4 ms·

10 years ago pirates complained about cable packages that forced them to buy a whole bunch of channels they didn't want. Instead they wanted a la carte choices.

by harryh 6y ago

10 years ago pirates complained about cable packages that forced them to buy a whole bunch of channels they didn't want. Instead they wanted a la carte choices. Now pirates complain about "convenience and fragmentation." Saying they want a service with everything all in one place. The truth is that pirates want content for free. Which is fine. I get that. But don't try to package up this belief as some kind of principled "civil disobedience." You want to watch other people's stuff for free. Own it.

Spivak 6y ago
I mean Spotify has completely eliminated my desire to pirate music. I did when I was younger but $10/mo easily worth the price. If such a thing existed for TV and movies it would be a no-brainer too. And Netflix was that for a while. Sure, it didn’t have everything but it had enough that I had more good content than I could watch. It’s not that it’s fragmented, it’s that too expensive to maintain 7 streaming service subscriptions. So most people seem to pick one or two, account share to get coverage, and then pirate what still isn’t available.
- harryh 6y ago
  "I pay for what I feel like paying for and then I steal the stuff I don't feel like paying for" kind of proves my point.
brnt 6y ago
Piracy is cheap, and that is appealing, granted. But first and foremost, it's easy and has the best availability/catalogue bar none. I decide what I want, I go to a torrent site, between a few minutes and an hour later I have it. Done. This workflow hasnt changed in 20 years either. For me, that is the appeal.
- em-bee 6y ago
  actually that's not quite true. you can easely find recent or popular stuff, by anything older is really hard to find, or the torrents are dead.
  - brnt 6y ago
    Not in my experience.
    - em-bee 6y ago
      mind sharing your sources? :-)
em-bee 6y ago
if i sign up for any streaming service now i still have to pay for channels i don't want. same problem really. we don't have a la carte choices yet
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
marvin 6y ago
Your reasoning is incorrect, and frankly quite insulting. I never pirate music anymore, because there is a service available that provides everything I want with no need to do a wild goose chase half the time I want to listen to something new. Time and attention are the important ingredients, not money. Ditto for computer games, as everything I care about is always available on one of the three (!) services I use: Battle.net, Steam and GOG. That's an example of low fragmentation. I gladly spend hundreds a year on this. I never have to worry that my favorite game will disappear from my catalog. Never have to worry about DRM servers shutting down and making my purchases worthless. The same is not the case for movies and series, as the movie industry in particular is still digging its heels and refusing to build something that properly serves its prospective customers. Multiple examples of DRM servers shutting down. Weekly examples of content disappearing from a particular platform, or changing its licensing terms to make it unavailable in my location. You'd have to be a chump to accept these terms. The alternative should be obvious.

by harryh 6y ago

Spivak 6y ago

I mean Spotify has completely eliminated my desire to pirate music. I did when I was younger but $10/mo easily worth the price. If such a thing existed for TV and movies it would be a no-brainer too. And Netflix was that for a while. Sure, it didn’t have everything but it had enough that I had more good content than I could watch. It’s not that it’s fragmented, it’s that too expensive to maintain 7 streaming service subscriptions. So most people seem to pick one or two, account share to get coverage, and then pirate what still isn’t available.

harryh 6y ago
"I pay for what I feel like paying for and then I steal the stuff I don't feel like paying for" kind of proves my point.

brnt 6y ago

Piracy is cheap, and that is appealing, granted. But first and foremost, it's easy and has the best availability/catalogue bar none. I decide what I want, I go to a torrent site, between a few minutes and an hour later I have it. Done. This workflow hasnt changed in 20 years either. For me, that is the appeal.

em-bee 6y ago
actually that's not quite true. you can easely find recent or popular stuff, by anything older is really hard to find, or the torrents are dead.
- brnt 6y ago
  Not in my experience.
  - em-bee 6y ago
    mind sharing your sources? :-)

em-bee 6y ago

if i sign up for any streaming service now i still have to pay for channels i don't want. same problem really. we don't have a la carte choices yet

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

marvin 6y ago

Your reasoning is incorrect, and frankly quite insulting. I never pirate music anymore, because there is a service available that provides everything I want with no need to do a wild goose chase half the time I want to listen to something new. Time and attention are the important ingredients, not money. Ditto for computer games, as everything I care about is always available on one of the three (!) services I use: Battle.net, Steam and GOG. That's an example of low fragmentation. I gladly spend hundreds a year on this. I never have to worry that my favorite game will disappear from my catalog. Never have to worry about DRM servers shutting down and making my purchases worthless. The same is not the case for movies and series, as the movie industry in particular is still digging its heels and refusing to build something that properly serves its prospective customers. Multiple examples of DRM servers shutting down. Weekly examples of content disappearing from a particular platform, or changing its licensing terms to make it unavailable in my location. You'd have to be a chump to accept these terms. The alternative should be obvious.