LOL.

We pay for 4K, but we don’t get more than 720p unless we use some proprietary shit hardware and agree to their super-invasive “privacy policy” - and they expect people to NOT set sail in the high seas? GTFO…

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m willing to pay for one, maybe two subscriptions, and ain’t nobody got time to dig for which service has what show to find out season 2 is on some other service entirely.

    Piracy provides a better user experience 🤷‍♂️

      • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I generally agree with him, but there are a lot of people who pirate simply because they don’t want to pay. And I’m not casting moral judgment here, i just feel like it bears mentioning lol “almost always” is pretty generous

        • VR20X6@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          If that’s true on its face, then you’re not losing any money either way since they are never going to pay regardless even if you try to force them to.

          Meanwhile, you can absolutely scare away what could have been a paying customer by offering dogshit service.

          • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s never been an assumption you can make.

            If you hand me a $10 version of a thing or a $5 option of the exact same thing, I’m taking the $5. Free is no different. Especially when they can do it from the comfort of their home and not drive to a mall to buy the CD or whatever. Remember what year it was when this all started man.

            • VR20X6@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Remember what year it was when this all started man.

              1903 when Edison v. Lubin was filed?

              • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                If you’re going to be a smartass then I have no desire to continue this conversation. I am talking about when piracy became mainstream via napster because it became easy for people to get free music.

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Lets compare three options as example:

          One streaming service with everything:

          • monetary costs: 25 €/month
          • opportunity cost: login, type name in search bar, enjoy in good quality, language and subtitles of choice

          Piracy:

          • monetary costs: 0-5 €/month (hardware/vpn)
          • opportunity costs: keep up to date with existing aggregator sites, take protective measures against identification, be wary of malware, limited scope of languages and subtitles, varying quality

          Current streaming services:

          • monetary costs: 100 €/month or more, if you cover most services
          • opportunity cost: login to each service, look if they have the particular series/movie, be limited by region to which languages and subtitles you can use, have only certain episodes or certain seasons of a series, get a movie as a result, but actually have to pay extra for lending it…

          People choose whether to pay monetary or opportunity costs. For a broke student priacy might still be the way to go, because they have time but not money. For most people a convenient streaming service will be the way to go though, because not having to worry about everything around and just finding your movie/series in 30 seconds, after you put dinner in the plates is the preferred option.

          The current situation combines high monetary costs with high opportunity costs, so that piracy becomes attractive to many people, who would be happy to pay for a streaming service, that actually covers everything.

          So i think “almost always” is perfectly applicable. Also keep in mind, that the offer of pirated stuff is directly related to the demand. if the demand reduces, so will the offer, which in this case would make piracy even less convenient. Of course the pricing matters, and if the one streaming service would cost say 50 €/month, more people would pirate again. But the dominant factor first is the service quality.

          • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            He made that statement when streaming barely existed. People were still primarily buying DVDs. That was the late 2000’s when it was only Netflix, maybe Hulu was just starting, and game streaming was barely a concept.

    • Steve@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Im willing to pay for two. It used to be netflix and prime, then hulu, paramount plus, disney…

      Now its down to one- Proton VPN 🏴‍☠️

  • snrkl@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    https://www.gamesradar.com/gabe-newell-piracy-issue-service-not-price/

    As Gabe Newell said: “Piracy isn’t a pricing issue, its a service issue”

    As my friend said: "every time a plastic video disc says " operation not permitted " a torrent is born…

    As I say: “People will pay when it’s easy, more reliable and more convenient.” As a software product manager, I forbid my product from ever wasting developer cycles with copy protection… It’s expensive to deliver, annoying to real customers and doesn’t make us any more money…

    • saintshenanigans@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t disagree with anything but I feel like GabeN said that before streaming and subscriptions took over.

      Photoshop is an incredibly easy to use and powerful tool for creators - I’d be happy to drop like $200 on, for example, the 2024 version. I’m not happy to spend $10 or $30+ a month for life to use it, especially when they lock you in to a year subscription and charge you a fee if you cancel early so you literally can’t just sub only the month when you need it, it’s the whole year, period. I’ll just pirate or use photopea or whatever.

      Similar for streaming. Netflix gave us the option to pay for more screens to watch on. Now suddenly it matters whose house it’s in?? All while you’re constantly removing value from the platform and you cancel anything decent if the production value is too high? Fuck you man I’m not paying like $30 monthly for that.

      • snrkl@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Please do keep voting with your wallet - its one of the few remaining ways to express our discontent!) That being said, I feel like both of those examples are where the service provided by adobe and then Netflix are terrible.

        Adobe is making you buy a whole year and Netflix is hassling you for “letting your pensioner mum watch your account”… To me, both of those are examples of bad service (coupled with cost).

        For me, a counter example for me is amazon.com: I hate what they’re doing to the retail landscape but find it hard to resist, as I find them SOOO convenient, and their customer service (for now) is absolutely stunning!!! Now if their prices were too high, I’d personally probably pay for that convenience a bit. (Where there model breaks for me completely is warranty major purchases: I’ve had warranty denied by manufacturers for items purchased through non approved amazon resellers. So now, for me, anything over $100 and I’m looking for direct purchase from the manufacturer as a preference. )

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    12% over four years? Damn. Somehow I had the impression that there’d been a significant increase.

    Netflix revenue is up by roughly 60% in the same four years.

  • maus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I can easily say that the amount of my friends and family that have become interested in my Emby setup has expontentially consistently increased every round that these streaming providers have increased their rates.

    The experience of launching 7 different streaming apps to find something, content constantly vanishing or moving platforms, and just an overall poor user experience coupled with doubling/tripling of each platforms costs…

    • brax@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      The companies have almost successfully re-introduced the very problem that streaming originally solved.

      It’s like this dipshits don’t want our money. I’ve always been firm that any content removed from streaming services is a message from that content company that they don’t want the money of the customers subscribed to said service and thus are okay with those people pirating it instead.

      If they cared about the money, they’d had left the content there.

  • OpenStars@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Bold of you to think that they even think of us at all.

    I actually mean that seriously: we continue seeing, over and over, that no, quite often they do NOT expect people to NOT do that, they quite simply DGAF. They pirate us, we pirate them, it becomes just another “cost of doing business”, until they are strong enough to eventually crack down further. See ad blocking & Chrome recently, after multiple decades of internet ads pushing the limits.

    It’s like a zombie nom noming your brains - after like 2 bites it’ll get bored and wander off, and it literally doesn’t even need to “eat”, it simply is so fucking DUMB that it doesn’t know what else to do with itself. It is truly horrifying b/c while your entrails may be strewn about on the floor, or in the throats of tens of zombies, they in turn… don’t even have the decency to be aware that you’ve died!?

    Lower-level managers sell ideas to higher-level managers, and “logic” has little to do with those conversations, compared to the amount of emo-stroking that goes on “oh, you will become so rich, and powerful, and handsome, and brave, and precious” (from here:-P) - and so long as enough people play along, that happens!

    Our world is just so fucking STUPID.

    That said, what they do is on them, while what we do is on us. Find a way to live - hopefully by finding a way to contribute, if/where you can.

  • onlinepersona@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I bet we’ll reach a point again where normal services are just so shit that piracy is normal again. Then they’ll try and take down even more things. Hopefully then we’ll decide to move operations to I2P.

    CC BY-NC-SA 4.0