7 ms·
Reasons not to use Netflix
- empath75 8y agoWhat’s the alternative?
- hdctambien 8y agoSpinning disks, I suppose
- drngdds 8y agoDVD and Blu-ray both have DRM, though. I guess there's always VHS.
- dingo_bat 8y agoDRM is not undefeatable.
- pdpi 8y agoThe problem isn’t defeatability. It’s the principle of buying DRM-locked content. It’s a compromise I’m willing to make under certain circumstances, but ultimately one that bothers me.
- jasonkostempski 8y agoDVD DRM can be broken easily.
- izacus 8y agoBluRay DRM is the worst thing ever - it demands that you are FULLY locked out of your own computer (this is why 4K HDR BR players are practically non-existent for PCs, since you need a fully locked out DRM stack from the drive to the display), it and demands internet connectivity to download keys. The number of devices that actually conform to draconian BluRay 4K spec is order of magnitude lower than devices that can play Netflix content.
- contravariant 8y agoDepends how utilitarian your morals are.
- bronco21016 8y agoThat’s kind of the saddest part really. We’ve allowed the convenience of streaming, packaged with these pesky copyright and privacy issues, to destroy any other legal repositories of digital media. Luckily as streaming has matured some of the more tech savvy artists are starting to do their own distribution. My biggest fear is in what will be lost in the future. These companies haven’t been around long enough for consumers to know how they will retain media. Will they only keep up licenses on the most popular movies? How will you then ever get a legal copy or access to one of your favorite movies of 30 years ago that nobody else liked?
- thirdsun 8y ago> That’s kind of the saddest part really. We’ve allowed the convenience of streaming, packaged with these pesky copyright and privacy issues, to destroy any other legal repositories of digital media. To be fair that only applies to video. With music there's a wide range of digital, DRM-free, lossless purchasing options available. However I worry that this will become a much smaller niche considering the popularity of streaming.
- dustinmoorenet 8y agoWe are not afforded a free'er alternative that is legal so I believe he probably doesn't watch much TV. DRM IS everywhere. There is no copying of modern media that isn't illegal. We lost that war.
- jasonkostempski 8y agoAny DRM free, EULA free source. Probably won't get that from the publishers and its probably illegal in most cases. If you have a problem with that, obviously don't use it, but there are limited legitimate offerings from publishers out there. The only semi-mainstream one I've seen is on the Louis C.K. site. I was hoping he was going to inspire a publishing trend, but I dont think he'll be putting out any more content.
- EpicEng 8y ago>Any DRM free, EULA free source. Probably won't get that from the publishers and its probably illegal in most cases So no real legal alternatives then considering the paltry number of options you'll have.
- bunderbunder 8y agoPrint books and VHS, I imagine. Anything post-DVD would be problematic due to CSS and suchlike. Maybe whatever videos you can legally get in Ogg format.
- realusername 8y agoI'd like video files personally, but publishers are probably not going to agree with me.
- tw1010 8y agoIf your openness threshold is as high as RMS's, the fact that there's no alternative is an ok tradeoff.
- kome 8y agoTorrent.
- philliphaydon 8y agoIs this satire?
- kashprime 8y agoRMS is gonna be RMS. I just wish he was a more realistic advocate of open content. Creative Commons has taken off while GPL v3 is rarely used.
- jampekka 8y agoCreative Commons and GPL are for quite different purposes, and FSF supports using CC for purposes other than software and software documentation. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/cc-by-4-0-and-cc-by-sa-4-0-added-to-our-list-of-free-licenses https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/cc-by-4-0-and-cc-by-sa-4...
- sanbor 8y agoI think FSF actually modifyed their license to allow Wikipedia relicense to CC (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2008/11/amended-fdl-will-allow-wikipedia-to-adopt-cc-license/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2008/11/amend...)
- r3bl 8y agoYou're comparing apples to oranges. Creative Commons licenses aren't meant to be used for licensing code, and GPLv3 isn't meant to be used for non-code projects. Case in point: If you click on "eBooks" from the submitted site, you'll download a one-pager PDF written by RMS, and released under a CC license.
- realharo 8y agoNetflix is still way better than the video streaming services run by giants such as Google, Amazon, or Apple. You won't see Netflix intentionally not working on Chromecast in order to sell their own dongles and tie users to its own ecosystem. Their business is video streaming, so their motivation will be to make sure as many paying users can access their content as possible. In contrast, the giants can just use their services as a way towards greater vendor lock-in.
- dustinmoorenet 8y agoThe point is that even the best of "them" is still not helping the individual. Netflix isn't giving back to society, because we can't archive their works legally or lend them out at a public library.
- bunderbunder 8y agoThe same is true of my local improv theater. Recording technology seems to have given us a collective case of viparinama dukkha with respect to popular culture. Perhaps it's OK for art to be ephemeral.
- smt88 8y agoThat sounds like a criticism of capitalism rather than a criticism of Netflix. For me personally, Netflix makes enough good content (and hopefully pays artists well in the process) that the amount I pay is worth it. I want them to do little or no harm, but if I only patronized businesses that actively give back to society, I'd never be able to buy most classes of goods.
- tobylane 8y agoIt is a criticism of capitalism. However, most of Stallman's post is, while accurate, a complaint of how we are being charged minimally by Netflix for a minimal access to media. If we could pay by cash in the post, on a player that didn't protect from ripping then it would cost more.
- 8y ago
- scandox 8y ago> A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in this way. I do respect RMS, but there is a sitcom contained in these two lines.
- mbrock 8y agoIt could be a cheap shot comedy making RMS into a funny weird guy, or it could be an interesting and challenging dialogue about ethics, entertainment, and convenience.
- jimhefferon 8y agoI'm pretty sure I konw which one Netflix would buy.
- fahadkhan 8y agoWhich? I only really see my little bubble of Netflix, of course, but a prominent part of that is Black Mirror and Big Bang Theory so it could go either way.
- youdontknowtho 8y agoOr it could be about a guy from American academia focusing on a very narrow definition of freedom.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y agoStallman's version of freedom does seem to be bounded by an excessive use of the word "never".
- DoreenMichele 8y agoAcademics and government employees both seem very capable of losing sight of the fact that someone needs to somehow pay the bills. They seem to often be oblivious to that idea. They work. They get paid. Their work doesn't have to make money per se. Their mental model for work and compensation departs from business culture into some la la land where bills are somehow paid by magic, it seems. (I have a lot of relatives who worked for the government and I was a military wife for a lot of years. This is a problem I personally wrestle with and it is likely a factor in my persistent poverty. So it isn't intended to insult anyone.)
- ryanmercer 8y agoOffer me a better product and I'll consider not using Netflix. Once all the original shows I'm watching have been canceled of course.
- dec0dedab0de 8y agoI agree with everything in here but still use Netflix(and others). It's almost an addiction. I remember originally ridding myself of cable, at that time the pain of spinning a disk or the fear of downloading a torrent limited the amount of video I watched in a day. Now I that I am unencumbered it has eaten into all of my other leisurely activities especially video games and music.
- youdontknowtho 8y agoI know. That's why I'm so upset that Netflix is imprisoning immigrant children. Oh wait.
- sctb 8y ago> Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- monochromatic 8y agoIt’s very easy to say “don’t use Netflix.” It’s a little harder to say “use X instead, it’s a viable alternative.”
- rhizome31 8y agoIn my city, there is a public library that offers a wide range of DVDs. People can watch them there or they can borrow them. It costs 15€ per year unless you're unemployed, retired or a student, in which case it's free. I've never used Netflix.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- spydum 8y agoI would suspect Stallman would reject that as well - library keeps track of what you have rented out, and requires proof of residency to get a library card. Sounds like exactly the same arrangement (except my property taxes foot the bill).
- stinos 8y agoWell there's still always downloading pirated copies of everything. Like before Netflix. Not completely viable for everyone (moral objections, ease of use) and at least with Netflix some of the money goes to the makers (well, I hope).
- dogma1138 8y agoI pay for Netflix and still pirate many of their shows just because download to watch does not support high quality video. It’s also at least on the iPad more battery efficient to play it via VLC than the Netflix app and I don’t need to worry about oh you haven’t been online for 48 hours please connect.
- maxsilver 8y agoI know this is going to sound crazy, but you could buy DVDs and BluRays. that is a viable alternative. It's still DRMed obviously, so RMS will hate it. And since you own it (not rent it) it costs more than Netflix. But it solves about half of the problems he mentioned -- you don't have to agree to an EULA, you still have the right to resell your discs later, and you can mode shift and/or back up your collection (rip it to a server, stream it over a VPN, whatever).
- adrianhel 8y agoThis is BS. Go Netflix.
- jokoon 8y agoApart from the morality of using Netflix or not (which to be honest had been taking off because it's a compromise made towards users of illegal downloading), it doesn't seem they have many shows of quality. The quantity and choice is good, but I'm still waiting for an interesting show to watch. And frankly, requiring a fast internet connection is an added cost. I might want to watch something on my cheap Android, in a train, and fast internet on mobile is a no go for me. Netflix is progress, but it's still a compromise. The fact that it doesn't have all existing catalogs shows that's it's not ubiquitous.
