this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
209 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

61394 readers
3858 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 122 points 8 hours ago (7 children)

It is impossible to ban piracy. The whole concept is that it's not legal to begin with.

I bet Lars Ulrich is so proud that he killed music piracy back when he killed napster.

Except wait.....no he didn't he killed A service. Meaning singular. The concept of piracy moved on. We got limewire and torrents.

The ONLY thing that has slowed (if not stopped) music piracy is making the content readily and easily available in a convienent consumption method at a reasonable price.

Shocking, I know.

The invention of iTunes CHARGING money for music in a (at the time) new more convienent method of music consumption at a reasonable price did leaps and bounds more to destroy piracy than Napsters downfall ever could.

Now if only video services would learn this lession. Because it's the same lession. I don't know how they missed the memo on this.

Put your video in one centralized place. Make it hassle free to watch. Charge a reasonable price. Piracy dies overnight.

And just to prove it, show of hands. Who here would go through the effort and risk of pirating, if Netflix had everything you wanted to watch, for $5 a month? Who here would say no, and still pirate? Reply below and tell me if you would still pirate with those conditions?

But instead, netflix is pushing $20 a month, and the video hosting is fractured among multiple hosts, all of which overcharge, AND want to serve ads.

Oh hey, right on cue. It's a skull and bones flag approaching.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 52 minutes ago

Video services involve bigger files, subtitles availability, streaming load less evenly spread over hours.

But I personally think there are ways involving chunk encryption (one key for many users for the same chunk, but not the same key for everyone ; obviously in the end it's decrypted and decoded at user's machine, so opportunity for piracy is not avoidable) and something like bittorrent to make commercial video streaming both convenient for users and not such a technical challenge for distributors.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago

About 10 years ago, I signed up for a seedbox for torrenting purposes. USD 15/month, which was roughly the same as Netflix at the time. Since then, Netflix has repeatedly raised prices, dropped content, and added ads. On the other hand, I'm still paying $15/month for that seedbox, and they've upgraded my storage capacity and bandwidth allotment multiple times.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 hours ago

Yep exactly.

They've pushed 6+ services now so it cost that cable used to so people are unsubbing and "cutting the cord" again

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I would still pirate. I like to have the files instead of proprietary apps

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

What if they gave you the files, with an easy download button ( with rate limits on downloads per user to avoid mass abuse )? Then, Netflix is basically providing a debrid service, which many people who pirate already pay more than 5$ for. Your VPN for torrenting is likely more than 5$. It's already trivially easy to rip a movie off a website ( even with DRM ), so this is not a real content control loss for them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago

If they offered a service like GOG for movies I think it would be worth it. I don't have much time for movies though so I actually will buy several films a year on UHD Blu-ray. I only really pirate films that are either out of print or not available in my country on disc.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

Same tbh. I like having a hard data copy of the things I enjoy, and have pride in my offline music library, which has been neatly filed with all the proper metadata tagged on. Now I can boot up Audacious (Linux) or MusicBee (Windows) and pick the genre I'm feeling that day. Or I can go out for a walk with one of the iPods I've restored and leave my phone at home.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

I gind it kind of ironic that if the streaming services were federated and your subscription applied proportionally to the services where you watched different shows this problem would solve itself

[–] __init__ 8 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Just a subscription that had most of the things and wasn’t a straight up abusive experience would be worth a hell of a lot more than $5. Too bad it will never happen.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

You mean it won't happen again. Netflix's goal was never to be good. It was to disrupt the industry. And they've succeeded; which is why everything sucks and piracy is a better option once again.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 hours ago

I would pay for the sub, but still seed for my friends in poorer countries where $5 USD is a hell of a lot of money.