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

Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

nplusonemag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 363 posts

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#331

Post by mindslight »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #276
vladvasiliu wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it depends on which kind of bandwidth we're talking about. I can follow a talk-show no problem while doing laundry / the dishes / vacuum / iron. Keyword being "talk". But I can't look at the screen too often. So, watching a sitcom or similar where the characters' body language or facial expressions are important is an exercise in frustration.

Yeah, so that's what radio is for (including in recorded form, aka podcasts). Making video (more complicated than "talking heads") so nobody watches it is such a waste... (so is non peer to peer mass streaming, come to think of it).

> so is non peer to peer mass streaming

erm, I'm a huge proponent of both peer to peer networking and piracy but it's hard to argue that transiting backbone links is more efficient than CDN boxen sitting at ISPs right next to last mile links.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#332

Post by brendoelfrendo »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #313
brendoelfrendo wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, people that want to half-watch TV deserve stuff made for them too. What? No they don't. Film and television are visual art forms that are meant to be viewed and given the appropriate attention. There's already plenty of mediocre television out there you can use as background noise; we don't need to intentionally lower the bar for the media that's being made. As the article mentions, Netflix has already played…

> no they don’t. … > meant to be viewed and given the appropriate attention I think the person choosing to spend a few hours of their one life with some audio/visual media, whether they’re doing their laundry or not, is the one who gets to decide whether or not it’s art, and how much attention it deserves. Anything else leads to some uncomfortable places.

There are two different perspectives. The viewer is, of course, entitled to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home. The creator or creators, conversely, are entitled to create something with the intention that it be viewed; if they didn't have that intention, then they probably wouldn't choose a visual medium.

I think what bothers me is Netflix inserting themselves into this conversation and trying to dictate what creators create. The idea of using data to say "well, some portion of people don't actually pay attention while their TV is on" to conclude "therefore, we should create visual media that is not intended to be watched" is the reductio ad absurdium conclusion of data-driven decision making gone wrong and it deserves ridicule.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#333

Post by bryanlarsen »

Retric wrote: post #299
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality is the average person's time to watch TV/unwind is also going to be spent doing chores. This was always the case. When I was a kid, we watched shows that could be followed along by whoever was cooking dinner/doing dishes as well as the people sitting in front of the set. People don't have all that much extra free time. Movies were an experience because... they were an experience. They weren't constantly o…

It’s very true this drives watch time, but I doubt it drives subscriptions. My guess is some internal metrics favor watch time over quality and is just quietly killing their business.

> I doubt it drives subscriptions.

We would not have as many streaming subscriptions as we do if had to sit in front of the TV to watch shows, if we couldn't have shows in the background while doing laundry and other chores.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#334

Post by tomatotomato37 »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #332
appreciatorBus wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no they don’t. … > meant to be viewed and given the appropriate attention I think the person choosing to spend a few hours of their one life with some audio/visual media, whether they’re doing their laundry or not, is the one who gets to decide whether or not it’s art, and how much attention it deserves. Anything else leads to some uncomfortable places.

There are two different perspectives. The viewer is, of course, entitled to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home. The creator or creators, conversely, are entitled to create something with the intention that it be viewed; if they didn't have that intention, then they probably wouldn't choose a visual medium. I think what bothers me is Netflix inserting themselves into this conversation and trying to…

...actually wait, you unintentionally brought up an interesting point, how exactly did Netflix get data on how people are consuming their media in the privacy of their own home. That's not something you'd get good data off a simple survey

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#335

Post by Loughla »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #291
Loughla wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name a good apocalyptic movie? I'm really struggling to come up with one. Twister, sort of, and that's neither good nor apocalyptic really. Edit: Twelve Monkeys. I think that counts.

The Road? Not something you ever need to watch more than once but if you want to internalize bleakness it worked for me.

I've read the book. That's enough.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#336

Post by knallfrosch »

> the box office has always been viewed as the gold standard of metrics in Hollywood

It seems hard to accept for movie fans, but the audience wants mindless drivel. The big screen is the second screen.

Netflix has competition and has to produce what the audience wants. The audience just wants something different than what critics like.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#337

Post by austin-cheney »

Yeul wrote: post #94
austin-cheney wrote: post #13

I suspect this appeals to two types of audiences. The first being people who play on their phones instead of watching the show. You can blame phone addiction and ADHD type behaviors for this but it feels like a slippery slope of stupidity in the face of good writing/acting as opposed to constant cartoon like action. (the wife and I do it too). The second set of audience this would appeal to are people with autism. Si…

A common misconception. Autistic people have emotions and empathy- perhaps more than other people. They just keep it inside. Also no Seinfeld is not funny.

So, autism is a spectrum of common disorders that vary from person to person. Therefore people are not diagnosed on the basis of noted disorders but instead on their performance in a battery of common performance tests.

As for empathy, it too varies from person to person. It is possible, though unlikely, to score high in empathy and yet utterly fail all the rest of the performance criteria. One of my coworkers with autistic children may or may not have autism themselves but does demonstrate high empathy.

In my experience people with autism tend to score remarkably low in empathy with some people even having absolutely no empathy at all. That is why many people with autism seem socially weird or have trouble reading a room. For people with high empathy these observations of low empathy in others is most obvious potential indicator of autism.

While very few people score high in empathy it’s equally rare to absolutely have no empathy at all. It is such a striking disadvantage as to be a major disorder. It is severe enough that it looks like sociopathy minus an informed intent. It’s a processing void. That void is further obviated by an equally diminished introspective capability in that reading one’s self is the same skill as reading others.

Also, empathy is not in any way related the quantity of emotions people display. A person can be both selfish and highly emotional.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#338

Post by fragmede »

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #334
brendoelfrendo wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two different perspectives. The viewer is, of course, entitled to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home. The creator or creators, conversely, are entitled to create something with the intention that it be viewed; if they didn't have that intention, then they probably wouldn't choose a visual medium. I think what bothers me is Netflix inserting themselves into this conversation and trying to…

...actually wait, you unintentionally brought up an interesting point, how exactly did Netflix get data on how people are consuming their media in the privacy of their own home. That's not something you'd get good data off a simple survey

The Netflix app knows when it's playing but the video window isn't visible.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#339

Post by fmxsh »

zo1 wrote: post #91
chgs wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you need something on in the background?

Personally it helps me sleep having "TV" playing in the background. But my SO uses it while she works, having something to break the monotony as music is distracting.

For background media, I found recordings of speedruns [0] with player commentary to strike the right balance, not being too distracting, yet giving a pleasant atmosphere (when, for example programming).

[0] for example as found on YouTube.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#340

Post by fragmede »

rapnie wrote: post #74
rich_sasha wrote: post #11

I find it very stressful when watching Netflix because I don't know what is going to happen. Maybe they could include the full story line at the start of the series, so I can read it ahead of time and remove all suspense and surprise.

A number is enough. You just need know which of the 5 movie templates they used.

Five? I thought there was eight.

Overcoming the Monster, Rags to Riches, The Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy, Mystery, and Rebirth.

Post reply on HN