8 ms·

> I've owned VHS's, they're worthless ... > I've owned DVD's - they're worthless > I've owned Books - they're worthless I honestly find this unbelievable and a

by lolsal 8y ago

> I've owned VHS's, they're worthless ... > I've owned DVD's - they're worthless > I've owned Books - they're worthless I honestly find this unbelievable and amazing. You have never rewatched a video, or re-read a book? You've never lent a movie or a book to a friend? You've never used a movie or a book to job your memory and spark a conversation with someone? There is value in all of those things to me, not to mention the value of being able to watch a movie or read a book whenever I want, regardless of my current state of subscription to netflix/hulu/xfinity/cbs/amazon prime/hbonow/etc.

snarf21 8y ago
That's a fair point but I think they are saying that if they really wanted to re-read a book, they could just rent it again. The other side of the coin is how many of the books or movies that you own have you never rewatched? What happens if you DVD stops reading? I think neither are wrong, just different. It depends on your goals.
- wristmittens 8y ago
  But the point of the original article is that "just rent it again" is entirely dependent on the renting authority deciding they still want to rent it to you. If Kindle decided (or was pressured) to censor a book for whatever reason, then it has enormous ability to dictate exactly what type of information you're able to consume.
  - supernovae 8y ago
    This assumes anti-competitive authorities as monopolies but that is as far from reality as can be expressed. Amazon Kindle doesn't own the content of the books to be able to censure them, they can't legally censor or edit books that weren't censored or edited by the writer/publisher. Also, there are dozens of ebook stores - a vast competitive market to choose from - not to mention many libraries have ebooks and print books available and interlibrary loans are awesome to get things you want even if not available locally.
  - TulliusCicero 8y ago
    That's only true if Kindle has monopoly power over books as a whole, which is obviously not the case. Now, services like Kindle or Steam deciding to revoke access to prior purchases is a potential Big Problem...but as of yet, it remains just that: potential. And at least in theory, there are government agencies that are charged with protecting against abusive behavior towards consumers (obviously actual results there are somewhat mixed).
    - xg15 8y ago
      Well, the whole point of the article is to observe a trend. None of this is a big problem right now. But economic incentives might push the renting model to become the main - or even only - model to use many goods and services in the future. Similarly, trends about the number of service providers seem to point towards consolidation as well. So if those trends hold true, we might at some point have Megacorp Inc. offering Living-As-A-Service. And then we would have a problem.
      - wristmittens 8y ago
        http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-santa-monica-scooter-suspension-20180814-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-santa-monica-sco... "Bird and Lime deactivate scooter services in Santa Monica for a day in protest"
- xg15 8y ago
  > That's a fair point but I think they are saying that if they really wanted to re-read a book, they could just rent it again. ...unless they somehow pissed off Amazon and lost their account. Or the publisher/auther pissed off Amazon and got taken down. Or...
esrauch 8y ago
It really is exceptionally rare that I've reread any book or rewatch any movie, and in those cases it wasn't hard to get another copy of the book from the library or find the movie again on Netflix or wherever. Maybe you reuse all of these things, but I think the 99% DVD is watched exactly once. Having these physical DVDs or whatever really is a very mild burden, but even that mild burden is larger than the mild benefit provided, people just like having their DVDs on their shelf because of the intrinsic value of owning "stuff".
supernovae 8y ago
I have MUCH more access to all the worlds books, movies, television shows, music libraries and documentaries by paying for a service or using the library then I would ever have in trying to own it. I'm not sure re-watching or re-reading anything is really limited or granted by owning... Lets take netflix for example. If there is something on netflix that i want a friend to see and they don't have netflix, i can just bring my phone/tablet over to their house and cast the show to the TV and watch it there or they can pay a few bucks and watch the entire series in a month. I don't have to collect anything, store anything, remember who borrowed what and quite honestly there is enough content on a few select services that i don't need them all and i'm quite content in having so much new stuff to enjoy that the need for having a favorite to watch over and over is sort of history for me. I watched the shit out of goonies as a kid becasue it was only 1 of 5 movies our entire family could own. Had we had on-demand everything that habit would have been a non starter for me. That doesn't mean i don't love goonies to this day and that i won't ever re-watch it but i may only re-watch it when it makes a round again on netflix and magically shows up as available - and i think that kind of experience to me is much better than feeling i owe myself to watch it because i'm moving it, storing it, seeing it, shelving it and having it occupy my life in some way.
- smhost 8y ago
  You're more arguing the differences between digital and physical technologies than you are arguing the merits of ownership as such. If we can ignore ethics for a moment, piracy still provides a superior product than rentals because pirated objects don't lock you into particular ecosystems nor does it prohibit you from using the product in any way. Given the choice, I don't want to have to buy an apple, android, or windows phone/tablet just to download movies to watch while camping or something. I would rather have the freedom to do whatever I want with the things I paid for.
  - supernovae 8y ago
    I don't have to care for that by choosing services that don't vendor lock me in. For example, i don't buy from itunes or google store if they restrict me to those marketplaces. But i do subscribe to netflix and hulu because they don't give a crap where i login from. piracy isn't ownership either... even if i pirate shit, i have to provide a service akin to that netflix provides to be able to watch it on my tablet/tv/phone or on the road
iscrewyou 8y ago
Anecdotal. I am slowly realizing that not many of the people I know like to rewatch things. For a while I told myself they don’t want to rewatch it so I shouldn’t force them to. But I realized that I was depriving myself from reliving the movies and the great scenes just because no one else rewatches them. It’s great to just put on a old movie and do chores. I recently watched The Dark Knight for like 8th time (last time was a couple of years ago) and I just enjoyed it. Different strokes I guess?
Groxx 8y ago
It depends. Have I rewatched every video I own enough times to offset the cost of renting it for each time I've watched it? Overwhelmingly "no". Not even close. Rentals of even new things are a couple bucks, DVDs are often $20 or more. I'm quite free to lend stuff out too, but it's still <1 on average and even if you include "every lend == the full cost to buy it on launch day" I'm still in the negative. Most people I've run into who would be interested already have it or have already watched it. Add in that the stuff I do rewatch is relatively old and rent-able for dirt cheap, and it's even more "no". There are a literal handful I'd buy, that's it. Same pattern with books, except that odds are pretty good that the library has a copy of it :) And even slightly not-super-famous books are pretty likely to be new to people I lend to because there are so many. (technical books are another matter, they're frequently not in libraries, but there too I've only reread a couple that are meaty enough to actually justify more than one pass) --- Books I still keep buying, especially since much of what I read for fun is somewhat old and available for extremely cheap. But I haven't bought a movie in... a decade? And I feel zero desire to do so.
Timpy 8y ago
A movie is a story you experience, the physical copy that you own is representative of the experience but it is not the experience. If we lived in a world where I could have ready access to my favorite movie without having a physical copy on hand, the value of such a physical copy would be reduced sentimental value. The physical disk that holds the movie is nothing but a souvenir from the vacation, you can have a physical item representative of the experience to admire, but it is not the experience. Likewise, a book's value is not in the paper and binding, but the content of the writing. I concede that I have an attachment to the exact copies of my favorite books, but I don't feel like I should. The important things are the what I take with me from reading, not the physical books themselves. I'm tired of consumerism, I'm tired of articles complaining about the change of paradigms since the baby-boomer generation. I'm not going to consume media in the same way a middle class worker from the 70's or 80's did. A subscription service lets me listen to any song I can think of on a whim while driving in my car, not limited to the selection of CD's I can jam into a binder. If the apocalypse hits and Amazon Web Services goes down I'll start buying CDs again.

