I'm mostly down to one. It's called Daddyflix (Jellyfin, actually) and runs on a Mac Mini in my home office. Costs close to zero, is accessible everywhere and there's no ads or other bullshit.
is it an old intel mac mini or ARM?
The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
141–150 of 398 posts
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#142Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not even buying. If governments think my data is worthless and e.g. don't kill the businessmodel behind data brokers, then why should I respect their copyright laws?
These streaming services don't even support 4k hdr on linux, leaving people with no choice.
I run linux too but I'm not going to pretend like my choice to run a niche setup means I'm entitled to pirate content because they don't 100% support it
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#144I am still happy with my decision to never get entertainment subscription services. I buy CDs (that I rip) and BDs (that I let someone else rip, since that's a science in itself). This guarantees me access forever and I get to sell down the line, if I feel like it. It is way cheaper long term.
>It is way cheaper long term. How few songs do you listen to, and movies/shows do you watch, for this to possibly be true?
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#145From an aesthetic point of view, I am getting pretty tired of this obviously LLM generated static site content template design in 2025/2026. 98% of the time when I see one of these it's a bunch of "content" generated by Claude or similar. Quoting the site: "Written by Rashid N. Rashid N is the editor of HonestlyRanked. He reviews every figure this site publishes against its source before it goes out, and has never ac…
Why can't anyone just run it through one of the "make this not appear so clearly LLM-generated" obfuscation utilities open sourced on GitHub, or something similar just with prompts. The level of phoning in the complete lack of any work beyond the absolute bare minimum is the most frustrating aspect to me.
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#146Surely the cost of storage has not gone up. And the cost of sending the 0’s and 1’s hasn’t gone up either.
Are movie studios demanding vastly more money from the streaming services for the movie and TV content? Maybe the costs to make new movies and tv shows have gone up substantially but has licensing costs for the old movies and shows gone up too?
Are these extra costs just going to the streamers to run up profit? Genuinely curious about the economics here. I know the streaming business is highly competitive so I don’t think it’s just rent seeking so wonder what else is going on.
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#147Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#148Any price comparison over time should include inflation. Otherwise this is akin to comparing speed of 2 objects in a relativistic setting without stating the frame of reference. Side note: I don't know why, but the existence of a "cite this" section on this page made me sad.
I think the point is that inflation numbers are bs. The official number from 2021 to today is 23%. But we didn't see prices only 23%. A restaurant mean didn't go from $20 to $25. It easily went up 50% or more. Inflation isn't some force of nature that needs to be accounted for like the curvature of the earth.
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#149I find that piracy is the only sane option any more
Re: The same nine streaming subscriptions cost $702/year more than in 2021
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
The TV license is insane to me, as a non-brit moving to the uk. I am happy to pay a reasonable price for something I use. But the threats I get about a GBP 1,000 is very un-british. I don't know who runs the TV licensing scheme but they need to be sacked. Thankfully if you can look past this gamesmanship then it is possible to call them and decline to participate in this nonsense.
The "licensing" has a point because it does make the BBC more impartial since the current government cannot adjust their funding down or up depending on their programming. However, the same aim could be achieved by just setting a formula in law. 1 pound per british citizen, or 0.0001% of the average income per citizen last year. Numbers pulled out of ass as i have no idea what an UK tv license costs. As long as they…
If they could find a way to fund Radio 4 without it I'd be in favour of scrapping the fee.