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

Update on Sharing

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 325 posts

Re: Update on Sharing

#311

Post by throwaway09223 »

pb7 wrote: post #250
throwaway09223 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"and the $9.99 Netflix plan won't get you 4k." Maybe a bit off topic, but I'm wondering if anyone else actively avoids 4k? I hate watching content in ultra high resolution. It looks strange and unreal to me (Yes: I've turned off "soap opera mode") I'm really glad netflix makes it easy to avoid higher resolution versions of their shows =/

Do you have weird post-processing/sharpening on your TV (other than "soap opera mode")? There's really no reason to watch 1080p instead of 4K. Your eyes aren't somehow low resolution with 1080p closer to that realism.

Nope, and I notice it on my computer monitor as well so I'm sure this isn't the case.

> "There's really no reason to watch 1080p instead of 4K. Your eyes aren't somehow low resolution with 1080p closer to that realism."

This is definitely not the case and one of the big reasons is lossy compression. Precision without accuracy can be very noticeable, in terms of artifacting.

Re: Update on Sharing

#312

Post by joemi »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #73
joemi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why be coy and simply (heavily) imply pirating? Just say outright that you're going to pirate stuff because you for some reason believe you have a right to view their content and not pay for it?

Pirating is seizing a ship for material goods. People get hurt or killed when this happens. And the economics of material goods are literally otherworldly from those of digital goods. (You can't download a car -- copying a car for practically free.) Torrenting is just choosing the most convenient distribution mechanism for data that you own. You can buy DRM-free music, but not DRM-free shows or movies unless they're…

There's a lot to unpack in what you wrote, and I agree with a lot of it. But you seem to be implying that the fact that you can't buy DRM-free shows or movies via your preferred distribution method (ie. without physical media) morally justifies illegally downloading stuff you haven't paid for (Netflix shows -- which as you noted you're not paying-to-own if you have a subscription). I can't agree with that, and I can't see how that makes any sense. Why do you think you have a right to obtain Netflix's content any way you please?

Also: "Piracy" might be a bad term for the act of uploading and downloading something for which you do not have the rights to do so since it is indeed different than physical piracy, but "torrenting" is not an improvement, since torrenting _can_ be completely legal, depending on what content is being uploaded and downloaded. I think it's useful to have a term that specifically refers to the illegal act. I haven't heard of a good popular term for this yet, so I'm OK with using "piracy".

Re: Update on Sharing

#313

Post by joemi »

questime wrote: post #141
joemi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why be coy and simply (heavily) imply pirating? Just say outright that you're going to pirate stuff because you for some reason believe you have a right to view their content and not pay for it?

Thanks for paying for the content that I can access for free, I'm sure Netflix shareholders thank you for your service. Netflix is effectively doing a massive price hike with no corresponding value given.

You sound pretty proud of the fact that you're pirating what other people are paying for, so again I ask, why use veiled references to what you're suggesting?

Re: Update on Sharing

#314

Post by joemi »

deltarholamda wrote: post #86
joemi wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> downloading Linux ISOs starts to look more and more attractive Is that a veiled reference to piracy? If so, why not just say piracy?

For one, it's funnier. Secondly, declaring an intention to commit a crime on the Internet doesn't have a great track record.

It's still declaring an intention to commit a crime either way though, isn't it? Unless you truly believe any prosecutorial organization wouldn't be able to crack the code.

Re: Update on Sharing

#315

Post by joemi »

Gunnerhead wrote: post #270
joemi wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> downloading Linux ISOs starts to look more and more attractive Is that a veiled reference to piracy? If so, why not just say piracy?

I thought it was clear what they were saying but funny. Why not?

Talking about it in jokes and codes just strikes me as either immature or ashamed, like how teenagers talk about sex or drugs. I think if they believe what they're doing is justified then they shouldn't be ashamed, and there's no reason to talk in code since that's definitely not protecting them one bit from any sort of legal action.

Re: Update on Sharing

#316

Post by joemi »

bee_rider wrote: post #96
joemi wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Overall it'll be interesting to see how much impact this actually has or doesn't have for subscription volume. My guess is maybe not as much as the usual uproared comments would have you think. I suspect you're right about this. This change has no effect on the people who aren't sharing their account, so those people have very little incentive to comment except perhaps out of sympathy for those who it will affect.…

I’m not sure. These services only have new good content like 50% of the time. So it makes more sense to cycle subscriptions on and off. This is harder if you’ve given someone your password (I’d definitely not be subscribed to Disney+ right now if my sibling wasn’t using it).

I think we're in agreement. I said it doesn't affect people who aren't sharing their password, and you seem to be talking about cases where passwords are being shared.

Re: Update on Sharing

#317

Post by Gunnerhead »

joemi wrote: post #315
Gunnerhead wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was clear what they were saying but funny. Why not?

Talking about it in jokes and codes just strikes me as either immature or ashamed, like how teenagers talk about sex or drugs. I think if they believe what they're doing is justified then they shouldn't be ashamed, and there's no reason to talk in code since that's definitely not protecting them one bit from any sort of legal action.

Ok.

Re: Update on Sharing

#318

Post by questime »

joemi wrote: post #313
questime wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for paying for the content that I can access for free, I'm sure Netflix shareholders thank you for your service. Netflix is effectively doing a massive price hike with no corresponding value given.

You sound pretty proud of the fact that you're pirating what other people are paying for, so again I ask, why use veiled references to what you're suggesting?

It's a mildly more humorous comment - also LLMs made it easy to piratify my comment. It's just some low effort internet humor - take it easy.

Also for all the injustice in this world, you getting so offended on Netflix's behalf regarding this is kinda mindblowing, you must be giga privileged.

Re: Update on Sharing

#319

Post by kstrauser »

nickthegreek wrote: post #307
KingOfCoders wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So and then 5 years later they changed their mind. What amuses me in this thread that people who change their mind every 5 minutes accuse a company changing their mind after some years.

I don’t think anyone is saying they can’t change their mind, just that it might have consequences. They leaned on password sharing to grow their base and once they are on top, they shut it down. I’ve paid for the 4 stream 4k since it’s release. I share it my mom and brother. Combine we all watch it less than 10 hrs a month. It’s is not worth its cost for any one of us to have an account. The moment I get that passwor…

You summed up my position perfectly. Netflix is free to change their mind. I'm free to re-evaluate my relationship with them in the context of the new, much less valuable plan.

Re: Update on Sharing

#320

Post by joemi »

questime wrote: post #318
joemi wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound pretty proud of the fact that you're pirating what other people are paying for, so again I ask, why use veiled references to what you're suggesting?

It's a mildly more humorous comment - also LLMs made it easy to piratify my comment. It's just some low effort internet humor - take it easy. Also for all the injustice in this world, you getting so offended on Netflix's behalf regarding this is kinda mindblowing, you must be giga privileged.

I'm _not_ upset on Netflix's behalf. I have many friends who work in tv/movie production. So when I see people like you proudly talking about pirating tv and/or movies I'm offended on my friends' behalf (behalves?) because you're negatively impacting my friends. You might think you're just screwing over netflix, but you're not. You're screwing over a lot of people.
Post reply on HN