by lolsal 8y ago

snarf21 8y ago

That's a fair point but I think they are saying that if they really wanted to re-read a book, they could just rent it again. The other side of the coin is how many of the books or movies that you own have you never rewatched? What happens if you DVD stops reading? I think neither are wrong, just different. It depends on your goals.

wristmittens 8y ago
But the point of the original article is that "just rent it again" is entirely dependent on the renting authority deciding they still want to rent it to you. If Kindle decided (or was pressured) to censor a book for whatever reason, then it has enormous ability to dictate exactly what type of information you're able to consume.
- supernovae 8y ago
  This assumes anti-competitive authorities as monopolies but that is as far from reality as can be expressed. Amazon Kindle doesn't own the content of the books to be able to censure them, they can't legally censor or edit books that weren't censored or edited by the writer/publisher. Also, there are dozens of ebook stores - a vast competitive market to choose from - not to mention many libraries have ebooks and print books available and interlibrary loans are awesome to get things you want even if not available locally.
- TulliusCicero 8y ago
  That's only true if Kindle has monopoly power over books as a whole, which is obviously not the case. Now, services like Kindle or Steam deciding to revoke access to prior purchases is a potential Big Problem...but as of yet, it remains just that: potential. And at least in theory, there are government agencies that are charged with protecting against abusive behavior towards consumers (obviously actual results there are somewhat mixed).
  - xg15 8y ago
    Well, the whole point of the article is to observe a trend. None of this is a big problem right now. But economic incentives might push the renting model to become the main - or even only - model to use many goods and services in the future. Similarly, trends about the number of service providers seem to point towards consolidation as well. So if those trends hold true, we might at some point have Megacorp Inc. offering Living-As-A-Service. And then we would have a problem.
    - wristmittens 8y ago
      http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-santa-monica-scooter-suspension-20180814-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-santa-monica-sco... "Bird and Lime deactivate scooter services in Santa Monica for a day in protest"
xg15 8y ago
> That's a fair point but I think they are saying that if they really wanted to re-read a book, they could just rent it again. ...unless they somehow pissed off Amazon and lost their account. Or the publisher/auther pissed off Amazon and got taken down. Or...

