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

The Next Chapter

blog.aereo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 198 posts

Re: The Next Chapter

#81

Post by twelvedigits »

rayiner wrote: post #73
twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

What is antiquated about the idea that you don't get to use other peoples' valuable content without paying for it? Look: the valuable product here is the content. All the technology can do is get in the way. It's great Aereo's technology got in the way less than its competitors, but that still doesn't mean people found the technology itself valuable. The content is what matters. The content is what delights consumers…

Keeping in mind that this content is being broadcast over public spectrum, you're right: the content is the most valuable product.

As a consumer, I want to access that content in an efficient, functional manner. My tax dollars are paying for it. So, I bought an antenna. It couldn't pick up any stations in my apartment, and this is a very common problem in NYC. Even if it picked up stations, I'd have to buy a separate device to record shows so that I can watch them on my schedule.

With Aereo, I was renting an antenna. The company built capital-intensive, power-sucking data warehouses in every city in which it operated and filled them with antennae for every customer. Aereo provided me with a cloud-based antenna, no different than buying one from Best Buy or Amazon.

Only:

(a) the signal was clear and reliable, not fuzzy. My friend has a long coaxial cable connected to his television and he tapes a 12" x 12" antenna to his window. Kind of ridiculous.

(b) they included a cloud-based DVR that allowed me to watch what I want, when I want. They improved the relationship that I had with broadcast content.

Aereo was very clear about the fact that they built a solution that adhered to the law because everyone had an individual antenna. This solution was very expensive, but it worked and though it was described as a Rube Goldberg machine, it made sense.

And here's the ultimate rub for content companies: now I don't watch your content at all. I don't see your ads. I have someone else's cable password, and I watch things sporadically, but I don't discover new shows like you want me to.

Re: The Next Chapter

#82

Post by lentil_soup »

throwaway1592 wrote: post #67
lentil_soup wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the family of Tolkien be compensated forever? What have they done to suddenly be entitled to this? Also, how does mixing and modifying things damage the original? The original is still there and you can appreciate it without worrying about stuff someone else has done with it. That is specially true in software that's what makes it such a great medium.

My view is that the damaging is because 1.) people are not experiencing the original. 2.) the voice of the characters is not that of the creator and can not be true to their his intentions. When the allow others to create derivatives works there are always changes but they allowed those changes

"people are not experiencing the original." Sure, but they're experiencing an original interpretation of another work, it'll be judged on its own merit. They can still look up the original if they want to. What's wrong with that?. As Newton said: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants"

If we were to ban any derivative work you'd need to forget about pretty much any "art" done in the last 400 years (to say a number). As mentioned somewhere else Tolkien's work is not "original" in that case then, it's a mash-up of European mythology. What about music? most modern music relies on samples of other works (check this TED talk by Mark Ronson about it: http://www.ted.com/talks/mark_ronson_how_sampling_transforme...). And TV/Film? Many movie/tv scripts are just a modern version of Shakespeare's works. Anything we do now is influenced by something someone has done before, that's called progress and if we block this with made up "laws" we are going to be very impoverished as a society.

Re: The Next Chapter

#83

Post by psychometry »

rayiner wrote: post #73
twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

What is antiquated about the idea that you don't get to use other peoples' valuable content without paying for it? Look: the valuable product here is the content. All the technology can do is get in the way. It's great Aereo's technology got in the way less than its competitors, but that still doesn't mean people found the technology itself valuable. The content is what matters. The content is what delights consumers…

You realize that OTA HDTV is...free, right? Explain to me how any content provider lost a single dollar because of Aereo's existence.

Re: The Next Chapter

#84

Post by untog »

twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

Aereo also worked remarkably well during Hurricane Sandy.

Provided you had internet, yes. Which a lot of people didn't. Over the air broadcasts - which Aereo were retransmitting - don't require any internet connection. In an emergency situation like Sandy a bunny-ears antenna is infinitely more useful than a bandwidth-chewing internet streaming service.

Have you ever tried using one? Given that you live less than a mile from where Aereo is receiving its signal, you might be surprised at the crystal clear, HD quality TV you can get without paying a company $7 a month. Aereo's biggest triumph was making free, over the air broadcasts look like their premium product.

Re: The Next Chapter

#85

Post by untog »

psychometry wrote: post #83
rayiner wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is antiquated about the idea that you don't get to use other peoples' valuable content without paying for it? Look: the valuable product here is the content. All the technology can do is get in the way. It's great Aereo's technology got in the way less than its competitors, but that still doesn't mean people found the technology itself valuable. The content is what matters. The content is what delights consumers…

You realize that OTA HDTV is...free, right? Explain to me how any content provider lost a single dollar because of Aereo's existence.

