Streaming services are driving viewers back to piracy

Post by the_af » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 4:58 AM UTC

frollogaston wrote: post #521

sunrunner wrote: post #24

"Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem" -- Gabe Newell [1] And I think he was largely correct, although the term _service_ seems like it now has to do a lot of heavy lifting as it now encompasses: - Availability by Company - Availability by Global Region - Stream Quality - Advert Policy (why does the lowest tier need to be ad supported? What am I paying for aside from being upsold?) - Qu…

Gabe Newell, founder of the largest video game DRM company. Find a way for anyone to download video games for free without risking malware or compromising online play, and see how many people still pay $60 for a new game on Steam.

Post by lucideer » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:02 AM UTC

recursive wrote: post #557

lucideer wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compression is an entirely different thing. Compression isn't just gain adjustment - it's a specific type of audio processing that increases perceived "gain" (loudness) of the entire source audio by "compressing" the levels of loud frequencies & increasing the levels of quiet frequencies. Normalization increases gain of all frequencies at any given point-in-time while reducing gain of all frequencies at other points…

I think you're describing a multi-band compressor. "Normal" compressors do indeed do gain adjustment. They usually do this without regard for the frequencies present. Only the amplitude matters for normal compressors.

Post by the_af » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:02 AM UTC

frollogaston wrote: post #523

area51org wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily true, as the success of streaming shows. The problem comes when the unbounded greed of the billionaires in charge leads them to inflate prices beyond their customers' ability and willingness to pay.

Streaming was cheaper than what existed before, and still is. Inflation-adjusted, movies and TV were insanely expensive back then, yet people willingly paid. And the movies were better. Who's greedy, companies wanting to offer nonessential entertainment for a price, or people who want it for free?

Post by cyberax » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:06 AM UTC

II2II wrote: post #346

cyberax wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you build a walkable city, people will walk. No, they won't. If you build a walkable city and then make it impossible to do anything else, then people will walk. It's a subtle difference, but it's there.

I live in a "walkable city". By walkable, I mean the old parts of the city that predated the automobile (and weren't destroyed in the name of modernization) are walkable. New parts of the city are completely unwalkable. If you came here, you would notice that massive numbers of people walk in the old parts of the city. Even the people who drive into the old parts of the city tend to walk once they are there. In the n…

Post by Dylan16807 » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:10 AM UTC

dotancohen wrote: post #579

Dylan16807 wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a thing that happened. But if it's what socalgal2 was talking about, then their comment was a non-sequitur. They saw the word censorship and rambled something almost entirely unrelated to the topic at hand. That's why it's worth asking what they're talking about.

They were responding to a comment about piracy not self-centering extant works. I could see where the comment does sequitur, just barely. Perhaps he is pushing an agenda, perhaps he was making conversation. I can see far further OT comments all up and down this post.