this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
239 points (99.6% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54411 readers
219 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I think a common factor on why torrents are having a resurgence and illegal streaming services are getting more traction, is subscription fatigue. Subscription fatigue doesn't only contain itself to streaming services, movies or music, nowadays you're also expected to subscribe to every app you download. Whether it's a meditation app, a budgeting app (looking at YNAB that went from a one-time purchase to a really expensive subscription model), the Adobe suite, the MS Office suite, your Peloton bike that you've already paid hundreds of dollars for (referencing the earlier article on them establishing a startup fee for buying used bikes), or a podcast app where the money doesn't even go to the podcasters themselves.

Is there a peak for this? I feel like subscriptions are becoming more of a rule than an exception. Having the ability to directly purchase digital goods seems more like a thing of the past. It's just so stupid. But apparently people don't care? They just keep paying for this? Apparently it's still worth it for companies to establish a subscription model, even if there are no benefits for the customer, just the company. What are your thoughts? What can we do to stop it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah because it takes away leverage from unions.

It's better to have national shares, so everyone owns the production, and that provides your income. But ya now I am probably a commie?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

How does it take leverage from unions?
It would effectively be a permanent strike fund.
Wouldn't that help unions?

It's also not so much "taking" power, as it's not giving power you feel is your right.
Which, is the same kind of thinking that let's copyright holders claim every count of piracy is theft of money they never actually had.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I didn't understand the second part, could you elaborate on that?

How do you imagine unions to function at all without workers? The work is what provides unions with leverage, which is why we see strikes even in countries that have really good laws.

If you receive UBI, what can you do that genuinely creates leverage? Maybe make blockades like XR does? I don't think that's as powerful.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If there aren't workers, there is no need for unions.

But that doesn't happen anyway.
UBI doesn't replace work. People still work. Pilot programs and tests show, people might work less overtime, or call out when sick more, so they can go to a doctor, spend more time home with a new baby, and stay in school longer gaining higher degrees. But they don't quit their jobs. So there will still be plenty of workers to join unions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Ya that makes sense. I guess it was kinda black and white to me and I was thinking of what's called Basic in The Expanse.