I don't doubt the good faith of individual implementors such as yourself. But, like the official BBC communications, you fail to address the _compulsory_ nature

I don't doubt the good faith of individual implementors such as yourself. But, like the official BBC communications, you fail to address the _compulsory_ nature. To draw a very apposite analogy, YouTube on Android requires sign-in for minor functionality. There's no 'back' button and you can't bookmark videos for later. The UX is deliberately crippled unless you sign in: clicked video by mistake? Good luck getting back to the previous one. This is a choice they made. It's not beyond the whit of an Android app to store bookmarks locally and sync them when you sign-in. Or to maintain a history for a back button. The ostensible reason is "so you can have a uniform experience across all devices". The real reason is "so we can use your data to shift ads". We all know this, and it's part of the Google value proposition. It's free because they exploit your data. The BBC is something different altogether. It's partly non-profit, has no shareholders, funded in a unique way, and, without wishing to seem mawkish, something special. Emulating commercial SV companies leaves a very bitter taste in the mouth. That combined with the privileged place it holds in public life, is not a nice combination. Maybe Netflix has some nice features. Maybe the BBC can adopt them. But if they really are for _my_ benefit, let me opt in, don't make it compulsory.