this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
486 points (93.5% liked)

Technology

59708 readers
5367 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] macattack 83 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

Fuck a corporations but let's not act like piracy is the modern version of Robin Hood or righting a huge injustice

[–] [email protected] 77 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I mean yeah it's selfish, but it is definitely righting a huge injustice:

There is literally no customer centric way to watch these shows, or most modern media at all. Where can I literally buy shows that I can then resell. Where can I get a subscription service that's focused on giving me the best content possible and not trying to squeeze value out of me by influencing what I watch or selling my metrics or up selling me to a bigger plan after killing the previous plan or any number of other dark practices. Where can I buy DRM free offline files of these shows so I can watch them on an airplane on my own hardware without Internet?

It's fucked up that there is literally no way for people to buy their entertainment and not be fucked over more for trying to do it the legal way and spending money. And piracy needs to exist as a breaking point to stop these companies from getting even worse.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If you are a gullible consumer whose devices are always connected to the internet, you don't notice you're getting a worse service. Unfortunately, way too many people are falling for this.

Luckily, at least PC gamers are largely outspoken about DRM and there are pretty popular platforms that cater to them. But console games and media (other than some e-books)? No end of DRM in sight.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

at least PC gamers are largely outspoken about DRM and there are pretty popular platforms that cater to them

I fear the day that's no longer the case. Feels like gaming is becoming more "proprietary platform first" with every year.

[–] Radicaldog 4 points 1 year ago

The Steam Deck has helped bring it to light. I loved the Hitman games, for example, but I won't buy the studio's 007 game if that has the same always-online-singleplayer shite.

[–] rambaroo 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Steam is full of DRM and people still worship Valve. If people actually gave a shit about DRM, they wouldn't accept that bs. They would force publishers to release DRM-free games on GOG.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

The good that steam does for linux currently outweighs the DRM issue present in steam. It why they are catching less heat than others for it.

[–] lemming741 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't use Steam, but I think the sentiment was that Steam's DRM is less anti-consumer.

[–] rambaroo 6 points 1 year ago

It is but they also allow crap like Denuvo on there. But I always buy on GOG if I can. Having access to my own copy of a game wins out every time.

[–] Touching_Grass 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Hence why the people on the internet needs to reject people coming here to profit.

There's no middle ground in trying to keep the internet good and having it be a platform to hock stuff.

We should go back to the roots. Promote collaboration and be hostile to those people trying to manufacture scarcity online

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not against platforms, if they actually compete on features and not content.

This somewhat works for music. Spotify, Apple Music, Deezer, YT music all have pretty much the same catalog.

[–] Touching_Grass 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why are you OK with platforms?

Giving that all of them have shown you that the end state is to reduce the features and quality of content while making you pay more and more for this stuff.

We had the perfect opportunity. We had a new thing to shape and mold for future generations. Instead We let the people in who ruined every other thing we enjoyed. What I can't understand is how people thought they could let them in and also think it would somehow be different.

The right move is to do everything possible to make the internet anti profitable. The minute anyone. Tries we should copy and share it to infinity. Crack all the software. Treat everything the way NFTs were treated. Move the needle back to what we started with a space for hobbyist and enthusiast to create and share information without the endless pursuit of profit enshitifying every space we enjoy

[–] TwilightVulpine 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I get the spirit of that, but actual creators (not executives and investors) still need money. We can't fully rid the internet of monetizable platforms without harming them.

[–] Touching_Grass 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For sure. We all need money. But I'm not willing to accept all the stuff that comes with it. Which is why I believe there isn't a middle ground. I think what the internet could be and evolve into is much greater than some creator making money by exploiting its spaces.

But also, they can make money in what I'm proposing. What I'm saying is it shouldn't be a place where that is the creators main motivation for being here.

These creators end up with the same behaviors as any Spotify, twitter, Facebook executive. There are inherent barriers with modern online creators that work against the good internet we all want. Its insidious and not as evident as it is with the bigger players. But they are all the same.

[–] Nonononoki 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've been buying movies and series on Bluray, which I can rip and resell. Not every show has a physical release, but the most popular do and you do not have to watch every show there is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Aceticon 38 points 1 year ago

It's more like Civil Disobedience on account that Copyright is an entirelly artificial construct (the idea that you can't copy - not take, just copy, with your own resources - something is pretty anti-natura, which is especially obvious in the more traditional domains like storytelling) and even the one reasonable rationalle for it - that it incentivises creation in a way that enriches society - has been entirelly nullified by making the entering of copyrighted works into the Public Domain take longer in average from the time of creation than the lifespan of the longuest living human ever: it mainly enriches a tiny fraction of people, not society as a whole, even though the costs of compliance are bourne by society as a whole.

