351–360 of 556 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's stealing. Just because saying "pirate" makes you feel better doesn't mean it's not stealing.
Just because saying "stealing" makes you feel morally self-righteous doesn't mean that physical goods and digital files are the same thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps not in depth of harm but in breadth it far surpasses R. Kelly. Disney has been accused of gross labor and environmental violations across the globe. So while R. Kelly has caused severe damage to a few, Disney has caused minor to moderate damage to a great number.
OK. I don't know if everyone would agree with your somewhat reductive view on Disney, how is it fair to compare an entire company and enterprise to a single man. This feels like you are looking at two wildly different things and connecting them with very thin lines.
Then maybe companies and enterprises shouldn't do all they can to be treated like men...
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/corporations-are-people-a_b_5...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's stealing. Just because saying "pirate" makes you feel better doesn't mean it's not stealing.
Piracy is copyright infringement or license term violations. Theft is a property crime. These are different things. Those heavily invested in intellectual property rights laws would like to conflate them, but they are--and always will be--fundamentally different offenses. And the industry propaganda is frankly ridiculous. Hell yes, I would download a car. But not if it came loaded up with malware, spyware, region-loc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You just invented the Cable TV network. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_television_in_the_United...
This is what confuses me about the current conversation around streaming services. It seems like everyone just wants cable again.
It's only a matter of time before some clever MBA comes up with Cable2.0, which bundles up all the streaming services under one roof (or series of roofs (cable packages!)) for 60% of the what it would cost to maintain subscriptions to all of them.
...Then the ads will come back
And we'll have gone full circle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's just so many Star Wars movies, and so many Marvel movies, and while I've seen most in theaters, they are basically juvenile blockbuster cookie cutter crap. The first 3 star wars films where important for their era, but most of the later ones are just forgettable sci-fi (for non-discerning fans). Not to mention letting down parts of the canon (e.g. the Solo movie, or "Kylo Ren", a hipster/teenage goth abominat…
Logan not even Marvel Studios it's 20th Century Fox so that makes it 0 in 10 :P For me, it went from I want to see every Marvel movie in the cinema to stream it from Netflix to I won't pay any extra if it's not on Netflix. I really like the Star Wars universe, but the only good new movie was Rogue One. It worked because it was a completely separate story only loosely tied to the original films.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's just so many Star Wars movies, and so many Marvel movies, and while I've seen most in theaters, they are basically juvenile blockbuster cookie cutter crap. The first 3 star wars films where important for their era, but most of the later ones are just forgettable sci-fi (for non-discerning fans). Not to mention letting down parts of the canon (e.g. the Solo movie, or "Kylo Ren", a hipster/teenage goth abominat…
Recent box office history is littered with studios losing money on “original” stories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's not really what it's about. You have no idea how utterly janky Plex and torrenting is. I don't know anything about Plex, but torrenting is pretty effortless compared to figuring out which streaming service what you want to watch is on, figuring out how to get that, evaluating other content it has trying to justify the price, figuring out how to get it to your tv, and figuring out how to use it. The only thin…
>> torrenting is pretty effortless compared to figuring out which streaming service what you want to watch is on, figuring out how to get that, evaluating other content it has trying to justify the price, figuring out how to use it, and figuring out how to get it to your TV Damn. You just nailed this. In fact, hearing it this way makes me confused as to why anyone would ever use a streaming service to start. I live i…
I don't think this is an option anymore. There was never a time when a Blockbuster store's collection could match Netflix/Hulu/Prime. In particular, there's so much more media being created now, that there's no way a physical shelf space could keep up. If you consider just TV, think about how many more channels there are compared to the heyday of Blockbuster. I just checked Fandango, there's over 20 movies opening this week alone. How could a Blockbuster keep up with that? I think the reason it felt that way might be related to the paradox of choice. There were fewer options, we got the "lottery win"/dopamine hit from finding that new movie when there was only one copy left to rent, etc. I think our brains artificially limited the set of things we "wanted" to watch to what was on the shelf, which was surely never that robust of a collection compared to what you get from something like Netflix today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seeing the box office results of Disney’s movies, your anecdotal opinion doesn’t jibe with the overall market. Yes, but the overall market also doesn't jibe with taste, as Zappa would say...
By definition, if people are collectively, willingly giving Disney billions of dollars a year for a Marvel and Star Wars movies, the market is jibing where it matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If all use Amazon or Google to stream then there is not that much extra expense. IMO I prefer to buy a game from the developer and get it cheaper or give the money to the creator but this days most games are on stores and not on the dev website, a good example is Minecraft ,it would probably be more expensive if it would have been on Steam and I would have to install the Steam client to play the game, and I could not…
Steam has sales all of the time, it's the Amazon of games, and it will always be cheaper on a Steam sale than the developers website.
My point is that in some cases Steam or Apple taking 30% is too much, now that Steam has some competition they made some deals with big publisher but this big percentage are to large for some products.
In this debate though many people ignore the creators and feel entitled that the app,game or movie be on his preferred store and using his preferred payment method.
I am sure there are cases where the store works great too.
"May" drive them back? This has already happened in my circles.. People who had cut the cord but all but walked away from casual piracy and signed up for Netflix and HBO (and probably Prime Video because they had Amazon Prime already) are openly talking about the fact they're definitely not signing up for more streaming services, and are seeking out torrenting again for the stuff that's being pulled from Netflix (esp…
> People who had cut the cord... As long as you don't care about the zeitgeist... That's not really what it's about. You have no idea how utterly janky Plex and torrenting is. People on Hacker News find IT stimulating, so their experience is basically moot. It's like trying to predict trends based on a nerd's hot take of the iPod. It has always been about enforcement. Seen in this lens, the hassle of pirating movies…
Compare these experiences:
1. Search Netflix. Discover it's not there.
2. Search Amazon. Discover they have it, but it's not available for free as part of your subscription.
3. Search Hulu. Leave Hulu, because it's not there.
4. Finally go back to Amazon and rent the movie, not sure why you're paying for Prime if you still have to pay on top of that for half the stuff you watch.
5. Watch your content, with network interruptions if you're new popular releases (i.e. recent Game of Thrones).
6. Pay three monthly bills every month, a large percentage of which gets you overlapping content, but only pays to the content creators for the service you watch it on.
Versus:
1. Search a torrent site.
2. Select a save location in your torrent client.
3. Go make popcorn.
4. Watch your content uninterrupted by network issues or ads, for free, even if you're not connected to the internet.
Which is the janky experience?
And this is if you remove regions and internet connection reliability from the equation.
I'm not arguing you should torrent, incidentally. My preferred experience is to purchase content directly from the content creators when possible.
[1] https://help.hulu.com/s/article/how-much-does-hulu-cost?lang...
EDIT: Okay, sure, there are some use paths where streaming services are easier. But my point here isn't to say that streaming is worse, it's to say that torrenting is absolutely comparable and not some highly technical, difficult thing to do.