Live data from Hacker News

Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

joe-steel.com

151–160 of 289 posts

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#151
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I humbly suggest that VHS is superior to DVD for young children, because you can manually censor naughty bits out of “too adult” movies by scratching the magnetic coating off the tape

You can do the same thing with a DVD if you have a needle and a steady hand.

That's too hard. Just use C-x M-c M-censordvd in emacs.

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it comes down to personal taste. I could likewise see someone say that 80% of all soccer matches are the same. That once you’ve seen one you’ve seen them all. And then on the opposite end you have people enjoying soccer who will be happy to tell you about the nuances between different matches, different players, different teams, etc.

Isn't the issue there that some people basically just don't like soccer so they can't appreciate the differences? I would put myself in that camp - watching soccer just doesn't appeal to me that much, so it all kind of seems the same. But I can very much appreciate the differences to people that enjoy watching the sport, and I think this could be said about nearly any endeavor.

> Isn't the issue there that some people basically just don't like soccer so they can't appreciate the differences?

Yep, hence the first sentence of my comment: “I think it comes down to personal taste.” :D

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#153
post #147
post #15

Basically there was a finite amount of content and a lot of it appeared on Netflix. Then 4+ services launched and a near fixed amount of content was divided by 4. Then they doubled the price. So now for a worse discovery experience you are effectively paying 8x the price.

The thing for me is that the media companies that thought they could just launch their own streaming services and keep all the money for themselves completely devalued the engineering of Netflix. It was "FAANG" for a reason. Viscerally, Netflix doesn't feel like it belongs alongside Google, but it did, because it was good. How does Disney fail to make money off Star Wars? Because they decided to build a shitty tech c…

this is factually incorrect. Disney bought a very successful sports streamer BAMTech to power Disney+

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#154
post #38

Turner Classic Movies streaming app is quietly full of win. Approx 100 curated sometimes thematic movie classics that change every few weeks, View it or lose it.

Unfortunately you need to have a cable subscription with TCM to use the TCM app. They have a fantastic catalog that I cannot pay them directly to watch. I have to pay Comcast first. Not cool. BTW cool angular animation on https://noiralley.tcm.com/?icid=espnav8-noir-alley

Same problem with sports. Asking me to pay a middleman is an instant dealbreaker, especially the cable/satellite tv company.

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#155
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you're right, I watched one season of Law and Order and thought "Great, I've seen 80% of all detective shows, no need to watch any more." /s

If you've seen one episode of Law & Order or House you've seen every episode in the series.

[deleted]

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#156
post #96
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And at some point, you'll feed all that stuff into GPT-(N+1) and get as many new shows as you want.

That will be too much work, most will subscribe to a few curators with matching taste that fulfill all your content needs. Can we eventually do away with other people entirely? Idk

to make streaming economically viable there will need to be Gpt-x that watches the content too.

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#157
post #148

> I’m not sure what’s going to get me to reactivate Disney+, maybe it’ll be whenever the second season of Andor comes out towards the end of 2024 or early 2025, but it’ll just be the two months the show runs, and then I’m out again like the Falcon leaving the Death Star. I don't get why you'd even pay for two months if it's just one show you want to watch. Wait until it's all aired, subscribe for one month, watch it…

> watch it all over a few nights

I don't have time for that, maybe the author doesn't either

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#158
post #44
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you say it's a fixed amount of content? Finite, sure, but it's not fixed.

Once you see a detective show, you basically seen 80% of all detective shows. That's why it seems that there can be nothing to watch, because 80% is basically a rehash, just with different characters and slightly different plots.

There was a show I watched every episode of, not because I particularly liked it but it starred one particular actor that I really wanted to watch.

I'm rather embarrassed to admit this, but there it is.

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that just a regular aspect ratio issue? If the content is filmed in 1:2.4 and you're trying to watch it on a 16:10 screen, it's always going to be letterboxed. In that case, if it doesn't look letterboxed then it's either stretched (deformed) or parts of the video are cropped/lost.

People expect black bats on the top or the sides but not both.

If it's "both" someone somewhere messed up, if you're in the 99.x% of users not experimenting with aspect ratios or resolutions.

Re: Please Pay for a Year of Nothing

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep thinking about Plex but I struggle with the idea of teaching my kids that stealing is okay. Like, for a little kid: "This kind of theft is okay, this kind of theft isn't." seems nuanced for a little kid.

Why do people think it is OK to steal media? I never understand it. After university, I reduced my media stealing habits by 99+%. During/before uni, I was broke and could not afford to buy media. (Not an excuse, but just the reality.) After uni, I had a job so I could afford to buy some media.

I think a lot of people intuitively understand that there's a difference between pirating the works of JRR Tolkein, him being wildly successful and not alive anymore, and doing the same to an up-and-coming author who's eating ramen a lot. There's no difference legally, though, which is a great object lesson in how there are sharp topological differences between the world of ethics and the world of human law.

If you pay for Spotify rather than hacking it, you're really not supporting artists financially very much, right? Paying someone a millionth of a dollar to stream their music seems to me like kind of an insult, actually, and recording their song to a cassette from the radio like kind of a compliment.

Post reply on HN