Because cable companies pay broadcast companies to redistribute broadcast content - it's a major source of income for the broadcast companies. The cable companies said that if Aereo were allowed to get away with what they were doing then they'd do the same thing themselves.

Re: The Next Chapter

#86

Post by varelse »

iolsantr wrote: post #31
wdewind wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yes, changed the world by making it legal to build a business off someone else's content that you got for free through a legal hack. Tragic it didn't work out. I think I mostly agree with you, but just to play devil's advocate: this is broadcast television. It's already being given away for free. I could easily and legally build a kit to record this broadcast without a cable box/official dvr. I could also rewatch th…

Doing it in someone else's facility I think is what makes it illegal. IF you had exactly the same scheme but hosted the equipment in your customer's houses, Aero's business model would be perfectly legit. (I think, it's been a while since i read the opinion)

That makes about as much sense to me as the Vatican saying it's OK to employ the rhythm method as contraception technique but don't you dare put on a condom! Sigh...

Re: The Next Chapter

#87

Post by pc86 »

lbotos wrote: post #76
pc86 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The content I create does not belong to society. It belongs to me. If I want to kill it that is my right.

I agree with you in theory, in practice we know this isn't the case. The way content is shared in 2014 and data is duplicated you don't have that right anymore if you are creating any type of digital content. Not out of some "overarching evil" but out of people's desire to share.

A right is not a right if the desires of people I have never met abrogates it.

Re: The Next Chapter

#88

Post by twelvedigits »

untog wrote: post #84
twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

Aereo also worked remarkably well during Hurricane Sandy. Provided you had internet, yes. Which a lot of people didn't. Over the air broadcasts - which Aereo were retransmitting - don't require any internet connection. In an emergency situation like Sandy a bunny-ears antenna is infinitely more useful than a bandwidth-chewing internet streaming service. Have you ever tried using one? Given that you live less than a m…

Bought one, it didn't work for me. Couldn't pick up a signal anywhere. Also, if I wanted to record shows I'd have to hook it to a Tivo (or similar device) which has an up-front cost and a monthly fee. Aereo provided the whole package in a low monthly cost.

Re: The Next Chapter

#89

Post by jcampbell1 »

rayiner wrote: post #73
twelvedigits wrote: post #71

I don't think many people had the opportunity to use Aereo. They had a decent presence in New York City, and as the company expanded across the country reporters cited customer numbers in the mid five figures. As an Aereo user, let me tell you what you missed out on: one of the most amazing products I've ever used. Aereo "worked." It worked like magic. First, it lived up to its claim. You could stream live, broadcast…

What is antiquated about the idea that you don't get to use other peoples' valuable content without paying for it? Look: the valuable product here is the content. All the technology can do is get in the way. It's great Aereo's technology got in the way less than its competitors, but that still doesn't mean people found the technology itself valuable. The content is what matters. The content is what delights consumers…

I come down on the other side. The networks get the airwaves for free. It was a reasonable deal -- free bandwidth in exchange for a public service and an ad supported business model.

If the networks want to give up their bandwidth and let the government auction it off, fine. I just don't like this crap that they get the spectrum for free, and I can't rent an antennae of my choosing.

IMO, either we allow Aereo, or we make the networks pay for the spectrum, or we get rid of over the air and use it for cell data.

I am all for people getting paid for their content, but your argument is like saying libraries should be outlawed.

Re: The Next Chapter

#90

Post by untog »

twelvedigits wrote: post #88
untog wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aereo also worked remarkably well during Hurricane Sandy. Provided you had internet, yes. Which a lot of people didn't. Over the air broadcasts - which Aereo were retransmitting - don't require any internet connection. In an emergency situation like Sandy a bunny-ears antenna is infinitely more useful than a bandwidth-chewing internet streaming service. Have you ever tried using one? Given that you live less than a m…

Bought one, it didn't work for me. Couldn't pick up a signal anywhere. Also, if I wanted to record shows I'd have to hook it to a Tivo (or similar device) which has an up-front cost and a monthly fee. Aereo provided the whole package in a low monthly cost.

You don't need a Tivo - just a USB tuner stick and MythTV, or some other open source solution. Granted if the antenna doesn't work then it doesn't work - I had some success buying a powered one.
Post reply on HN