PlayStation To Delete A Ton Of TV Shows Users Already Paid For::Sony says Mythbusters and more Discovery TV shows are going away whether you bought them or not

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2541 year ago

    If you can’t own digital copies since they’re not property, then piracy isn’t theft.

    • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
      link
      fedilink
      English
      441 year ago

      Easy there on the sound logical arguments buddy, you’ll have the lawyers shitting their pants.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      It’s not theft. It’s why they named it piracy instead of theft. Because it’s different.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        It’s weird this needs to be repeated so often. Just goes to show how often media corpos repeated the lie that creating a copy of something and sharing it with someone else is the same thing as stealing physical property from someone.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      681 year ago

      The irony is that I feel like I own my pirated content more than any of the digital content I’ve actually purchased in the past.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        Feel? Without question you have ownership in a way legal distributors no longer allow for. Physical media aside of course, but even that has a hassle to it that pirated content circumvents.

        There is simply no downside to having a collection of movies, tv shows and music on your HDD that no one can take away and plays in any modern operating system hassle free.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            Because allowing access to your VPS/homelab without VPN is like having a one night stand without a condom. You might be ok one time but eventually your gonna wake up with a nasty virus

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            To make the server accessible via internet, it’s a VPN service.

            You could do it without tailscale too, but using it makes things extremely easy.

          • Free Palestine 🇵🇸
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            Nothing. It’s free for 3 users with a limit of 100 devices. The traffic isn’t relayed through Tailscale servers, instead, Tailscale just orchestrates the peer-to-peer connections.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -121 year ago

          No, you guys are missing the point. If you want to own something buy Blu-ray’s, piracy isn’t justifiable just because you don’t want to buy it.

          You don’t have to justify piracy like you idiots always tries to do. Who cares?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            91 year ago

            Calling people idiots doesn’t make you right, and trying to make a different point doesn’t show that you understood the original point—quite the opposite.

            The point is that if a company can choose not to honor its legal obligation to consumers who have purchased content from them, then there is no reason for consumers to honor their legal obligation to refrain from accessing the same content outside the system the company has provided—or in this case failed to provide.

            Moreover, if the legal system of your country doesn’t require everyone to uphold their legal obligations, then why should we allow it to hold us to the obligations it has placed on us?

            Now you’ll probably write a reply that reply that shows no understanding of the difference between ownership and licensing, or between theft and unauthorized access, but you can’t say I didn’t try.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -61 year ago

              The company did honor its legal obligations.

              Whenever it’s morally right is a different discussion.

              I don’t care about your point. I just think the constant attempts of justification are really annoying. Like it or not, I will continue to complain about that.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                41 year ago

                Cool, keep on bootlicking big companies that underpay their workers and overcharge their customers.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -2
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You guys are really cringe.

                  Why do you need to constantly justify piracy?

                  Just do it. I have hundreds of movies on my media server and dozens of series. Yet I don’t feel the need to complain and whine about something that doesn’t affect me.

                  Keep on crying.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Because buying Blu-ray’s is owning?

              Personally I just pirate everything on my Plex server but don’t pretend that this Sony news makes piracy justified.

  • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1391 year ago

    They just want us to pirate everything right? Like, that is the only logical response to this.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      401 year ago

      The content you bought is available to be streamed on Discovery Plus, for a small subscription fee.

      Just buy your content again, that’s fair right? You wouldn’t expect a perpetual license for the cash you parted with, that would be crazy!

      • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
        link
        fedilink
        English
        241 year ago

        I don’t have a house big enough to store a ton of DVDs, and the Playstation Digital Edition solidified that we don’t have to buy physical media anymore. So the only option is piracy.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -21 year ago

          There is this lovely invention called dvd binders, it let’s you keep a ton of them in a much smaller space

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -231 year ago

          No, there are plenty of ways to buy digital only media, where you store it on your own drives.

          I have a NAS full of media that I own that I bought. None of it physical.

          • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
            link
            fedilink
            English
            311 year ago

            What service do you use that lets you pay for and download the media files in that way?

            The only one I know of is Bandcamp that lets you download the mp3s after you buy the album.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              7
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Amazon also lets you download music without DRM, and I know Apple did ten years ago before I dropped them. I don’t think there’s a single legal option for film, though. I think the person you’re replying to is full of shit.

              Closest thing? Last time I used their stuff, Apple let you download video you buy. It has DRM, though, so if they lose the license to it, it’s pretty much moot anyway.

            • ugh
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              You can’t even buy MP3s anymore?? I haven’t paid for a digital download since before smart phones. I would be more concerned about downloading digital content from a website that charges for it rather than pirating tbh. Where did the seller get it from in the first place??

              That’s not a bad black-market business model, actually…

            • Lev_Astov
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              Man, I love Bandcamp, but I hear they got bought by Epic Games which does not bode well…

              • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Oh shit, I had forgotten about that.

                What wonderful changes do you think they are going to make?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    761 year ago

    This isn’t really Sony’s fault. Discovery (who owns all these shows) are pulling them. Discovery sold them to people via the Playstation network. They sold them there and took your money. Now they want you to sign up to HBOMax to watch their dumb weak ass garbage.

    • Dariusmiles2123
      link
      fedilink
      English
      581 year ago

      Well whoever is taking them away should reimburse the clients if they were not made aware that they didn’t own the show but were just renting it.

      These behaviors are dangerous and shouldn’t be legal. You press « buy », you own the product, not the right to watch it for a few years.

        • assa123
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          and that’s why it should be illegal, the big “buy” button ahould have higher precedence over any “renting” claims in the ToS and any attempt of misrepresentation should be fined.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      431 year ago

      Thanks for pointing that out, it is Discovery’s decision. For their part though, Sony is still at fault as they didn’t demand perpetual use rights for content sold on their store, or at least a full refund for the customer.

      • deweydecibel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sony isn’t in a position to demand refunds, though. Discovery pulling their content means there’s no negotiation happening.

        As for demanding perpetual use rights, yes, that’d have been nice, but that wouldn’t have been granted and then that content wouldn’t have been in the store at all. No company will ever sign an agreement to license their content in perpetuity like that.

        That’s the crux of the issue with digital content. When it was physical media, companies had no choice but to release their media with perpetual licenses because there was no means of revoking it later. They weren’t compelled into doing this, they had to because the only other option was not releasing that media at all. Digital content has removed this issue for them, and they have no reason to ever willingly go back to the old method of content distribution.

        This is something that has needed regulation for a very long time. If there’s no incentives for companies to do something, it won’t happen, unless they’re forced to do it.

        • Zagorath
          link
          fedilink
          English
          71 year ago

          No company should ever buy the rights to something if they aren’t willing to provide a proper consistent experience to the user.

          In the case of streaming services where you pay an ongoing subscription, specific content being removed is fine. In the case of a store where the user is presented with the idea that they are “buying” the content, being able to view that content in perpetuity should always be expected. Sony is to blame for not requiring this.

          They don’t have to keep access to the content for new purchases forever. If Discovery wants to pull their content so anyone who hasn’t already paid for it can access it, fine. But if they’re able to say “you paid for this already, but too bad”, Sony and Discovery are both equally to blame and deserve the harshest criticism.

    • Kushan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      30
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is absolutely Sony’s fault. Sony owns the platform, Sony took the money, Sony signed the terms and agreements with Discovery that let them pull the content users paid for.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        161 year ago

        I blame Discovery too, but you’re right that Sony is to blame. They have an army of lawyers to go over the terms of the agreements. The buyers don’t. When I push the button that says buy, that should mean I own it. Not that I’m renting it for some unspecified period of time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      At best you could say Sony didn’t know you thought you now own the car they were actually lending you. They probably spelt it out this could happen in their legal codex but that doesn’t negate the fact they took your money or they made a system wherein they can deny you from using what you paid for. Sony takes part in this degeneration of ownerships.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        If it’s not something that lets you straight download and keep a native, non-drm video file, then you never owned it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      Just Max, not HBO Max. They changed the name because they literally planned on making it worse and didn’t want it reflecting badly on the HBO brand.

    • Mbourgon everywhere
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      No, it’s also Sony’s fault for not making a contract that says “bought means bought forever”. Sony isn’t making contracts like that where they can get screwed over later. Just making them that way when it affects you.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      This is what I wrote on the other thread about the same article. The question is, on what possible grounds are they allowed to revoke licenses for completed sales?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        Someone in legal on Sony’s side fucked up.

        They should issue refunds. Whether they will or not though…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          They will ALMOST CERTAINLY. But my point is this doesn’t really help… Let’s say a game I really like, I dunno Wreckfest (substitute you own idc) gets yanked from Steam. Here is my 24.99 EUR back. Okay fine, fair enough (it isn’t but whatever), where can I buy the game again? Well REALLY you can’t, you can either buy gamepass forever (Until it gets yanked from there again), or you can go and hunt down a rare an expensive Xbox physical release.

          So have I been reimbursed for my loss? No, because the 24.99 is no substitute for the game I had and wanted.

          • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            The only way to play Chronicles of Riddick (a really great game btw) is illegally by downloading it. I would happily pay money for the privilege, but there is no option for that.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Well yeah but that is hosted on various abandonware sites. If they defacto disown the rights of it, that is fair enough…

          • Xyloph
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            In the case of Steam, something I bought was pulled from the store, but it’s still in my library, and I can still redownload it. Even though it can’t be found by people who didn’t buy it anymore. This seems to be the general Steam strategy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      641 year ago

      It should be. But I would be extremely surprised if everything in the terms of service isn’t worded something like “you’re buying a license to view this content that can be revoked whenever”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        231 year ago

        It is, and IIRC you don’t even “own” a movie even if you physically have it. You own the physical disc, not the content on it. Granted, it’s a lot harder for Sony or Discovery to come kick down your door and take your copy of Ice Road Truckers so you have to rebuy it…

        • JackbyDev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          171 year ago

          That’s not really a big deal with regards to physical items. If you buy a book you don’t own the rights to the text either.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        I wouldn’t be surprised if the TOS says “We reserve the right to change this agreement at any time in any way without notice and you agree to be bound by all future versions of this agreement”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      There’s a line in the EULA when you purchase digital media that says they can revoke your access to it at any time that they see fit. Look it up for yourself.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    491 year ago

    I stopped piraring when I graduated college and streaming started to be wonderful. It is now a bleak hellscape that is more expensive than ever. Time to buy 20tb of hard drives and install Jellyfin I guess :(

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      On the bright side, 20TB of hard drives is relatively cheap these days if you buy used. They’ll pay for themselves in a year if you kill the streaming services.

      Happy sailing

        • CALIGVLA
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -31 year ago

          Might as well just rent a server at that point, more memory and performance for basically the same price.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              12tb is literally $100 right now new. also my fellow hoarders, save a bookmark to that site it’s great.

              If you want to hit eBay and buy used disks, you can probably build something with redundancy and 20tb+ for around $300. If you’ve got a machine laying around and don’t plan on downloading everything on every service, you can grab 16tb used for $100, use one drive for parity, and the spend $50 when you run out of space for another 8tb.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Yeah, I went a little more overkill. I got a rack for free, and I have a Dell CS24 (that’s probably due to upgrade just for power savings at this point) that connects to a Rackable 3016. This runs unRAID, so I end up with the same thing roughly you have - JBOD with parity that I can bring any disk to, and 16 bays to fill before I have to start cycling drives out. So I check disk prices, when something tickles my fancy, I buy a new disk and shove it in there and it just keeps growing. If I had to do it today, I’d probably do it a bit differently just because the drive density, but it’s been going strong for 7-8 years now.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Heh, I’m about at capacity with my 20 tb of storage. I think I’m getting myself a Synology NAS for Christmas. I’ll probably spend a couple grand on the device and the drives, but it’s totally worth it to own everything. No regrets.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Amazon gifted me one a loooong time ago. Useful for storage but apps aren’t supported on older models really.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That makes sense. Currently I have my raid split, so 10tb are primary media storage and 10tb are backup. My plan is to set my internal raid to be entirely media storage and use the Synology as just a simple network backup system. This will at least double my storage, good enough for now.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    461 year ago

    Amazon does the same thing. You don’t own digital content you pay for, you’re renting it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      231 year ago

      You’re paying to use their license, piracy or buying the media physically is the only way to own it.

      • plz1
        link
        fedilink
        English
        401 year ago

        If the button says"buy", ownership is inferred. That’s a lie, of course.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          171 year ago

          You own it as long as they have a license to host and stream it.

          They should be offering refunds for this at least, but you literally cannot own something that permanently lives on someone else’s device.

          If you want to truly on something, you need to control physical access to it. If there is an option to download the media when you buy it, and you can store it on your own device, then you own it. If not, then you only have access as long as you’re paying someone else for access to their storage.

          • ugh
            link
            fedilink
            English
            81 year ago

            Which is almost impossible now. You can’t even play offline games without internet access because companies force you to use their app to launch it.

            I thought I would be able to get around that system with EA by purchasing a hard copy of the game circa 2016, but nope, I just bought a plastic case to throw away. I miss the old days of owning things.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          The problem is that what you’re buying is a license. Of course it has to be a license, because unlike a physical good, anything delivered digitally could be replicated infinitely, and of course you wouldn’t be allowed to do something like open your own storefront to resell copies of it. Nor would you legally be allowed to play it on the radio, as background music in a store, etc.

          “Buy” isn’t really that different here than if you bought a ticket to a concert; of course you wouldn’t be able to attend next year with the same ticket, but you still bought something. The problem is that with digital licenses, they can be INCREDIBLY varied, and sellers don’t make even a small attempt to clarify what the terms are.

          You use the word ownership, but at least from a legal standpoint, that doesn’t really mean anything intuitive, unless it means you hold all rights to the IP (which, again, you don’t). It would be nice if there was some widespread legal definition and norms about “ownership of a digital copy”, but no such concept exists, and frankly the rights holders are not incentivized to try to create something like this.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            “Not incentivized”!

            They like using the current word “buy” because people think it means they “own” a digital copy. Since that’s not true what we’re really saying here is that they like lying because that makes them more money.

            I think the more honest term is “rent”. A normal rental agreement online is for like 48hrs. This is a rental agreement for a much longer, but unspecified, time period.

            You’d think a court case would clear this up. But probably not.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Part of the problem is that court cases don’t materialize from nothing. A judge can only rule on a case before them. So you would need someone to bring out a specific complaint against a specific party. So there needs to be a lot of money on the line for someone who actually feels they can win. A class action against all online media storefronts just isn’t that.

              Also, it’s a difficult case because the terms of the legal license that each customer are being asked to read and agree to ARE being upheld properly – so you either have to make the case that asking a customer to agree to terms digitally that they’ve pretty please read isn’t binding (which kills all digital commerce, because it all becomes a liability nightmare!), or, that the website etc is materially misleading / misrepresenting the agreements; we’ve talked about consumers maybe being prone to misunderstanding “buy” here, but I really don’t believe it’s a legal slam dunk.

              If anything, the faster path to improve this the way you’re looking for would be legislation.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    431 year ago

    “Buying” media with drm is a mistake.

    I buy books from audible sometimes, but I immediately rip the drm out. Use Plex to store your movies and TV shows, it does music ok too now.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      Give Jellyfin a try too. I switched to that from Plex after I realised they were trying to charge me money to use hardware transcoding on my own hardware.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        Give Jellyfin a try too.

        Unless your main TV client is a Playstation. Client support is Jellyfin’s biggest weakness, and why plex is more popular.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Yeah, I’ve heard of jellyfin, but don’t really know anything about it… How is it different?

        I’m likely to stay with Plex though, because I have 3 friends with Plex servers and we’re all sharing content. It’s pretty fantastic, when I don’t have something, usually one of my friends does have it. If jellyfin doesn’t support content sharing, it’s a huge no-go, but just convincing my friends to switch over would be pretty challenging.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    411 year ago

    This is why I buy the physical copies of shows/movies I like and just pirate the rest

    Dont trust these guys to not screw you over

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Yeah personally I only ever use points or rewards to buy digital media. Rarely do I ever pay actual money.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    371 year ago

    Looks like enshittification of the internet is really kicking in. Decentralized platforms, and piracy needs to be the new normal

    • Ech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not enshittification. Just a corporation following through on the inevitable result of these one sided EULAs everyone “agrees” to.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      I remember a long time ago buying the first iPhone model. Eventually, Apple released an update that added an “App Store” that allowed you to download third party apps.

      Google released a preview / trailer for a new app called Google Goggles. It was like something from the future, and I wanted it more than anything. However, months and months later, it still hasn’t showed up on the App Store.

      Eventually, Google released a statement saying Apple was blocking them from releasing it because it competed with Apple in some way, or some shitty thing like that.

      It was then that I realized I had paid about $700 for a brand new device which I thought I had owned, but actually did not. I then switched to Android and never purchased an iPhone again.

      This has been happening for a long time.

    • yeehaw
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      It’s been “kicked in” for years.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    37
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ve pretty much switched to streaming and paying for content. This makes me question that decision. This just makes the pirates look right.

    • db0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      281 year ago

      Piracy has always been the better choice

      • ɔiƚoxɘup
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        It’s always been a balance between getting the stuff instantly and for a charge or waiting a few minutes and having to look for the item and maybe not being able to find it.

        If you’re paying for it and you’re still not able to find it then there is no benefit to streaming. All they had to do was make streaming just a little bit better and experience than piracy. It’s actually a pretty low bar because they’ve got all the access and the infrastructure to be able to do this but lacking that, well, like my computer science teacher always used to say " information wants to be free "

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      171 year ago

      I went back to mp3s and flacs for my music a few years ago. And quickly followed that up with my own Plex server. Two of the best decisions I’ve ever made. If you’re remotely tech savvy it takes no time at all and having every tv show, film, music, video that has ever released on all of my devices at any time within seconds is pretty sweet, for near-free

      • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        I’m leaving Plex for Jellyfin. It’s free, and Plex has been pushing bloat for so long, I can’t be bothered with it. It used to be great, just open Plex and there’s your media. But now it’s full of random streaming channels and shit. It takes multiple non-intuitive clicks to get to what I want. I tried Jellyfin and it’s perfect, just like Plex used to be.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          Meh, it’s no extra clicks to get what you want on Plex once you actually configure your home to show what you want. I just pushed all those options down to the bottom of my home list, but you can just as easily remove them entirely. IDGAF about bloat. Those are just features I’m not using. I’m sure I use features somebody else doesn’t care for. Besides, the “bloat” you’re referring to is mostly just free streaming content from various channels collected in one searchable app I already have. I’d never stream any of that shit if it wasn’t on Plex already. Reminding me that a show I pirated is available on a streaming service I actually pay for is actually kinda neat. It means I can go watch it there to support it, while making sure I’ve got it in the format I want and where I want.

          I’m all for diversity in our self-host streaming software and fully support Jellyfish, but let’s not pretend that the latest halfbaked option is superior because it has fewer features and is less polished. Plex used to kinda suck, lots of features have gotten better. Saying Jellyfin is just like what Plex used to be is not a compliment.

          If you want to complain about Plex at least point to something truly awful, like needing Internet access to access local media because of the way Plex account authentication works or the botched and ill conceived rollout of social media features.

        • ɔiƚoxɘup
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          The question I have, because I’m considering self-hosting something like that, is will my non-text have a family be able to understand how to use it? If not then it’s not really going to be worth it right?

          Ideally I want something that would seamlessly replace Spotify and all video streaming services as well and, if my dreams can come true, also work with Google Assistant.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            I have my music on my server and can stream it like Spotify. The frontend user experience of Plex, Jellyfin and Emby is literally just like Netflix, the untrained eye wouldn’t tell the difference.

            • ɔiƚoxɘup
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You sound like someone that has never supported a production server.

              The main reason I pay for content is that I don’t have the time to provide reasonable customer service to my family. If they can’t use it, it is without use; useless.

              Also, I do plenty enough care and feeding of complex systems at work. When I get home, it’s nice to stop working.

            • FeminalPanda
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Not really when you are going to be texted about it. I spent 3 hours trying to get jellyfin to work on my phone. Staying with Plex as they have better apps.

              • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                What was the issue? My experience was the opposite… I installed the app (android) and went to my IP, it works. I was surprised how simple and easy it was. Or were you trying to use it outside of your home LAN?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      I’ve switched to streaming and don’t “buy” anything. If content isn’t available on those few streaming sites I’ll try a different provider but I will not “buy” (eg rent for more money).

      It’s all a word game though. I think I actually do have one movie on Amazon. Enough people were over and wanted to watch it that we felt the larger rental fee (“buy” option) was worth it.

      ComiXology is an interesting example of this. They have a shitty UI and an odd attempt to emulate the “collector” experience (obviously I think it’s horrible). It’s like a bad drug trip of skeuomorphism. I quickly decided we’d never “buy” anything there either.