Live data from Hacker News

Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

taylor.town

91–100 of 138 posts

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#92

Pretty inaccurate. "In 2020, each Netflix subscriber in the U.S. was watching an average of 3.2 hours of Netflix content per day." -- https://www.zippia.com/answers/how-many-hours-of-netflix-are... Let's say there's 4 weeks to a month - that's 12.8 hours a month. So using $23/m is going to be 1.8/h -- I'd be curious to see the median hours per month per user -- I am willing to bet the average is skewed by the top 20%…

Yeah I can't read. :) sorry guys.

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#93

This is why platforms like https://www.loor.tv/ are essential, which let you fund the tv shows you want to see, not just _all tv_ Netflix is producing.

Is it though? Because if they were doing something that good wouldn't I have heard of this service by now? I have a pretty good (I would wager better than most) understanding of which streaming services are available but I've never even heard of this one.

They just soft launched in June and are currently raising capital for marketing and customer growth. So it makes sense why you wouldn't hear from them.

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dice strategy is only unfair if you look at it from the perspective that you’re the only one doing things that way. But lots of people are likely doing something similar to that so that on average across enough people it works out. I would wager that most people who support at least one creator probably still consume media from far more creators than they can afford to support, so they just pick one or two someho…

Oh sure I realise rationally that it's fair, but given that my aim is somewhat to support creators and somewhat to feel good about supporting creators, it doesn't really help me on the latter because irrationally it feels unfair. I am not sure lots of people would be doing this though.

Seems like you are stuck not supporting creators til you can support all the creators you may reasonably choose to support.

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#98
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hours of TV watched a day are unintuitive to me, and by my opinion absurdly high. I discovered a few months ago, this graph: https://www.statista.com/statistics/269918/daily-tv-viewing-... Which completely shifted my understanding of TV consumption. Median daily UK linear TV viewing time was 3 hours in 2021.

I suspect the stat gets blown out of proportion by people who leave the TV on as background noise. I'll never personally understand having a TV in the bedroom, but I know folks who can't fall asleep without it on.

It's median, but I think there's a similar effect actually. A lot of people "watch TV" as a side activity to something else (like browsing their phone). Alas, I've never been able to multitask as well as my digitally-poisoned peers.

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#99
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Important to remember that the distributions here are multi-modal, so averages don't represent the data well. For AAA games I think you're way off. Looking at the 5 top played games in 2023, "main story" to "completionist": Title Main Story (hrs) Completionist (hrs) Baldur's Gate 3 57 146 Super Mario Wonder 10 19 Starfield 22 145 Zelda: ToTK 59 235 Hogwarts Legacy 27 68 Of these, the first two are co-op but not the s…

Depends on the type of the games you are looking obviously: - 2023 shooters average just over 12h to complete - 2023 RPGs 37.5h - Battle Arena (all time) 433h All in all average for 2023 releases is just under 20h _to complete_, which doesn't necessarily mean people actually played that much - the other article I've linked suggests that on average people got to less than half of the main story..

Shooters are focusing more on the multiplayer right? So the story modes are de-emphasized and also many players don't bother with it.

Re: Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

#100
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would like to support This is the attitude that makes people fork over $70/hr to CGPGrey. I like these people's content, and want to support them too. But they don't need my financial support. They're all making way more money than me and probably you. If they wanted some sort of micropayment they could ask for it, but they're all pushing for the $10/month rate instead. Your $1/mo is so inconsequential to them th…

Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage. We are not in a system that allows for micropayments to work. You list a very famous content creator. On the other hand, there are lots of content creators who actually are struggling, and not making half as much as a minimum wage worker despite working longer hours than full-time. If you look at the Twitch lea…

> Micropayments on the internet don't work. Payment processors charge 30¢ per transaction, plus a percentage.

Well yes, micropayments don't work if you don't use a micropayment platform. There are solutions that cater specifically to micropayments that have different fee structures so that it makes sense.

A platform with enough resources and interest could also accept deposits from traditional payment processors in bulk, and payout at some threshold to content creators.

> If you look at the Twitch leaks, the payment curve has a long tail; the vast majority of creators do not make very much at all, while the top creators tend to make out with multigenerational wealth in a year.

This isn't because of the payment system. This is because content quality and discovery both have a long tail. The average content is poor quality and has almost no views.

Post reply on HN