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
    216
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    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
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        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

        • faintwhenfree
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          No it also means it’s a service problem in the sense that it’s not priced right for a geography. Pricing a game $70 where local average monthly income is $120 a month is a service problem. If you expect people from that geographic region to pay, the product should be priced within their means. And thus argument is valid only for digital goods where every new copy of the said goods costs mere few cents.

          • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You’re gonna have to put in some work to convince me he used “service“ to also say “too expensive” when he said that. Hell GAAS as a concept didn’t even exist when he said that.

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          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
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            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.

        • Facebones@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Actually not very true in regards to gaming at least, a study found a decently wide majority of game pirates end up buying the game. Alot of em just either use it as a demo or to bypass the copy protection garbage that fucks up the game they want to pay for.

          • SwampYankee@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            For gaming, you’ve got Steam, which is pretty close to the ideal legit content delivery service. You don’t even necessarily have to pirate in order to demo games if you’re comfortable paying up front and making a decision within 2 hours.

            Nothing similar exists or has existed for TV/Movies. Netflix was pretty good for a while, but you’ve never had the option to download the content to your own hard drive. Now you’re not even allowed to log in to your account on as many devices as you want.

            Give me a service that’s a free storefront where I can pay a one-time fee for content that I’m actually interested in and download it to my hard drive as many times in as many places as I care to. Bonus points if I can stream to other devices that I’m logged in to and lend my purchases to my friends & family like I can with Steam. I don’t care if there’s DRM in the form of me having to log in to actually use the content if I can use it the way I want.

          • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            There is no way they could possibly know the percentage of Pirates to do that. Just because it occurs doesn’t mean there aren’t countless people who do it for free things. It’s also important to remember that those claims come from advocates, so you need to take it with a ton of caveats/pinches of salt. They have a pretty strong incentive to make that case.

              • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                What? There is no information. You made a broad assertion. You don’t have a single source for that claim.

                  • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    I don’t need to prove that people download free media because it’s free because it’s literally the reason for it. The motivations may change but the entire appeal of piracy is that it’s free. It’s why Napster was created.

        • VR20X6@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          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
            1
            ·
            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
              1
              ·
              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
                1
                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.

        • neo (he/him)@lemmy.comfysnug.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          No it also means it’s a service problem in the sense that it’s not priced right for a geography. Pricing a game $70 where local average monthly income is $120 a month is a service problem. If you expect people from that geographic region to pay, the product should be priced within their means. And thus argument is valid only for digital goods where every new copy of the said goods costs mere few cents.

          People who pirate because they don’t want to pay will never, ever pay. Not worth considering them to be honest.

    • Steve@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      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 🏴‍☠️

        • doppelgangmember@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The best public option is Proton imo. With paid subscriptions you even get access to Secure Core servers where Proton runs their own data centers instead of hiring 3rd-parties like NordVPN, etc.

          Case-point: Nord has been hacked before bc of third-party data centers. Proton has no breaches so far and does regular security audits, has plenty of servers outside the 14 Eyes Alliance, and actively fund privacy focused projects.

          Mullvad is a close second bc of their anonymous payments.

          It really depends on the quantity and sensitivity of the content I’d say.

          But Proton has replaced everything I used Google for (Drive/Email). Proton will work for a good 90% of everyone most likely.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        How the fuck do you expect me to just jump into The Two Towers and not expect me to want to watch The Fellowship of the Ring first?! Oh you think I’m going to go buy/rent the first movie 😂 that’s cute.

        How do people still not grasp that Netflix can’t just buy whatever they want to stream? Licenses are often being held by other services at the time. They also have no control over if a show gets pulled or not. I still see people complaining that Netflix “got rid” of the Office.

        Like, I have no love for Netflix or any streaming service at this point, but at least shit on them for things that are actually in their control.

        And frankly, this is how HBO, Showtime, Stars, etc have operated like this for decades before Netflix came along. It’s so weird people think “shows/movies being pulled because the license deal expired” is something unique to Netflix.

        • SocialEngineer56@notdigg.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Music industry seemed to figure it out pretty well. Except for a few rare case outliers, it doesn’t matter if I’m using Apple Music, Spotify, Amazon music, etc. Sure they all have different features, but I can blast Taylor Swift to my heart’s content and never leave one app

    • Dave@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      10 months ago

      For the record, you can use justwatch.com and it will tell you exactly where you can watch it, and which seasons. But I’m still not paying for multiple subscriptions.

    • adONis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Hell, I even pay for a service that has all the magnet links resolved and ready to stream, no downloading involved. For 30 bucks (a year!) it’s been the most convenient way of enjoying movies & shows.

    • Howdy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      Got two. Not doing anymore. Ive had up to 4 or 5 and still couldn’t find what I wanted.