- eponeponepon 8y agoThere's some genuine gold in Netflix's library, if you go looking. An awful lot of dross too, to be sure, but there really is quality tucked away in amongst the mediocrity. That's one of the reasons I find this particular essay exasperating - there is a measurable amount of serious work being distributed on Netflix, clearly made with care and passion, both in fiction and non-fiction. Yet Stallman's stance says to deplore those artists' work for their distributor's business practices. It's literally shooting the messenger.
- tunap 8y ago"There's some genuine gold in Netflix's library, if you go looking." As an early adopter of the DVD program, my biggest hangup was the weighted catalogue that required me to click through many screens of often repeated listings(crap titles Netflix wanted me to watch more than I wanted to watch) & I was never certain I had perused all titles. Without an A to Z listing, it is obfuscating my options. I don't care for tailored shit that pushes others' weighted options.
- nothrabannosir 8y agoThe comments here are eerily similar to the “before picture” in this xkcd: https://www.xkcd.com/743/ https://www.xkcd.com/743/ Are we ready to look back on this thread with a bittersweet mixture of regret and yearning for our naïveté ? I feel like we’ve been down this road before , and we don’t seem to have learned much about weighing contemporary practicality against long term security of freedom. And our duty in leading the development through our choices , rather than sitting back as ineffectual actors, choosing what works best for us, without regard for the effect of our choices on the proliferation of anti-freedom techniques. Yes, Netflix works well now. That’s not his point. There is no fully superior alternative. That’s not his point. Our choices and boycotts can effect an alternative reality. I can’t speak for him, but, even if unwittingly, that’s what he’s achieving. It’s a sacrifice we all make for the greater good to get out of a local maximum. It’s about sending a signal. Signed , a fervent Netflix user on an iPhone :/
- scarface74 8y agoSo what's that alternate reality? That Netflix allows everyone to copy all of thier content for free?
- CraneWorm 8y agojust use the Netflix and TPB too
- kome 8y agoOnce again, he is right and forward looking. What technology is becoming is must be clear to everyone nowadays. Having a democratic technology is a priority right now, and new IP laws as well. I never even installed Netflix.
- sebringj 8y agoNetflix is a positive force driving technology to delight its customers. It has breathed life into new product lines such as apple tv and roku and paved the way for others to use the subscription streaming model by example. The open and free media is great as its own idea and proper application but why conflate the two?
- scarface74 8y agoNetflix is a surveillance system: it demands customers identify themselves to pay, and thus records what each person watches. Protect your privacy — reject Netflix! He's complaining that you have to pay for content? Where is the money going to come from to pay people to produce it? Is everyone suppose to work voluntarily? {DRM tirade} The usual argument against DRM is that you are buying content that you can't use as you please, with Netflix, you are explicitly not paying for ownership you are paying for access. Would anyone complain that you can't stay in a hotel as long as you want when you only paid for 3 days? {Netflix doesn't let you use what you bought} You haven't bought Netflix content, you rented it. I can't go out and sell a leased car. Educators speak the mission of "socialization" of children, meaning teaching them to be good, cooperating members of their community. That includes being willing in general to give things to others So if he thinks other people should give away their work. Will he come over and cut my grass for free? Netflix is parlaying its control of users (obtained through the wrongs stated above) into a grab for control over video entertainment. Every time you hear that some video is produced specifically by Netflix, it is be appropriate to feel a wave of disgust and resentment. Those feelings will help you refuse to watch it — refuse to feed the monster. Netflix produces content I want to see, I give them money. They pay people to produce content. It seems like a fair exchange and a much less crummy business model than most internet based businesses like Google and Facebook.
- cameronhowe 8y ago1. No, he wants a cash payment option. 2. DRM sets up blockades for things you are legally allowed to do. Your analogy is a strawman. "More informally, I call it "jerkogenic", because it makes people promise to act like jerks. " That's you.
- dogma1138 8y agoAll contracts set up what you are allowed and not allowed to do, DRM is just a way to enforce the contract in this analogy the DRM is the police. However the OP is right if you stay in a hotel and wreck the place or don’t want to leave they’ll call security or the police and they’ll kick you out and that’s their DRM. If anything the DRM argument itself is a straw man and a fallacy unless you are willing to forgo property rights all together.
- qrbLPHiKpiux 8y agoI really like the plain-textness of this site.
- badrabbit 8y agoThey produce content,they have an anti-competitive bias. That and I simply don't want to support production of arbitrary movies. I might avoid a particular studio or director so as to "vote with my dollar", but it is all too pointless with netflix since they also are the producer. To me,netflix is like walmart and what it did to smaller stores and how the quality now is so generic and bland.
- PretzelFisch 8y agoI don't understand his drm and antisocialization argument. His comparisons are to purchased media. But Netflix is renting me access to all of those movies, with block buster I didn't have legal standing to reloan the video or copy it.
- maxsavin 8y agoLove it: "A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in this way."
