4 ms·
Apart 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
by jokoon 8y ago
Apart 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.