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

What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 354 posts

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#281

Post by rezonant »

antasvara wrote: post #158
spiderice wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this list only self-produced programs then? The Netflix announcement makes it sound like it included everything on Netflix.

I've looked at the list and there are plenty of shows that aren't Netflix originals. Not sure how they chose the shows in the list, though.

Others mention that this is a result of the WGA strike, though apparently the terms of the deal allowed the streaming company's to require an NDA to view the information, so that doesn't explain everything.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#282

Post by Ldorigo »

nilsherzig wrote: post #238
getcrunk wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Night agent came out this year and is 10 episodes. I didn’t check but assuming it’s 1hr/ep that’s 80million viewers. Wow Ps. Checking a popular torrent site and roughly adding up the download count for all the season rips and adding a representative number from some of the individual episodes. Then multiplying that by 10 because there are other public torrent sites and many private ones we get 60k x 10. Even if you d…

Basically no one in my age group (gen z) knows what Torrents are let alone is able to use them. Most piracy happens via sites like s dot to.

They might not know torrents per se, but I think most at least know that stremio and popcorn time exist - I have no sources, but I'd expect most torrents nowadays to be consumed that way.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#283

Post by watwut »

nomel wrote: post #73
firebirdn99 wrote: post #30

Kinda sad that Netflix opted for quantity over quality. It shows with all the inane sequels like Murder mystery 2, Extraction 2 and with the idea of just filling an uninteresting script with some stars to make the numbers like Red Notice. And many of the top 50 shows reflect just that. The last Netflix original I watched and liked was The Queen's Gambit.

Or, to look at it another way, they're giving their paying customers what they want.

But they are not giving people what they want. Netflix recommendations are notoriously bad and Netflix is not all that successful lately with its own shows. Even when they have actually good shows you would like, you rarely find them through Netflix recommendations - you need someone to tell you about the show.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#284

Post by pjc50 »

Tomis02 wrote: post #67

Slightly related. Netflix is that company that doesn't provide English subtitles in Australia (unless the movie/show's original language is not English), and possibly other native English countries as well. They do provide closed captions however, so that we get helpful captions such as " loud urinating sounds ".

Wait, is there a distinction between "subtitles" and "closed captions"?

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#285

Post by watwut »

hobofan wrote: post #241
danielscrubs wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not. They removed the five star rating because they thought people lied to themselves, but in reality they just couldn’t handle the data. What they will give you is what I call the lowest common denominator of shows.

> but in reality they just couldn’t handle the data If you mean from a "critique" standpoint then no. If you meant from a "data wrangling standpoint then yes, as binary like/dislike data is just a lot easier to work with for recommendation algorithms. There are many good reasons to move from a five star rating system to a binary rating system, and yeah, I think many of those fall into the "people lied to themselves"…

> Netflix also displayed the ratings as 5-star "adjusted ratings for the viewer", which already took your preferences into account.

It was not adjusted to your preferences. It was adjusted by algorithm to ... something that has nothing to do with my enjoyment.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#286

Post by kombookcha »

globular-toast wrote: post #242
muzani wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I sit and think about how one of the highest paying companies in the world sells unproductivity as a service. There's free options for entertainment like YouTube too.

There's nothing wrong with being unproductive. We should totally rest and enjoy life once we've covered our needs for the day. This thing about productivity being a goal of society is stupid. Who says being productive leads to happiness? I actually like to be productive, and I suspect you do too. But if people don't, that's fine too. I do wonder if we might be addicted to productivity, though.

HN is a site where you hear people unironically talk about how they listen to audiobooks and podcasts at higher speed to optimize how many they can take in.

Thinking about what that implies about how these people engage with art is kind of wild. It's like speedwalking through an art gallery to see more paintings per hour. There's something about that optimization/productivity mindset that seems strangely pathological. Like insisting on eating exclusively vitamin gruel because it's optimized for nutrition per minutes.

I don't know where this compulsion starts, but it's a little disturbing.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#287

Post by [deleted] »

jncfhnb wrote: post #126
jay_kyburz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really love the production values, the costumes, the makeup, the world. I love the idea of the Witcher. But I have no idea what the story is about or what anybody is talking about. It's just all way too complicated.

I thought season 1 was straightforward once you understood the dual timelines

[deleted]

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#288

Post by blitzar »

thebradbain wrote: post #118

For anyone else wondering “why they’ve decided to do this”— This is an outcome of the WGA strike negotiations. Now writers (and actors, and anyone else) can use this information to better negotiate their worth with studios, rather than it being 1-sided. All other streaming services should be following suit soon. https://www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign/what-we-won > Streaming data transparency: Companies agree to…

I expect they fought for, and won, something that will ultimately work against their best interests.

Netflix etal. didnt hide this data to pay writers less, they hid to to juice their stock price. If they disclosed how few views they recieved for the piles of cash they were throwing at original content the magic money tree would have dried up.

Re: What We Watched: A Netflix engagement report

#290

Post by Aissen »

The report is lacking a column that shows the total hours watched divided by the number of hours in this content. Some top shows by hour watched are telenovelas with 60 (!) 43min+ episodes per season. It would also give a much better place to movies vs series.
Post reply on HN