this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
2326 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

59636 readers
4425 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Tech's broken promises: Streaming is now just as expensive and confusing as cable. Ubers cost as much as taxis. And the cloud is no longer cheap::Some tech is getting pricier and looking a lot like the older services it was supposed to beat. From video streaming to ride-hailing and cloud computing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 year ago (4 children)

We should have seen this coming. I remember the early 80s when cable was the new hotness, and it was cheap, with no ads unlike broadcast television. That was its major selling point.

Then over the next decade the ads crept in, and we were all paying for cable with ads, even though the whole point had been no ads. Then the price skyrocketed and the ads remained.

Steaming was always going to follow the same path. Cheap with no ads at first, then adding ads, then skyrocketing prices, then crazy prices with ads too.

They know as long as all of them raise their prices, where are we gonna go? They have exclusives. We can’t just take our money elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The alternative is simple. The seven seas are calling out to you. :)

[–] antim0ny 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or read a book, or do literally anything else.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Not if Anna has anything to say about it...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago
[–] capy_bara 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wait, there was a time when cable didn't have ads???

[–] paraphrand 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah, because you were paying for it. Where as broadcast was free over the air.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's surprising to me is that anyone didn't see this coming. The ideal of online streaming being cheaper and better was very alive and well when Netflix was the only streaming service. However, I started to note that some content from specific copyright holders started getting removed from Netflix and from that single indicator, I saw this happening...

I could almost see them gearing up to launch their Netflix competition service which would be analogous to channel "packages" on cable. You get the Netflix package for x, y, and z shows, the $studioG package for shows a, b, and c, etc etc. Creating the exact problem that we're trying to eliminate with going to streaming. From that moment, I committed myself to sail the seven seas and download all my own Linux ISOs. It seemed like everyone else couldn't see what I saw, and nobody cared. Then it happened.... HBO, Hulu, Prime video, Paramount+, Disney+, etc, all came out of the woodworks, and now this.

My argument is that the MPAA needs to learn the same lesson that the RIAA did after the Napster lawsuits. Some people who were "sued" by the RIAA actually fought back. Most couldn't because they didn't have the money to pay for a drawn out legal battle, so they settled, but a few brave souls fought back.... The story is long but it's clear to me that the RIAA learned a very important lesson: it's not profitable to sue everyone who pirates their content; and if you look at the music industry now, there's very little piracy, and almost everyone has a music subscription service, whether Spotify, Apple music, tidal, YouTube music, or something else. Anyone without a subscription generally suffers through ads, with very little difference between which service you use (at least, regarding what's available), or how you use it.... There's still people pirating the music (far fewer than in the days of Napster), and still people buying physical media, but long term, they're safe from going under from P2P sharing. The vast majority of consumers are paying for the content either through ads or subscription and all music is available on all services.

The MPAA is still hard headed about all of this. Disney is trying to fix the problem by buying everything up, so other studios are forced to have their work on D+, because the big D bought them.... I'd argue that Disney is doing a better job at squashing video media piracy than the MPAA.... The problem right now is that the various video streaming services are all run by the studios that publish the content on them. A truly third party streaming service (that is not also a competing studio) is needed, who can license content from everyone.... Most won't license their content to a third party service because it's not as profitable compared to running their own service... So we're stuck. If the MPAA stepped in and made such a service, and not-so-politely asked the various studios to license their content to it, then made it affordable, I would hang up my black hat and skull flag and never look back.

The chances of this happening are so small that I'll just go ahead and order a new flag... My current one has been flying for so long it's looking a bit sun-bleached.

I have zero hope or expectation of this happening, and bluntly, if it did, whether we admit it or not, I think most of us would hang up our hats and relent, because it's far easier to simply pay a (reasonable) monthly fee than to do all the crap associated with getting it another way. They won't, so yo-ho-ho.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

It's economics 101, prices will rise to what the market will bare... Unfortunately the market is irrational and has access to credit cards.

[–] ParikramaWasi 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As long as current economic/cultural model exists, there is no escape from advertisements. Consumerism can't thrive without advertisements and any technology that gets mass adopted is perfect venue for that.

Today, its only entertainment platforms which are infected with this bug, tomorrow it'll be your car, fridge and anything which needs internet connection(almost every home appliances).

[–] AngryCommieKender 3 points 1 year ago

None of those things need Internet access. They are doing this so that you'll own nothing. Cars are a good example here. Why in the world would they introduce heated seats that are subscription based? Because they don't want to sell you or me a car anymore. They are looking forward to self driving autos, and intend to sell fleets to cities and corporations. You and I will rent the cars much like a cab, but now the manufacturer can still make money charging $1 to roll down the windows, $5 for the radio, $7 for A/C, etc.....