Live data from Hacker News

Popcorn Time 4.0

github.com

221–229 of 229 posts

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#221
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You in fact have no inherent right to control other people's computers. It's hard to justify why you think that creators have a right to the contents of your hard drive and wallet. I don't remember being party to the social or legal contract that created such rights nor realistically do I have a voice in changing it. If society says that as a poor person in addition to having less of everything else I ought to enjoy…

> You in fact have no inherent right to control other people's computers. The legal system in your jurisdiction may disagree with you on that one. > It's hard to justify why you think that creators have a right to the contents of your hard drive and wallet I never tried to "justify" creators doing anything to your computer or anyone else's? Show me where I said that? That's a preexisting grindy-axe you brought along…

There is only one class of possessions. All else is aggrements not possessions and in a wholly owned subsidiary of the rich I don't feel morally bound by the agreements between the upper middle class and the owner class.

The agreement is that the government will attempt to keep you and I from improving each other's lots by sharing under the idea that the notes hanging in the air forged of air and emotions are sort of like a ham sandwich.

From what I can tell they have secured increasingly one sided agreements mostly by legalized corruption wherein the parties who write nothing, sing nothing, express nothing, invent nothing but own much make campaign contributions.

Physical property is problematic itself but certainly cannot be fixed incrementally or in total by pretending property isn't a thing because one must still deal with the exclusive nature of physical goods whether we acknowledge the fact or not whereas piracy can indeed simply route around the upper classes contact's.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#222
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Streaming music has set the price floor. For the price of an album a month you can stream all the music you want, even new releases. What makes you think movies should have a multiple of 10 instead of 1 for a monthly subscription fee? I'll attempt an answer, the cost should be whatever the market will bare. The market could likely boom at $50/mth, but at $200 it would be niche. The industry seems to even be coalescin…

I'm fairly certain that movies are far more expensive to produce than music albums.

True. Now, compare the number of music albums produced per studio to the number of movies. We’re explicitly talking about paying per time rather than per work here; one movie versus one album is misleading and/or irrelevant.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An official and legal version of this wouldn't be $50/month, it would be more like $200/month. It includes movies from every major company, and films while they are still in the cinema.

For that price it would be cheaper for me to “buy” the movies I want to watch outright. You’d have to watch a lot of movies to recoup the cost.

I don’t know what things are like in other parts of the world, but the US market has shown a preference for renting large-library access over buying individual works. There are exceptions, when the costs got skewed too far and the perception grows that the “large library” is actually a small library plus a lot of dross (see Cable TV), but even then it took decades of Worst-in-the-nation service issues, billing ‘hijinks’, and predatory pricing to convince Americans to start cutting the cord.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without judgment I find it amusing that these arguments rapidly converge to ones used by the participants on subreddits for shoplifting and stealing. I'm not saying the acts are equivalent, just that the positions are. It also feels like statistically I should have read at least one comment where someone is convinced by argument that their copyright infringement is wrong but over twenty years on the Internet, I actua…

I deal with shoplifters daily none have yet expressed the position that private property ought not to exist much less provided a fair line of reasoning supporting the position.

Oh there's a subreddit where they met where they'd say that all the time. Don't know if it's still up.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not entirely absurd IMO, it could be that iTunes did so well because Kazaa, et al., had laid the groundwork for an expectation of "any tune, any time" and iTunes came closest to that?

perhaps, I think iTunes did so well because of iPods and iPhones.

People had gigabytes of free music on their computers and wanted a place to store them that enabled easy playback, hence the iPod. iTunes removed the friction necessary in piracy and priced inventory low enough to emerge as a viable alternative.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#226

I downloaded the 64bit Linux build and it has a strange executable called "payload". I moved it out of precautio and still launched the app, and it seems to work fine without this executable. What is this "payload"? Anyone know? A quick search didn't find anything relevant.

You're not the first one to notice something odd [0]

Added to the fact that you need a boatload of stuff to even build it [1], and you get an interesting cocktail of mass-exploitation.

0: https://old.reddit.com/r/mealtimevideos/comments/dulvpz/subs...

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22614247

This doesn't look good:

https://old.reddit.com/r/PopCornTime/comments/flcqsd/trojan_...

https://old.reddit.com/r/PopCornTime/comments/fknfnm/is_this...

https://old.reddit.com/r/PopCornTime/comments/fluait/the_vpn...

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#227
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that anywhere close to stealing? The only person who loses anything in this situation is the person that chose not to pirate the content that was not available to them.

I'm tired of arguing over semantics with people. Call it copyright infringement then. Either way, it is generally illegal. Just pay the $3 to rent the movie.

The original comment is about content not available to "rent". How are you supposed to pay the $3 then? Doing that through a VPN would also violate the ToS (or: be generally illegal).

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#228
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You in fact have no inherent right to control other people's computers. The legal system in your jurisdiction may disagree with you on that one. > It's hard to justify why you think that creators have a right to the contents of your hard drive and wallet I never tried to "justify" creators doing anything to your computer or anyone else's? Show me where I said that? That's a preexisting grindy-axe you brought along…

There is only one class of possessions. All else is aggrements not possessions and in a wholly owned subsidiary of the rich I don't feel morally bound by the agreements between the upper middle class and the owner class. The agreement is that the government will attempt to keep you and I from improving each other's lots by sharing under the idea that the notes hanging in the air forged of air and emotions are sort of…

You seem to be an extremely cynical individual. I'm sorry to see that. Wish I could help.

Re: Popcorn Time 4.0

#229
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is only one class of possessions. All else is aggrements not possessions and in a wholly owned subsidiary of the rich I don't feel morally bound by the agreements between the upper middle class and the owner class. The agreement is that the government will attempt to keep you and I from improving each other's lots by sharing under the idea that the notes hanging in the air forged of air and emotions are sort of…

You seem to be an extremely cynical individual. I'm sorry to see that. Wish I could help.

I'm not sure why you classify abstract reasoning as cynicism. If you are less pessimistic about your fellow man its likely you are merely in a better position where you can afford an objectively less realistic position.

I know I don't regularly worry about how a broken system funnels food into American's trash cans while others starve because I personally have never been in a position where starvation is even remotely possible.

Post reply on HN