esrauch 8y ago

It really is exceptionally rare that I've reread any book or rewatch any movie, and in those cases it wasn't hard to get another copy of the book from the library or find the movie again on Netflix or wherever. Maybe you reuse all of these things, but I think the 99% DVD is watched exactly once. Having these physical DVDs or whatever really is a very mild burden, but even that mild burden is larger than the mild benefit provided, people just like having their DVDs on their shelf because of the intrinsic value of owning "stuff".

supernovae 8y ago

I have MUCH more access to all the worlds books, movies, television shows, music libraries and documentaries by paying for a service or using the library then I would ever have in trying to own it. I'm not sure re-watching or re-reading anything is really limited or granted by owning... Lets take netflix for example. If there is something on netflix that i want a friend to see and they don't have netflix, i can just bring my phone/tablet over to their house and cast the show to the TV and watch it there or they can pay a few bucks and watch the entire series in a month. I don't have to collect anything, store anything, remember who borrowed what and quite honestly there is enough content on a few select services that i don't need them all and i'm quite content in having so much new stuff to enjoy that the need for having a favorite to watch over and over is sort of history for me. I watched the shit out of goonies as a kid becasue it was only 1 of 5 movies our entire family could own. Had we had on-demand everything that habit would have been a non starter for me. That doesn't mean i don't love goonies to this day and that i won't ever re-watch it but i may only re-watch it when it makes a round again on netflix and magically shows up as available - and i think that kind of experience to me is much better than feeling i owe myself to watch it because i'm moving it, storing it, seeing it, shelving it and having it occupy my life in some way.

smhost 8y ago
You're more arguing the differences between digital and physical technologies than you are arguing the merits of ownership as such. If we can ignore ethics for a moment, piracy still provides a superior product than rentals because pirated objects don't lock you into particular ecosystems nor does it prohibit you from using the product in any way. Given the choice, I don't want to have to buy an apple, android, or windows phone/tablet just to download movies to watch while camping or something. I would rather have the freedom to do whatever I want with the things I paid for.
- supernovae 8y ago
  I don't have to care for that by choosing services that don't vendor lock me in. For example, i don't buy from itunes or google store if they restrict me to those marketplaces. But i do subscribe to netflix and hulu because they don't give a crap where i login from. piracy isn't ownership either... even if i pirate shit, i have to provide a service akin to that netflix provides to be able to watch it on my tablet/tv/phone or on the road

iscrewyou 8y ago

Anecdotal. I am slowly realizing that not many of the people I know like to rewatch things. For a while I told myself they don’t want to rewatch it so I shouldn’t force them to. But I realized that I was depriving myself from reliving the movies and the great scenes just because no one else rewatches them. It’s great to just put on a old movie and do chores. I recently watched The Dark Knight for like 8th time (last time was a couple of years ago) and I just enjoyed it. Different strokes I guess?

Groxx 8y ago

It depends. Have I rewatched every video I own enough times to offset the cost of renting it for each time I've watched it? Overwhelmingly "no". Not even close. Rentals of even new things are a couple bucks, DVDs are often $20 or more. I'm quite free to lend stuff out too, but it's still <1 on average and even if you include "every lend == the full cost to buy it on launch day" I'm still in the negative. Most people I've run into who would be interested already have it or have already watched it. Add in that the stuff I do rewatch is relatively old and rent-able for dirt cheap, and it's even more "no". There are a literal handful I'd buy, that's it. Same pattern with books, except that odds are pretty good that the library has a copy of it :) And even slightly not-super-famous books are pretty likely to be new to people I lend to because there are so many. (technical books are another matter, they're frequently not in libraries, but there too I've only reread a couple that are meaty enough to actually justify more than one pass) --- Books I still keep buying, especially since much of what I read for fun is somewhat old and available for extremely cheap. But I haven't bought a movie in... a decade? And I feel zero desire to do so.

Timpy 8y ago

A movie is a story you experience, the physical copy that you own is representative of the experience but it is not the experience. If we lived in a world where I could have ready access to my favorite movie without having a physical copy on hand, the value of such a physical copy would be reduced sentimental value. The physical disk that holds the movie is nothing but a souvenir from the vacation, you can have a physical item representative of the experience to admire, but it is not the experience. Likewise, a book's value is not in the paper and binding, but the content of the writing. I concede that I have an attachment to the exact copies of my favorite books, but I don't feel like I should. The important things are the what I take with me from reading, not the physical books themselves. I'm tired of consumerism, I'm tired of articles complaining about the change of paradigms since the baby-boomer generation. I'm not going to consume media in the same way a middle class worker from the 70's or 80's did. A subscription service lets me listen to any song I can think of on a whim while driving in my car, not limited to the selection of CD's I can jam into a binder. If the apocalypse hits and Amazon Web Services goes down I'll start buying CDs again.