I’m just here to talk about The Fall of the House of Usher
Hoo-boy was Carla great in it. Glad to see her making a comeback.
Is that was the picture is from? Because I came here to ask what that pictures from
I wouldn’t mind like a store where you buy movies and music but you bring your own storage device, maybe 2 to get a safety backup in case something happens on the way home.
A business that connects to random people’s usb drives all day? What could possibly go wrong!
Man’s destroying my hopes and dreams here x’D
Nah jk, i seriously didn’t think of the implications yet.
Do you know how copyshops work?
It’s called rent seeking behaviour. It’s parasitic.
I’m not surprised at all, physical media is only good for the consumer. They want subscriptions so they can keep you paying constantly, there’s no benefit for them
As a consumer I hate physical media
Why?
If they’re anything like me it’s an overriding laziness!
We listened to the same audio cassette that was stuck in our car for nearly 6 months rather than spend the hour it eventually took sort it out.
I still love No Doubt though.
This place with only one cassette tape sounds like a Tragic Kingdom to me.
…And I would walk 500 miles
Quite the opposite!
But you should swim -500 kilometers?
It takes up space and meeds special equipment to use.
To be fair, so does digital media/streaming
Same. I understand all of the reasons why people prefer physical media, but after buying the same movie across three generations of physical media between VHS / DVD / Blueray / 4K UHD and now Dolby, I’d just prefer to have it once and get access to the best copy modern technology allows.
It’s also supremely easier to download a purchased digital copy instead of buying physical media, rip it, find increasing storage, find a player like Plex, maintain my own Plex server and hardware, and then download it.
I’ve done Plex for years with physical media, downloading a digital copy is simply a better consumer experience.
That’s allowed. You have many options for digital media. I don’t like spicy food. Upsets my tum tum. But if corporations were actively keeping spicy food off the market, I wouldn’t say “Well that’s great, because I hate spicy food.” That would just be ridiculous.
yeah I hate owning things that I can keep and hold on to without someone revoking it away from me.
I already have that with digital media though. I don’t do subscriptions.
as long as it’s on your computer/server and it’s not dependent on an online service, I’m all for it. Vudu is a great example of what can happen with online purchases
Yes, I always save my own copy of any content I wish to keep.
My physical media was destroyed in a fire, but I still have my backed up digital library. We all accept some risk!
I’m sorry to hear that, but yeah I rip my media and then stream it, it’s more about obtaining my copy that they can’t take away. I’m glad your backups made it!
This is false. Firstly, because people don’t subscribe to everything forever. But even in some Netflix utopia where everyone has a Netflix subscription, and they keep it forever, then what? Now you can’t make any more money, you’re making the maximum amount of money your business model can make. But you can keep people subscribed to your service by continuing to add new things, while also making extra money from those who would like to own physical copies.
Subscriptions detach income from titles, meaning all the service needs to do is exist and have things on it. There’s no budget to actually create anything special. Physical offers a way to reconnect those, making something that is more expensive and in return making more money.
The ad-based plans everyone is introducing run on the same logic. Subscriptions aren’t sustainable.
So say I buy The Matrix on DVD. I can watch it whenever I like…
If I stop paying for Netflix, then I can’t watch it anymore so I have to keep signing up again. What about when the matrix isn’t on a Netflix, I then have to go sign up for Apple TV.
Isn’t capitalism supposed to weed out the companies without a viable business? If you can’t keep improving your product or you’ve got saturation with users then that’s your ceiling. Down like it, close down.
Kinda weird take from you to be honest. Like why won’t we think about the poor struggling corporations. Perhaps they would be in a better position if they didn’t go so long with losses trying to capture the market with a view to rinse us all later down the line.
I have exactly one monthly subscription and that’s for AppleCare+ on my phone. Fuck death my a thousand paper cuts.
“There’s no benefit to physical media.” “Yes there is.” “Why are you defending corporations?”
…what?
I literally told you a benefit. Way to ignore that part.
…which side of this argument are you on?
Ngl I’m a little confused right now as it seems your comment was edited from what it initially said, but I’d don’t have a clue.
Edit: To be clear I am on the side of massive tech companies not being encouraged to use massive amounts of investor funding to corner a market and then work to fleece their customers as much as humanely possible. This level of laissez faire capitalism is horrendous and only cares about the companies and not that users get a decent product in exchange for their money.
At the risk of sounding like a corporate shill: fucking duh? Who ever thought otherwise???
Netflix. Its how their business started. DVD rentals via mail.
Netflix. Its how their business started. DVD rentals via mail.
Nokia started as a paper mill company and sold toilet paper. With the release of the Nokia 9 PureView smartphone, nobody expected Nokia to release bog roll along with it.
I was going to make the same sort of metaphor with Nintendo until I looked it up and saw that they still produce playing cards 🙃
I almost did that too, until I remembered Pokemon and pivoted before posting.
Do they make actual basic playing card decks, or just video game merch themed decks?