- grigjd3 8y agoI don't get it. I'm paying a monthly fee to have streaming access to videos. If the service becomes unvaluable to me, I will drop it. For videos I want lasting access to, I buy the disk. These are choices I make knowing how these markets work. If you don't like how these markets work, you're perfectly free to choose not to participate. It's not like anyone is confused or there is some kind of monopoly or even some kind of predatory lending scheme here.
- topcoder1 8y ago“A friend once asked me to watch a video with her that she was going to display on her computer using Netflix. I declined, saying that Netflix was such a threat to freedom that I felt uncomfortable with legitimizing it in this way.” Did anyone think the op is intentionally mocking himself? or have I lost touch with reality
- roboyoshi 8y agoIt's Stallman we're talking about, so yeah - this is him being 100% dedicated. I would be a bit more chill, because hell, we just want to watch a f*in movie.
- berbec 8y agoIt's is good we have someone as dedicated as Stallman. I admire his commitment but I have to disagree partly with him here. I believe DRM in media you buy should not be allowed. But you aren't buying anything from Netflix, just renting. I'd love a FOSS Netflix client and it doesn't require any loss in security.
- onyva 8y agoNetflix is useful, I guess, but only if you’re willing to compromise. I can’t find there everything I’m interested in, and if you can afford only one streaming service, you’re compromising your intellectual curiosity and allowing someone else control how wide your world should be. There’s no single company that can provide such a service and humanity cultural heritage should not be ephemeral. The possibilities digital archiving provides are huge and consequential and Netflix and other services like it are the complete opposite of what’s in our own best interest. In many ways, this is what American capitalism is all about. Containing and replacing everything with something that you can make people pay for. From natural food to cultural artifacts. That’s why the USA is where it is today. They’ve been fed this myth of exceptionalism to cover for extreme and dangerous form of cultural poverty.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y agoIf you can't find what you want on Netflix there's nothing stopping you from using a different streaming service next month, or using no streaming next month and renting / buying a DVD, new or secondhand.
- DoreenMichele 8y agoit is be appropriate Typos of this sort make me wonder how clearly the man is thinking. That's perhaps unfair, but that's what crosses my mind when I read something like this and on top of the general craziness of the position, it has gibberish of this sort in it. The post rants a lot about justice, but I am failing to see where in this rant he allows for the ability of people creating videos to get compensation at all. This seems to posit that a streaming service just shouldn't exist, period. The assumption that end users have all these rights, but creators apparently have none -- that's basically the very definition of slavery, no? A lot of these things he is protesting were created as some attempt to try to capture compensation for the people doing the work that makes it possible for the end user to get all the things Stallman is claiming is some kind of right of end users. I'm not comfortable with the moralizing language here. I think we need to do a better job of making sure people can get their share of the wealth that they participate in creating, not because of morality or justice, but because when (for example) Amazon employees are homeless while Bezos is insanely wealthy, this is basically preconditions for bloody revolution. When the people you need to create that wealth hate you for how you treat them, this is not a good thing going good places. It isn't that I think it is "immoral" for Bezos to make that kind of money. It's that I think he's a fool to think that bleeding his workers won't come back to bite him. When their behavior was objectionable enough, even Roman emperors were sometimes offed by the very guard unit intended to protect them. There's an old DnD concept of "lawful awful." This is where you try to play an alignment 1 Lawful Good character who is so "good" and so rigid about various rules that they wrap all the way around to behaving like a Lawful Evil. This post sounds a bit like to me. I have a fair amount of respect for the fact that he believed in certain principles enough to put his own time and effort into creating open source alternatives to the proprietary things he felt were inherently in the wrong. And it's fine if he doesn't want to watch Netflix and wants to layout his reasoning for it. But this post veers into trying to tell other people to also embargo Netflix. What I am not seeing is his proposed alternative. And that's a difference here between his past willingness to write the code and make it open source because he felt that mattered and this current rant. If you have a viable alternative to Netflix that fits your high-minded morals, awesome. If all you have is a rant about how this thing is not good enough, I think that should stay in the land of personal opinion or personal preference and not veer into territory of trying to use his position of influence to get other people to embargo them.
- type0 8y agoNetflix actively lobbied DRM to be included in browsers and as a result even smaller local streaming services are incorporating it into their businesses. The general populace doesn't know what DRM is and doesn't care. Have you tried to clarify to a computer illiterate person on what that even means? (you're basically a thinfoil hat by that point).
- darth_mastah 8y agoI have great respect for Richard Stallman, but frankly this text seems a bit paranoid. So what if they know what I watch? Is it too bad if I can have a list "continue watching" to pick up where I left off? Is it that terrible, that they can suggest to me other content I may be interested in? Is it a crime that they want to know how their service is used in order to stay attractive? I think not.