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

111–120 of 198 posts

Re: The Next Chapter

#111

Post by [deleted] »

twelvedigits wrote: post #81
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…

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…

[deleted]

Re: The Next Chapter

#112

Post by lentil_soup »

logfromblammo wrote: post #100
lentil_soup wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

You cant swim in the same river twice. No one can ever experience the original, because the context of everyone's experience has changed. Would your perception of Lord of the Rings be the same before and after reading Wheel of Time or Game of Thrones ? Would it even be the same before and after the France-U.S.-Vietnam War? Would it have been the same if written before World War 2? When a work is created, the intentio…

Yeah, but then the argument that allowing derivative works ruins the original is still flawed. If the way you appreciate art is directly linked to your past experiences (which obviously they are) then the original work is already "ruined" whether you've experienced a derivative work before or not.

Re: The Next Chapter

#113

Post by jcampbell1 »

rayiner wrote: post #106
jcampbell1 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You're precisely right: it was a deal.[1] The broadcasters get the airwaves for free, and the public gets TV over those airwaves for free. The deal said nothing about allowing people to capture content over those airwaves and broadcast it over the Internet. You can hardly blame companies for not wanting to give up more on their end of a deal than they agreed to give up! [1] I think it's a waste of valuable spectrum o…

I think you Kennedy and Roberts are all on the same page in thinking Aereo quacked like a retransmission company.

The problem is Aereo got greedy and screwed up the marketing. Had their homepage always said, rent a streaming DVR for $10 a month, it wouldn't be a problem. Capturing content and streaming it over the internet is perfectly legal. TiVo does it. Cablevision does it. Slingbox does it.

Aereo should have acted like a hardware rental company until after the supreme court ruling.

Re: The Next Chapter

#114

Post by jcampbell1 »

varelse wrote: post #101
jcampbell1 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"I am all for people getting paid for their content, but your argument is like saying libraries should be outlawed." I suspect if you set up a privately owned library and lent out bestsellers, that's exactly what would happen. That said, it'd be a real kicker IMO if the government stepped in and started broadcasting everything on the public airwaves for free anywhere in the world over the Internet. If the broadcaster…

Renting books is perfectly legal in the US.

Re: The Next Chapter

#115

Post by tapsboy »

harryh wrote: post #108
twelvedigits wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Your tax dollars are paying for TV show production?

No. But our eyeballs watching those paid ads on free broadcast TV are enabling payments + profit for the production of that content. The numbers may vary by broadcaster and program, but the business model is clear, or atleast was.

Re: The Next Chapter

#116

Post by ufmace »

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…

Yes, the content is what's valuable. And it's already paid for by the ads, which are part of the content stream. As far as I know, Aereo wasn't interfering with those ads in any way. The providers are getting exactly the same deal that they always have - your eyeballs on their ads in exchange for content.

I don't see how they can legitimately claim that they are entitled to more money because it's all happening over the internet instead of in your living room, especially when they aren't lifting a finger to distribute over the internet themselves.

Re: The Next Chapter

#117

Post by geographomics »

I wonder if they could have got away with it, had they not included the DVR feature and just strictly rebroadcast in real-time. As it was, they were too akin to something like The Pirate Bay to not get some sort of legal bruising.

Re: The Next Chapter

#118

Post by dangrossman »

[deleted] wrote: post #110
nemanja wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that would make some sense back in 2005, maybe. During Sandy in 2012, Aero was infinitely more useful: when power ran out your TV with bunny ears became completely useless. On the other hand, you could still watch Aero on your battery powered HSPA connected smart phone. While I am sure bunny-ears antennas work great in more rural areas, they are completely useless on Manhattan.

[deleted]

Most people have a several-hundred-watt backup generator at home: their car. You can idle most cars for at least 2 hours per gallons of gas. That means with a 20 gallon tank, you have 40 hours of charging time for electronics. If you need to charge for an hour every six hours, for example, you'd have 10 days of phone usage.

I've had uninterrupted internet through many multi-day power outages with just my car and a $20 inverter to recharge my phone and laptop. I always fill up the car before a dangerous storm.

No car? You can buy pocket-sized power banks that recharge a phone to full multiple times for $5 a piece. Keep one per phone around for power outages and enjoy your movies.

P.S. If you have Verizon FiOS, you can keep your wired internet on too. The ONT uses almost no power; with a little hacking you can hook that up to a backup battery or your car too. Unlike cable, which needs powered repeaters on the phone poles every mile or so, your fiber's probably still connected in a power outage so long as the line hasn't physically been broken.

Re: The Next Chapter

#119

Post by kenrikm »

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…

Not that I did not see this coming but I wonder if the title is a Freudian slip or intentional. The Next Chapter.. is 11.

Re: The Next Chapter

#120

Post by gareim »

look_lookatme wrote: post #74
laichzeit0 wrote: post #62

Did Aereo as part of it's technology have the ability to strip out ads from content? Because honestly that's the only reason I haven't watched tv/cable whatever in years. Can't be bothered to waste my time on non-content when it's easier to just download a torrent and watch it via Plex. Or is this more aimed at sport, which necessarily needs to be "live" mostly?

And do you send the "tv/cable whatever" companies a check for whatever you think the content is worth? Otherwise you are just a thief.

I hope you don't use Adblock.
Post reply on HN