Both, I think! Nintendo was originally a company that made generic playing cards. They’re extremely old too. I haven’t looked recently but I think they were around before ww2?
deleted by creator
Founded 1889
Both
Blockbuster.
Why is this even a knock on Netflix? McDonald’s doesn’t serve steak and I don’t think it’s because McDonald’s bad. Netflix is in the streaming business, not the physical media business. Look elsewhere if that’s important to you?
Because there’s no way to own that media that netflix has rights to. Currently, legally
buyingaccessing any tv shows or movies digitally means the company who offered them to you can yank them away at any time, legally.That’s not ownership.
Physical media still isn’t perfect, as it includes copy protection, but at least no one can legally take your BluRay away from you.
Okay. Don’t consume that media? Artists are not forced into contracts with Netflix. They can do what thousands of artists did before Netflix ever existed. Will they hit the same level of audience that Netflix pulls? No. People like streaming and it’s popular as hell. Why would they be entitled to that though? Artists, creators of any type really, have agency to do as they wish with their art. Consumers have a choice in the art they consume. If either chooses to engage with Netflix, why would it not be on the terms that Netflix has openly set and asked you whether you wanted to partake in?
I just do not understand this viewpoint and it’s all over the thread. To be clear, Netflix does other stuff that sucks, like killing shows and underpaying artists. Be mad at them for that all you like, I’ll be right there with ya. Insinuating Netflix is doing something ethically bad by pivoting to streaming, which the vast majority of the world’s population would rather use than physical media, just does not make a lick of sense to me. Why should Netflix pay employees, rent factory space, set up an entire vertical they’ve gotten out of, just to produce CDs that history showed hardly anyone bought after the transition to streaming?
I think it boils down to how people view and value this medium of art. Some think that the creator owns the work and can do with it what they please. Some think that art belongs to everyone and they should have a say in what happens to it.
IMO, when all digital media by its very nature can be infinitely copied and distributed, trying to DRM everything is insanity. Trying to restrict people’s access doesn’t work; people still pirate, people still get over news paywalls, etc. It’s the wrong approach. US copyright law is broken and bonkers. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is bad and insane. I don’t know how to make this a fair system under capitalism, if it’s even possible.
The current system labels me a criminal if pay for netflix, watch a netflix movie, and then circumvent the DRM in order to save that movie to my own computer. And netflix also won’t allow me pay them more to save that movie. That’s bonkers.
Agreed on all counts regarding pirating, DRM, copyright, etc. It’s a messed up landscape and we need legislation and community action around it, for certain. Even aside from capitalism, technology is shifting rapidly and that causes its own issues as society struggle to keep up.
The idea that everyone owns all art is interesting, but I’m not sure that I agree. Seems similar, but a bit distinct from the death of the author idea. I have created things and I am not comfortable with the idea that I do not have ownership of the work. There is obviously nuance there and I don’t expect to have full control over how my art is received or parodied or memed on or whatever, that’s fine, but it is my choice as to how I distribute it, how I created it, how I choose to maintain it. Netflix cannot force me into a contract with them. Hulu can’t. Disney can’t. I can release my art right onto the internet or my own website. Every artist has that freedom. It has consequences, but that’s not persecution or unethical, in my opinion.
I mean, for as long as physical media even is a thing. Given where the control and money is I don’t see physical media being a thing for much longer.
And Netflix isn’t the one killing it, they’re just following trends. We are killing physical media because we don’t use or buy it.
Because they’re in the business of art and they’re perfectly happy to kill art if it doesn’t make business sense. There is a cultural cost to this stuff disappearing that isn’t comparable to the McRib going away.
If you feel that way, then you should pay to support them, just like the mcribbers
Netflix will get money from me when they unfuck their decision to cancel Mindhunter
I’m pretty sure Fincher stopped working on it. It wasn’t Netflix’ decision
Oh, I thought you meant independent artists when you said something about art
Oh, I mean I do support artists I like
Man you are getting downvoted over nothing.
You got a stalker?
Ok. But if they’re footing the bill, that’s their choice. The content creators don’t need to go to Netflix for their funding, there are many other options.
Sure, and Netflix/HBO et all are still assholes for happily sending art to the glue factory when they think it makes financial sense. They deserve to be criticized for it.
“Sending art to the glue factory” is hyperbole, cmon. They’re also not restricting anyone from releasing their own stuff their own way? If you want Netflix funding, you’re going to be bound somewhat by their business, which is focused on streaming. Expecting a business to construct entire sectors to distribute art in the way you want is just… weird. Make your own fucking art with your own resources if you want to distribute it how you want.
I mean they have enough power to force people to deal with them don’t they?
Netflix? How can Netflix have enough power to force artists to release through their service? I’ve enjoyed tons of movies and TV from other sources. They may not have the same reach, but that’s a far cry from “forcing” you to do something. If you go with the megacorp with the most reach for your art, expect to make concessions. If you release on your own, it can be tough but you have full control. There are myriad points in the gradient between.
