharing

#77

Post by jrflowers »

joemi wrote: post #44
questime wrote: post #22

Ahoy there, mateys! I be here to say that I be leaving Netflix. They be raising their prices too high, and they be taking away all the good shows. I be sailin' the high seas for my entertainment now. Arrrr!

Why be coy and simply (heavily) imply pirating? Just say outright that you're going to pirate stuff because you for some reason believe you have a right to view their content and not pay for it?

It’s possible that is meant to be read somewhat sarcastically or humorously.

Explaining a painfully obvious joke destroys the joke, even when it was painfully obvious in the first place.

Re: Update on Sharing

#78

Post by kstrauser »

s1k3s wrote: post #55

Glad they're actually pushing this. The fact that people think it's somehow their right to use stuff for free, that others had to put in work for, is mindblowing for me.

It would be more understandable if their founding CEO wasn't on record saying that they were happy to have people share their accounts, especially with their kids.

Re: Update on Sharing

#79

Post by joemi »

yieldcrv wrote: post #33
zamadatix wrote: post #13

Honestly, I wouldn't have minded something like "buy an extra member" if it were introduced years ago. Introducing it now just seems to be a trigger to re-evaluate "is Netflix really worth that much" at a time their content selection doesn't look as amazing as it once did. I'm coming from a background of having recently cancelled my account though, and may be biased in thinking along those lines as a result. Overall…

> at a time their content selection doesn't look as amazing as it once did I feel like Netflix is seasonal. Just like Disney+ and HBO. Come fall Netflix will debut a bunch of viral bangers, and by February you'll be questioning if Netflix is worth it again.

That's how I treat all streaming services nowadays. With the fractured landscape it's kind of the only way to handle it now.

Re: Update on Sharing

#80

Post by Paul-Craft »

ChikkaChiChi wrote: post #47
dangerboysteve wrote: post #18

In Canada, I had the full pickle 4K account and my girls in another city used my account. When the new rules kicked in, I cut my plan and pay half now. And I'll cancel it this month. The service is just not worth it with all the crappy content.

This is the most mind-blowing aspect of this. Kids away at college use their parents' accounts for entertainment. Those kids graduate, then get their own accounts. Netflix is shooting themselves in the foot. These kids will just adopt content from other providers.

With kids and parents, what may very well happen is that the parents start subsidizing kids' individual accounts while they're already in school. It's not like the few extra bucks a month is meaningful compared to the low 5 figure sum it takes to send a kid away to college.
Post reply on HN