It's about not obbeying unfair laws in a way that doesn't harm anybody and only damages the interests of those whose gain comes entirelly from the unfairness of said laws: so not selfless like a Robin Hood situation, but also not the pure selfishness of trying to get more than others.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm not a proud pirate, but I'll never be a proud data harvest free-for-all resource. there is no glamour to any of this, but I will patiently await a reasonable offering. in the music industry it also worked. as well as the video game industry. you can easily buy honest drm free games

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] systemglitch 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] adrian783 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

in a pretty limited, cultural archival and dissemination point of view, mayyyyyyyyybe.

the vast majority just want free entertainment.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (12 children)

No, they want easily accessible entertainment for a reasonable price.

Currently I'm supposed to pay 3-4 services at 10-15€ to get a somewhat reasonable library. There's up to 60€, each month. For a collection of services, that I'm realistically using maybe 2h a day. That's completely unreasonable.

And if you see, that especially Netflix seems to spend 90% of that money on extremely low quality crap, this price tag seems even less reasonable.

[–] sebinspace 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This. Why would I go through that whole rigamaroll when I can go to one site and it has everything, often with robust search that’ll actually find what I’m looking for when I misspell Benjamin Cucumberpatch’s name.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

*Benadryl Cucumberpatch

[–] Usernameblankface 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What are your thoughts on borrowing DVDs from a local library?

[–] TwilightVulpine 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's interesting that even though technology advances and public options could evolve with them, people are still expected to jump through archaic hoops. Even if there needs to be a quota for lending, that could be handled digitally too.

The way media companies act today, if libraries weren't already a thing, they would not allow them to be invented.

[–] Usernameblankface 3 points 1 year ago

Agreed, we definitely could not make libraries today if they were not already around.

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

Oh. Well that's a bummer.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

Right now, I pirate mostly because I can't afford paying for my entertainment (like the vast majority of people where I live). But even if I had disposable income, I would not pay for some media because I don't want to spend money and be restricted more than if I didn't. I would not mind spending money for DRM-less copies. And even if this wasn't possible, I would rather pay for the piece and then pirate it DRM-less to truly own it (like I already did with some games when I was better-off).

[–] MadBigote 5 points 1 year ago

There's definitely people only looking for free content, but others like me pay a fair amount of money for the services needed to get going a Plex server, for example. I pay for a VPN to stream outside my network, I pay for JDownloader, a MediaFire account, a Plex subscription, etc...

It's cheaper to just stick to Netflix and their horrible catalog and practices than to run my server the way I do, but it's not just about the money.

[–] Aceticon 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sorta.

At a very narrow per-tree level it's indeed about a selfish desire of the pirate.

At a broader forest-wide level it's about the available choices having been artificially narrowed by legislation that creates a monopoly on copying. As seen more in the gaming world (mainly with GoG, Steam and indie titles) and even streaming video a few years ago, even with artificially narrow choices by law if the competition is still broad enough to provide lots of options at good prices, far fewer individuals will engage in Piracy, though as we see with streaming video, the artificial monopoly legislation ends up being sooner or later leveraged to narrow the available choices and Piracy flourishes in response.

It's not by chance that the very same individuals who have simpletion takes on just about every subject (not saying you, just some commenters here) also seem have the simpleton "piracy is bad because the law says so" take when commenting on this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It's not the pirates that are Robin hood in this analogy, it's the support network enabling piracy.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

Hollywood put billions into the next generation disc, blu-ray, and you would still pay extra at Blockbuster for being late if it wasn't for piracy.

While piracy isn't without problem it is the closest we get to "supply and demand". Piracy balances the scale.

[–] TwilightVulpine 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At some level it happens due to people wanting stuff for free... but if it's the consequence of that is that works are preserved and disseminated, that's more valuable for our culture than when companies vault them and lose them, or when they never release them at all, like Warner has been doing lately.

One might say that these companies have all the right to make these works unavailable, but this is clearly a situation where the "proper" is more detrimental than the "clandestine". After all, the way these companies handle it, when the ridiculously excessive copyright length is over and the works are supposed to cease their artificial monopoly and be returned to the Public Domain from which everyone takes inspiration, there might be nothing left. A DVD is unlikely to last 100 years.

This is not a matter of life and death but culture has its value.

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

Most people don't have the understanding to fully appreciate the consequences of the current system of "free" services. That's why it's the job of governments to put robust consumer protections in place. The Europeans have been making some moves in the right direction, lately. Unfortunately, they also increasingly have been veering towards totalitarianism in their moves to enforce mandatory trusted certificates, weakening of encryption and other hare-brained schemes.

[–] TwilightVulpine 1 points 1 year ago

If by "free" services you mean ad-driven internet services, I don't think this is as much a consequence of those, rather than the growing power of media companies and their influence over the law and technological development. They were fiercely against piracy since ever, their attempt to vilify VHS and cassete tapes comes to mind, but now copyright law is stricter than ever, digital ownership has been eroded into nearly non-existence through absurd one-sided License Agreements and devices increasingly act as if storefronts of the manufacturers rather than as a tools purchased by the customer.

This is not because there aren't enough people paying, but because the media companies are never satisfied. Loads of people subscribed to streaming but it isn't ever enough, it doesn't guarantee that their quality and collections will remain as good.

load more comments (2 replies)