970
submitted 1 year ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Decimit@lemmy.world 330 points 1 year ago

Pirating went down when paying for streaming was more convenient. Well, you are making it far less convenient.

[-] Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml 105 points 1 year ago

Streaming has become cable 2.0.

It was wonderful when everything was on one, maybe two providers. Could watch everything in a very easy, very affordable way.

But everyone saw that, went "I know, I want that money!" and spent billions building their own individual infrastructures so make their own streaming services, and right around we go right back to the absolute worst days of cable and bullshit.

Only thing stopping me from saying fuck it and downloading shit I want to watch, is the fact that I no longer know what the good sites are.. since I havent pirated since the heyday of the bay.

[-] Decimit@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago

piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com Their sidebar can teach you a lot.

[-] SeatBeeSate@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Streaming has become cable with micro transactions.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

Join lemmy.dbzer0.com the piracy instance and ask around about private trackers and if there are any open signups

[-] Khotetsu@lib.lgbt 10 points 1 year ago

And the irony is that people switched to cable for the exact same reason. They got tired of the nonsense that broadcast TV pulled with subscriptions for different channels and all the ads and everything, and went to cable because you paid one bill for every channel. Then, everyone moved to streaming because you had to buy 50 different cable packages for the one channel on each you actually cared about, and there were just too many ads to deal with, etc.

Something something, those who don't listen to history are doomed to lose profit margins or whatever.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago

Broadcast tv had different subscriptions for channels? Where? Free to air tv is free with no subscriptions or options.

[-] KIM_JONG_JUICEBOX@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Lol they are definitely wrong about that.

[-] Khotetsu@lib.lgbt 0 points 1 year ago

I may be remembering that wrong, as it was before my time, but I had heard that people moved to cable for the same reasons that people moved from cable to streaming services. You bought one cable package, it gave you access to everything, and there were no ads. Then came the ads, and eventually, the packages you have to buy in addition to your cable subscription for the channels you actually care about.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago

People went to cable because it had no ads and let you have the opportunity to watch stuff you’d missed because they looped content regularly. Missed an episode of the Simpsons? All good, it’s on again in 12 hours. It also has movies and shows long before free to air because they paid for it. Cable was the start of subscriptions and paying for individual channels.

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Cable most definitely had ads though. Special add ons like HBO or Showtime didn't but basic cable did.

[-] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

TorrentFreak occassionally posts a list of sites, just use a good no logging VPN.

[-] hypnotoad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

That and movies just suck nowadays. This is partially old man yelling at cloud stuff but also true since the death of DVD's means studios won't take risks anymore since they can't recoup funds after a poor box office.

[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

This isn't yelling at clouds, it's check l correct.

It's also not quite so much "recoup funds at a poor box office" as it was "count on DVD sales to make up fifty percent of revenue for certain kinds of movies."

[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

On the usenet side of the house, I think the only big change was NZB Matrix going away.

[-] cor315@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I can't tell if no one talks about usenet because no one knows about it or because they don't want anyone else to know about it.

[-] ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

I prefer torrents because it's totally free, unlike Usenet. I don't even pay for a VPN since I don't care about a few love letters in my inbox. It's not about the cost; it's a matter of principle that I disagree with commercialized piracy.

But Usenet is a good option for other reasons.

[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Both. It's a semi secret club.

[-] MtBarbarian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Galaxy torrents is a newer, solid option friend

[-] bregosh@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

!piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

[-] Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 year ago

As lord Gaben has said, "piracy is a service issue"

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 1 year ago

Well, this time they have Google and Microsoft on big brother duty to make sure you don't get crazy ideas. And I'm not seeing enough people jumping away from Chrome and Windows to stop it.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago

I'm on Windows and it's never hindered me when I needed to go download something that would make a studio exec cry. Granted, I use Firefox, but I'm not sure what Chrome would do differently - it's just a matter of clicking links that get sent off to qBittorrent to handle. What "big brothering" do they do?

[-] 4am@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Google is implementing a new scheme that verifies your browser (correct DRM, etc.) and sites won’t allow access without it.

Basically you have to have Chrome and without extensions they don’t like.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

I'm preeeeetty sure that the Pirate Bay isn't going to implement that scheme.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

But so far google and microsoft are incompetent big brothers, to the point that most people will find free streaming sites just by searching "free streaming epx of show". Now we are not talking good streaming, or even safe but if you want an example just look at any place with poor users (like a school or library).

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago

What exactly are you talking about? Google and Microsoft have literally nothing to do with any of this.

[-] sadreality@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Time will tell...

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago

It’s not really any less convenient, just more expensive

[-] duncesplayed@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

True as long as they keep an ad-free tier.

this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
970 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

35022 readers
239 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS