Topic: Sony rootkit scandal
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #39,076
Never forget
> In August 2000, statements by Sony Pictures Entertainment US senior VP Steve Heckler foreshadowed the events of late 2005. Heckler told attendees at the Americas Conference on Information Systems "The industry will take whatever steps it needs to protect itself and protect its revenue streams... It will not lose that revenue stream, no matter what... Sony is going to take aggressive steps to stop this. We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source - we will block it at your cable company. We will block it at your phone company. We will block it at your ISP. We will firewall it at your PC... These strategies are being aggressively pursued because there is simply too much at stake."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
> In August 2000, statements by Sony Pictures Entertainment US senior VP Steve Heckler foreshadowed the events of late 2005. Heckler told attendees at the Americas Conference on Information Systems "The industry will take whatever steps it needs to protect itself and protect its revenue streams... It will not lose that revenue stream, no matter what... Sony is going to take aggressive steps to stop this. We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source - we will block it at your cable company. We will block it at your phone company. We will block it at your ISP. We will firewall it at your PC... These strategies are being aggressively pursued because there is simply too much at stake."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
squeegee joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later[^] [v] #520,362
lol, this was always funny to me. they were SO worried about napster but i could still record free music off the fucking radio with a cassette player from the 80's. i'm shocked they haven't figured out that people will pay for quality and release new media across a variety of different quality channels. Release movies in high quality in theaters and on DVD, and then at the same time release super low quality versions (think lower than 480p) full of commercials and stream it for free to co-opt the pirates. People will still pay for the higher quality versions if they want, and people that won't will still pirate or watch low quality copies for free if they want.... so fucking monetize that shit you fucking idiots.
(Edited 37 seconds later.)
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,388
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 34 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,402
@previous (C)
it's not something you can actually stop or prevent. so, imo they need to try and work with new media delivery instead of trying to work against it or stop it.
it's not something you can actually stop or prevent. so, imo they need to try and work with new media delivery instead of trying to work against it or stop it.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,403
@520,388 (C)
some might, many wouldn't if the low quality versions were easily accessible in a netflix like library that you could access without signing up or having to pay any money.
some might, many wouldn't if the low quality versions were easily accessible in a netflix like library that you could access without signing up or having to pay any money.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,404
@previous (A)
bingo, and most wouldn't even mind regular commercial breaks enough to bother with non-monetized pirated versions
bingo, and most wouldn't even mind regular commercial breaks enough to bother with non-monetized pirated versions
Syntax joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 16 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,408
@previous (squeegee)
@520,362 (squeegee)
> Release movies in high quality in theaters and on DVD, and then at the same time release super low quality versions
Recently in a lab at Qualcomm a bunch of us looked at clips from super high quality films - Set up was a soon to be released Galaxy along side a Ipad Iphone6 and one unnamed device with a more better display if they ever figure out how to produce them in mass quantity - Point is ALL had hi res small screens.
Next time I swing by that lab with the permanent test setup I am going to ask to see some low quality shit for comparison. Tyrannosaurus Rex Me still cannot imagine watching a great flick on a Smart phone or Tablet - Pic and sound ...Sound? LOLOLOL - Like just imagine super Dolby on a Ipad.
@520,362 (squeegee)
> Release movies in high quality in theaters and on DVD, and then at the same time release super low quality versions
Recently in a lab at Qualcomm a bunch of us looked at clips from super high quality films - Set up was a soon to be released Galaxy along side a Ipad Iphone6 and one unnamed device with a more better display if they ever figure out how to produce them in mass quantity - Point is ALL had hi res small screens.
Next time I swing by that lab with the permanent test setup I am going to ask to see some low quality shit for comparison. Tyrannosaurus Rex Me still cannot imagine watching a great flick on a Smart phone or Tablet - Pic and sound ...Sound? LOLOLOL - Like just imagine super Dolby on a Ipad.
Handel !XFpaTU3A5E joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,409
@OP
Applications like Spotify are the future of the music industry. If they can't see that they will die a very slow and painful death.
Applications like Spotify are the future of the music industry. If they can't see that they will die a very slow and painful death.
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,412
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,458
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 57 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,459
@previous (C)
only if the producers were to actually put the movies on there upon release, which they don't.
only if the producers were to actually put the movies on there upon release, which they don't.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,462
@previous (A)
So you want movie theaters to compete with youtube? Are you talking about the quality of a cam? Because there are few pirates that watch the cam versions, and most pirates that don't, I'm judging from seeder numbers.
You are talking about the dvd release only?
So you want movie theaters to compete with youtube? Are you talking about the quality of a cam? Because there are few pirates that watch the cam versions, and most pirates that don't, I'm judging from seeder numbers.
You are talking about the dvd release only?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,463
@previous (C)
I'm talking about legitimate, legal, easily obtainable content. The point is that it's legal and easily obtainable, torrents are neither for the average layman. They'll have to find a torrent client, install it, find a torrent site, add that torrent to their client, wait for a download to finish, and then finally can they watch it. Not to mention that it is illegal.
Camrips on torrent sites tend to have people walking in front of the screen, and have the audience as part of the sound. I don't think they're a fair comparison to <480p encodes, as those would still be better. In any case, of course most camrips are not popular when you're looking at movies that already have better releases available, but they still get downloaded a bunch before dvd release happens.
I'm talking about legitimate, legal, easily obtainable content. The point is that it's legal and easily obtainable, torrents are neither for the average layman. They'll have to find a torrent client, install it, find a torrent site, add that torrent to their client, wait for a download to finish, and then finally can they watch it. Not to mention that it is illegal.
Camrips on torrent sites tend to have people walking in front of the screen, and have the audience as part of the sound. I don't think they're a fair comparison to <480p encodes, as those would still be better. In any case, of course most camrips are not popular when you're looking at movies that already have better releases available, but they still get downloaded a bunch before dvd release happens.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,464
@previous (A)
So, youtube. Or are you saying go to say, the Sony site and instead of buying their dvd or digital version of The Interview for instance, have the option to watch it there in low quality with adds for free?
So, youtube. Or are you saying go to say, the Sony site and instead of buying their dvd or digital version of The Interview for instance, have the option to watch it there in low quality with adds for free?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 43 seconds later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,465
@previous (C)
So you're just trolling, then? Youtube would suffice as a medium, but it is not currently being used in the way I described. It also probably doesn't have enough ads to make it worthwhile.
So you're just trolling, then? Youtube would suffice as a medium, but it is not currently being used in the way I described. It also probably doesn't have enough ads to make it worthwhile.
(Edited 15 seconds later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 17 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,471
@previous (A)
We aren't talking about the back catalog here, like already exists on youtube and netflix and amazon we are talking about the latest release.
Grate troll. The studios should do this themselves, is a troll?
I still think people will just pirate the high quality versions of everything.
We aren't talking about the back catalog here, like already exists on youtube and netflix and amazon we are talking about the latest release.
Grate troll. The studios should do this themselves, is a troll?
I still think people will just pirate the high quality versions of everything.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,473
maagd
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 34 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,484
@520,471 (C)
The back catalog on youtube generally is unauthorized and will get removed when they detect it or it's reported. It also does not show ads for which the revenue goes to the movie companies. This is the case with music though, if you upload songs to YT, YT will detect what song it is and enable monetization for the music companies.
I have never advocated for a specific implementation, you keep trying to imply that I am but I am not. I don't care how the movie companies implement it, what matters is the general idea.
The back catalog on youtube generally is unauthorized and will get removed when they detect it or it's reported. It also does not show ads for which the revenue goes to the movie companies. This is the case with music though, if you upload songs to YT, YT will detect what song it is and enable monetization for the music companies.
I have never advocated for a specific implementation, you keep trying to imply that I am but I am not. I don't care how the movie companies implement it, what matters is the general idea.
Anonymous F replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,485
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,503
@520,484 (A)
right, and funy thing is the idea has been out there for awhile, i'm just repeating ideas i've heard bandied around for years. it'll eventually happen in one way or another and that'll be the day piracy "dies" except for a few die hard dinosaurs.
but you can still find people using betamax, so i won't be surprised when in 15 years people still download movie collections
right, and funy thing is the idea has been out there for awhile, i'm just repeating ideas i've heard bandied around for years. it'll eventually happen in one way or another and that'll be the day piracy "dies" except for a few die hard dinosaurs.
but you can still find people using betamax, so i won't be surprised when in 15 years people still download movie collections
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,504
@520,484 (A)
Well, I think your idea of easy access to low quality ad filled content that is specifically not on a movie studios website sucks, sorry.
Well, I think your idea of easy access to low quality ad filled content that is specifically not on a movie studios website sucks, sorry.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 55 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,505
@previous (C)
> that is specifically not on a movie studios website sucks
Where oh where did I bring this up? It was you who started "putting those words in my mouth"
> that is specifically not on a movie studios website sucks
Where oh where did I bring this up? It was you who started "putting those words in my mouth"
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 26 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,506
Anonymous C double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,507
@520,505 (A)
Well, how is it a bad idea for the studios to release their own shit for free like you say, on their own site?
Well, how is it a bad idea for the studios to release their own shit for free like you say, on their own site?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 38 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,508
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,509
@520,506 (C)
if it's marginalized enough, yes. you can make it so that it is no worse than the theft of DvDs from stores, as it is it takes a huge chunk of profits from publishers. if you provide a free, yet monetized channel for the same content then people will literally stop pirating. yup.
if it's marginalized enough, yes. you can make it so that it is no worse than the theft of DvDs from stores, as it is it takes a huge chunk of profits from publishers. if you provide a free, yet monetized channel for the same content then people will literally stop pirating. yup.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,510
@520,506 (C)
@previous (squeegee)
I doubt it'll fully stop, but if you look at music piracy it has significantly decreased the past few years with spotify becoming more popular. I know many people, myself included for some time, who stopped pirating music because spotify was so nice and easy to use and had everything I wanted.
@previous (squeegee)
I doubt it'll fully stop, but if you look at music piracy it has significantly decreased the past few years with spotify becoming more popular. I know many people, myself included for some time, who stopped pirating music because spotify was so nice and easy to use and had everything I wanted.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,511
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,512
@previous (C)
Your citation makes no sense. I have not brought up an opinion for how exactly it should be implemented, and have explicitly stated this. I am convinced you are just trolling now, have a nice day.
Your citation makes no sense. I have not brought up an opinion for how exactly it should be implemented, and have explicitly stated this. I am convinced you are just trolling now, have a nice day.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 50 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,513
Anonymous C double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,514
@520,512 (A)
Holy shit dude. That's not trolling, it was just an idea. I will have a nice day, thanks.
Holy shit dude. That's not trolling, it was just an idea. I will have a nice day, thanks.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 20 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,515
@520,510 (A)
pretty much exactly what'll happen with movie piracy. like you said, it'll never go away, but it can be marginalized to a much smaller group that can't do any real damage. these days pretty much any song i want is just on you tube and i can listen to it over-and-over because they have found a way to make money off of giving me free content. they'll do the same for movies and their profits will be higher than ever once they make piracy less attractive than their monetized channels
pretty much exactly what'll happen with movie piracy. like you said, it'll never go away, but it can be marginalized to a much smaller group that can't do any real damage. these days pretty much any song i want is just on you tube and i can listen to it over-and-over because they have found a way to make money off of giving me free content. they'll do the same for movies and their profits will be higher than ever once they make piracy less attractive than their monetized channels
squeegee double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,516
@520,513 (C)
and yet music piracy is no longer a problem like it was in 2000
and everything is now free on you tube or any number of free internet sources
i haven't pirated music in like 7 years, lol
but movies, yeah, but they still want people in theaters and buying DVDs like it's the 90s still, lol
retards
and yet music piracy is no longer a problem like it was in 2000
and everything is now free on you tube or any number of free internet sources
i haven't pirated music in like 7 years, lol
but movies, yeah, but they still want people in theaters and buying DVDs like it's the 90s still, lol
retards
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,518
@520,514 (C)
In that case I'll give this one more shot. Here is a summary of my opinion:
Movie companies should make shit-tier quality ad-loaded versions of their movies available for free either when they release in the movie theaters or when they do the DVD release. DVD release makes more sense, but I am impartial about this. I do not care, or mean to advocate, where they release this content. It could be their own website, they could make a deal with youtube, or they could make a deal with something entirely different. It matters not. What matters is the core idea: Make the movies accessible for people who would otherwise not pay for it, and earn money through ad revenue. People who are passionate about movies will spend money on a better quality, and those that are not will watch the free version and provide ad revenue.
Similar things have happened before with spotify (they have a free tier with ads) and southpark.com
In that case I'll give this one more shot. Here is a summary of my opinion:
Movie companies should make shit-tier quality ad-loaded versions of their movies available for free either when they release in the movie theaters or when they do the DVD release. DVD release makes more sense, but I am impartial about this. I do not care, or mean to advocate, where they release this content. It could be their own website, they could make a deal with youtube, or they could make a deal with something entirely different. It matters not. What matters is the core idea: Make the movies accessible for people who would otherwise not pay for it, and earn money through ad revenue. People who are passionate about movies will spend money on a better quality, and those that are not will watch the free version and provide ad revenue.
Similar things have happened before with spotify (they have a free tier with ads) and southpark.com
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 11 years ago, 53 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,519
@520,516 (squeegee)
Something that may be worthwhile to add to:
> and everything is now free on you tube or any number of free internet sources
The sources on youtube are generally monetized by the content producers. For more info see https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en
Something that may be worthwhile to add to:
> and everything is now free on you tube or any number of free internet sources
The sources on youtube are generally monetized by the content producers. For more info see https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,520
@520,516 (squeegee)
Movies in theaters are like bands in concert I suppose, idk. How much have you paid for music in 7 years?
Movies in theaters are like bands in concert I suppose, idk. How much have you paid for music in 7 years?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,521
@previous (C)
zero dollars. it is really a good thing they figured out how to monetize the way i listen to music these days
for instance: i listen to a lot of internet radio stations
zero dollars. it is really a good thing they figured out how to monetize the way i listen to music these days
for instance: i listen to a lot of internet radio stations
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,522
@520,518 (A)
I guess some people will just avoid paying for things, or listening or watching ads.
Music came first, probably because of the sheer volume of new music and the file sizes. Movies are next and I agree that they have to follow a similar way of monetizing their products.
But piracy and copying are going nowhere. 3d printing is the next piracy drama that will affect manufacturing not entertainment.
I guess some people will just avoid paying for things, or listening or watching ads.
Music came first, probably because of the sheer volume of new music and the file sizes. Movies are next and I agree that they have to follow a similar way of monetizing their products.
But piracy and copying are going nowhere. 3d printing is the next piracy drama that will affect manufacturing not entertainment.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 30 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,523
@previous (C)
Sure, some people will. I don't think the majority of the population falls within that category, though.
Sure, some people will. I don't think the majority of the population falls within that category, though.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,525
@520,521 (squeegee)
Fucking radio? Ok. And you haven't pirated books for 7 years, because you use the library. Thanks.
Fucking radio? Ok. And you haven't pirated books for 7 years, because you use the library. Thanks.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 26 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,526
oh yeah, and also they are going to have to start delivering different quality products pretty soon anyway once 4k is the new standard. i may be wrong but i think even bluray disks are too small to hold a full 4k movie (is that wrong?) so unless they want to lose DVD sales and that kind of thing then they'll need to release 4k by stream only and sell 1080p movies as DVD and cheaper streams or something.
anyway, everything always changes, from VHS to DVD to 4k streams, so don't worry they'll be forced to change their business models to benefit us soon enough
anyway, everything always changes, from VHS to DVD to 4k streams, so don't worry they'll be forced to change their business models to benefit us soon enough
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,527
@520,523 (A)
Then the majority are either not consuming the content, or using the existing means of payment. Pirates remain unaffected
Then the majority are either not consuming the content, or using the existing means of payment. Pirates remain unaffected
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,529
@previous (C)
Disagree. A lot of people pirate, but think it's a bother. With regards to spotify, I've actually had a conversation about this before in college. There were at least a dozen people there, myself included, who used to pirate music but stopped after they got a spotify became a thing and they instead got a subscription there. This is of course anecdotal evidence, and I am not aware of any studies on the matter. Thus I believe it is pointless to argue this matter. Let's agree to disagree?
Disagree. A lot of people pirate, but think it's a bother. With regards to spotify, I've actually had a conversation about this before in college. There were at least a dozen people there, myself included, who used to pirate music but stopped after they got a spotify became a thing and they instead got a subscription there. This is of course anecdotal evidence, and I am not aware of any studies on the matter. Thus I believe it is pointless to argue this matter. Let's agree to disagree?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 56 seconds later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,531
@520,525 (C)
no, i buy books at the half-priced book store usually or just buy them new as paperbacks.
but i don't splurge for the more expensive high quality hard cover.
and yeah, radio. if i want to listen to a playlist of songs i can do that on youtube. i DO have some music on my PC but they are all just youtube rips
also i'll listen to pandora sometimes, but i've got a few good stations bookmarked that i usually go between.
just like in my car.
i'm not one of those people that hears a song and needs to "have it" in any way. i'm okay with things existing in the aether
no, i buy books at the half-priced book store usually or just buy them new as paperbacks.
but i don't splurge for the more expensive high quality hard cover.
and yeah, radio. if i want to listen to a playlist of songs i can do that on youtube. i DO have some music on my PC but they are all just youtube rips
also i'll listen to pandora sometimes, but i've got a few good stations bookmarked that i usually go between.
just like in my car.
i'm not one of those people that hears a song and needs to "have it" in any way. i'm okay with things existing in the aether
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,534
@520,529 (A)
I'll agree that college kids with disposable income and credit cards are too lazy to pirate. That's not going to stop an emerging generation of kids who only know about getting their entertainment from the internet, and don't have any money to pay for it. Even the dumb ones can find good quality free music and movies without ads.
You are targeting an older generation of pirates.
I'll agree that college kids with disposable income and credit cards are too lazy to pirate. That's not going to stop an emerging generation of kids who only know about getting their entertainment from the internet, and don't have any money to pay for it. Even the dumb ones can find good quality free music and movies without ads.
You are targeting an older generation of pirates.
Anonymous C double-posted this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,535
@520,531 (squeegee)
I've always listened to music that same way, radio, pandora etc. I've downloaded albums from time to time but don't often listen to them or only listen to a couple of songs.
Do you use an adblocker in your browser? @OP Do you use an adblocker?
I've always listened to music that same way, radio, pandora etc. I've downloaded albums from time to time but don't often listen to them or only listen to a couple of songs.
Do you use an adblocker in your browser? @OP Do you use an adblocker?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,536
@520,534 (C)
you know it was the college kids in the early 2000 that blew up napster and other p2p file sharing sites, right?
and since when do college kids have disposable incomes? i thought they had incredibly burdensome debt placed upon them and go 4 years either working part time or sucking parental tits for beer money.
anyway, you are right, you can't stop piracy, but again, yes, it can be marginalized to the point it lessens the negative impact.
you know it was the college kids in the early 2000 that blew up napster and other p2p file sharing sites, right?
and since when do college kids have disposable incomes? i thought they had incredibly burdensome debt placed upon them and go 4 years either working part time or sucking parental tits for beer money.
anyway, you are right, you can't stop piracy, but again, yes, it can be marginalized to the point it lessens the negative impact.
squeegee double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,537
@520,535 (C)
i think firefox comes with it or something, but no, i don't go out of my way to block ads. they can be annoying and sometimes ugly, but they don't actually detract enough from the experience to make me go out of my way to do anything about them.
also adblocking can sometimes have an adverse impact on how a site functions. i believe adblock used to block all of the google topresult search ad things and i'd click on them and the page was black and it was annoying as fuck and i think now it at least loads the landing page ad thing. idk
i think firefox comes with it or something, but no, i don't go out of my way to block ads. they can be annoying and sometimes ugly, but they don't actually detract enough from the experience to make me go out of my way to do anything about them.
also adblocking can sometimes have an adverse impact on how a site functions. i believe adblock used to block all of the google topresult search ad things and i'd click on them and the page was black and it was annoying as fuck and i think now it at least loads the landing page ad thing. idk
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,538
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,539
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,544
@520,537 (squeegee)
You're like one of my buddies that watches the ads on yt. He hates them, but obviously not enough to google how to get rid of them. I mentioned to him about adblockers and he was shocked and made me show him that I didn't get ads on yt. I think he still watches the ads, but doesn't bitch about them to me anymore. This is the type of guy that is the target audience of OPs anti piracy low quality ad filled movies.
You're like one of my buddies that watches the ads on yt. He hates them, but obviously not enough to google how to get rid of them. I mentioned to him about adblockers and he was shocked and made me show him that I didn't get ads on yt. I think he still watches the ads, but doesn't bitch about them to me anymore. This is the type of guy that is the target audience of OPs anti piracy low quality ad filled movies.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,545
@520,534 (C)
I don't think that assumption is valid. I am such a college kid and have been pirating content for as long as I can remember, starting when I was like 12 or 13. I've bought exactly one CD in my life, because I wanted to support the artists. All other music has been pirated, spotify or other free ad-supported services.
@520,535 (C)
I do, and I am also a pirate. I do however not use this adblocker because I don't want to see ads. I use it because I want to make it difficult to be tracked & profiled. There is also the concern of malicious ad network to try a drive-by exploit kit on me (note to self: see if i can whitelist specific ad networks in my adblocker). All that said, I whitelist sites that I use more than once and expect to not use shady ad networks (TPB for example never got whitelisted, their ads were shady as fuck).
However adblockers become irrelevant when you are talking about applications like spotify or video streams. It would be trivial for a video server to splice the ads into the video stream, making it impossible for them to be hidden.
Youtube does not do this because Google cares too much about stalking their visitors and showing personalized ads, and splicing in a personalized ad for each video stream is less trivial. But when you consider it to be a competitor to TV where everyone sees the same ads this is much less problematic.
I don't think that assumption is valid. I am such a college kid and have been pirating content for as long as I can remember, starting when I was like 12 or 13. I've bought exactly one CD in my life, because I wanted to support the artists. All other music has been pirated, spotify or other free ad-supported services.
@520,535 (C)
I do, and I am also a pirate. I do however not use this adblocker because I don't want to see ads. I use it because I want to make it difficult to be tracked & profiled. There is also the concern of malicious ad network to try a drive-by exploit kit on me (note to self: see if i can whitelist specific ad networks in my adblocker). All that said, I whitelist sites that I use more than once and expect to not use shady ad networks (TPB for example never got whitelisted, their ads were shady as fuck).
However adblockers become irrelevant when you are talking about applications like spotify or video streams. It would be trivial for a video server to splice the ads into the video stream, making it impossible for them to be hidden.
Youtube does not do this because Google cares too much about stalking their visitors and showing personalized ads, and splicing in a personalized ad for each video stream is less trivial. But when you consider it to be a competitor to TV where everyone sees the same ads this is much less problematic.
(Edited 8 minutes later.)
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,547
@520,544 (C)
the reason they have ads on youtube is because that describes the vast majority of youtubes users.
they gather metrics on that kind of data and if they saw the vast majority of people using adblock then no one would buy ads on youtube.
most people can stomach having a banner ad or have to see 5 seconds of a skippable commercial
the reason they have ads on youtube is because that describes the vast majority of youtubes users.
they gather metrics on that kind of data and if they saw the vast majority of people using adblock then no one would buy ads on youtube.
most people can stomach having a banner ad or have to see 5 seconds of a skippable commercial
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,549
@previous (squeegee)
I guess it's just about what you are used to. I've had an ad free internet from the start when I was a kid and because of ridiculously slow internet speeds and low data restrictions it was actually beneficial.
I hate seeing the internet any other way.
I guess it's just about what you are used to. I've had an ad free internet from the start when I was a kid and because of ridiculously slow internet speeds and low data restrictions it was actually beneficial.
I hate seeing the internet any other way.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 16 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #520,684
One thing these idiot companies do is piss off paying customers. Putting a rootkit on CDs is just the worst example. When I open some of these discs I get, I feel like I'm being punished for being a paying customer. CDs have the stupid god damn tight ass shrinkwrap, and then god damn stickers along the edges that you have to peel off that never peel off in one piece, leaving behind sticky residue on the case. Then, you open the case and half the teeth of the ring hub are broken off because the plastic material is shit. The so-called jewelcase itself is brittle and cracks and breaks easily, as is apparent when you are buying through the mail. DVD packaging sometimes has retarded gimmicks that take up square feet of shelf space just to store a few discs. Do I really need a storage case in the shape of some stupid thing from the show, no. When you play the DVDs, there can be ads that you can't skip. I paid for the fucker, stop punishing me and reminding me that I could get a pirate copy by telling me not to pirate at the start of every disc. And blu-ray machines have to be connected to the internet to get codes to watch new encrypted discs? Jesus Christ.