No it’s not. See: Acme vs Coyote, Batgirl, and nearly 100 other things crushed by David Zaslav
So now we’re talking about a completely different subject? Be mad at Netflix for canceling shows all you want, that’s fine and righteous in a lot of cases. This article is about not producing physical media though, which is not sending art to the glue factory. You should stay on topic with the article instead of inflating your argument without even telling the people you’re having a debate with to be about a subject none of us were even discussing?
I think the two are intertwined because without physical media there is no guarantee that media cannot just disappear like Spiderman at the end of Infinity War. Piracy is thankfully a safeguard to that but there’s still a conversation to be had about how easily media can just get black holed nowadays. Everyone’s busy talking about how they’re legally allowed to do that, I’m trying to say they’re morally wrong to disallow their content from physical releases. It’s also a bit ironic considering Netflix wouldn’t exist if not for physical media.
That’s a great tour
Not to be that guy, but the McRib going away is a bit of a cultural thing because that’s a food that only the USA could come up with and get people to eat. That being said, I fully understand and agree with your point.
Don’t worry. Just because you can’t pay for something doesn’t mean it’s gone away. Netflix (and basically all media companies) are just shooting themselves in the foot trying to lock everyone into a bunch of subscription services. If I could pay them a couple bucks to download a movie or show with no DRM I would. Instead they get $0 from me and I do it anyway.
They are in the business of streaming, and are making art to maintain a fresh library to stream. Just like broadcasters and movie theaters before them.
TV shows and movies on physical media was a huge change for those that required a shift in priorities that took decades and for phyiscal media to be profitable. Netflix is still making bank doing what they know how to do, which is streaming. Switching to physical media would need to be more reliably profitable for them than limiting it to streaming to encourage subs to make the switch.
I would prefer the physical media option too, but their reluctance is understandable.
Netflix and the other streamers represent a growing majority of new IP investment
If the trend continues, there would eventually be no new media produced in physical formats
Burn your own copy.
Data on a HDD or SSD (without DRM) is also physical media, and much more flexible. No need to expend more plastic locking data onto a dying format.
Not only a dead format, but a unstable shelf life format. CDs and DVDs were always marketed as storage for good. But technically that was never possible, not the way it was actually manufactured. The used plastics and metal laminates had a rough expected life of 15 years or thereabouts, at best. Obviously a massive increase from magnetic tapes that started degrading as soon as the recording stopped and got slowly more damaged the more you played them. But still not a permanent solution. No organized data is stored forever, entropy won’t allow this. Most if not all original compact discs are probably gone by now, and some end user burnables had even worse chemistry in their data layers than original prints.
Only actively making new copies of digital goods in new storage media regularly keeps those goods alive. We need new storage mediums that are resilient in the measure of centuries and not just a decade or so. We need commercial glass 3D optical storage now.
More like dead format. I haven’t had a dvd player in my home for over a decade
I bet you still have an HDD or SSD somewhere though
Yeah, like a half dozen just lying around.
No game consoles? Everything from the PS2 and Xbox forward has the ability to play DVDs.
Blu Ray starting with the PS3 and Xbox One.
4K UHD starting with the Xbox One S and PS5.
No game consoles?
What, PC’s with lock-in firmware? Thanks, no.
Nope. Only console I’ve bought in the last decade was the Switch and the Steam Deck. I did have an Xbox 360 but that was like 14 years ago now
Flanagan admits that he has tracked down and secured bootlegged copies of his Netflix series because that is the only means of preserving his work.
Kinda sad he can’t even get a good copy for himself from the source. Fear of leaking I guess
I mean… no shit? Netflix’s business is not making good films or TV shows. It is getting people to sign up to Netflix and then forget about it for a few years.
It sucks because I very much prefer my media on blu-ray (and then on my plex server). And we are increasingly seeing media that is very much dependent on HDR and gets demolished by encoding and bandwidth limitations. But… that is more a “problem” of the creators not realizing their medium (similar to how a Nolan mix is perfect if you have a center channel but… most TVs and cell phones don’t have one).
Flanagan made Hill House and Midnight Mass for Netflix. So it’s not like there aren’t at least some good shows.
Even though my wife subscribes to Netflix, I would buy Midnight Mass on Blu-ray. They are missing out on taking our money twice.
Yep. Would have gladly bought more than one season of Bojack Horseman, two seasons of Stranger Things, Hill House in 4K/HDR… but no. I’m glad there are preservationists keeping stuff like this from disappearing at the whim of corporate (all hail etc.).
Netflix has a lot of great shows and movies. But the point of those is to sell Netflix.
Mostly I am thinking of stuff like the final season of Game of Thrones that had a lot of “dark” scenes that looked like dogshit without HDR. Or even Andor which had a few striking shots that very much suffered from compression artifacts (and is why I am so glad there was a blu ray of that).
