Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:03:46 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

   I saw an anti-copyright-infringement advertisement today, and felt duty-bound to exercise my rights under Fair Use.

   #FreeCulture #CreativeCommons #Copyright

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:03:46 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     I mean, you *can* read arbitrary memory very easily with a small amount of JavaScript on your website, from the visitor's machine if the visitor does not have sufficient security; for example, the Spectre/Meltdown bug and others. Mitigations exist for many of these.

     I don't advise against watching TV shows for free but maybe do it on a secondary machine that you use only for that purpose.

     Then again most people don't lug 2 and sometimes even 3 computers around with them on a bicycle like I do.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:25 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @libreleah@mas.to @n0toose@chaos.social So you're unironically arguing implementing DRM into Peertube is good actually?
     
     This is clearly a horrible idea and doesn't benefit users of streaming platforms at all. DRM must be completely abolished before I would ever start paying streaming platforms.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:26 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose The benefit to consumers, if all the big streaming companies had two brain cells each, would be:

     * Much lower bandwidth and infrastructure cost, but they'd still charge the same - but more money would then be available to fund more (and higher quality) shows.

     * More unified access to TV and film; could also do it for news and such. Anywhere in the world.

     * More competition. Companies make more money and consumers would spend a lot less (they'd only need one provider).

     Everyone wins.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:27 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose DRM in web-based Free Software is perfectly feasible, and still not something I'd recommend, but you could absolutely do it. In practise, the user does not control the server they're connected to, but any number of streaming services could pop up this way.

     If all the streaming services used a single unified method of streaming, it'd be much cheaper and the services would be higher quality. It would lower the bar to entry for any small studios that want to sell their shows to consumers.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:27 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose I'm 100% OK with paying for services, but as I've said in previous posts, these services are shit. You can't access everything on any one service and they're all completely non-standard.

     Free software isn't about freedom of cost; I can perfectly see PeerTube being used by the big TV studios to stream shows.

     They'd charge money to legally watch TV and film, but all the studios would federate with each other.

     They'd save bandwidth too. PeerTube is awesome. They could lower their costs.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:27 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose Perhaps I should fashion some proof of concept? Make a PeerTube site that is just full of meme videos. It would only federate with an approved whitelist of other servers, and have some DRM-type mechanism, and take payment.

     Then make another such service to complete the proof of concept. The companies would check each other to make sure they all implement the same DRM. An established minimum charging fee would exist, and some algorithmic method would give funds appropriately to studios.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:28 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose Yes, lack of software freedom is also a big downside. Though, many unlicensed streaming sites also require you to run non-free JavaScript code to watch; the same is even true of many torrent sites nowadays. However, it is to a lesser extent.

     They serve you *more* ads than the authorised services, but Ublock Origin or other decent adblocker mitigates that and those services don't cap quality so your Linux computer will get the highest bitrate you can handle.

     Most TV is garbage anyway.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:28 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @n0toose Maybe all the streaming services should just do something similar to the old Usenet.

     You pay a subscription fee to any Usenet provider and you have access to all the same files.

     Obviously, this is far less efficient. I basically think all the streaming services (official ones) should use PeerTube, and provide unified access to videos between them. They could fork the network for themselves.

     Money isn't the issue; it would be nice if these companies simply gave a shit about customers.

   • Embed this notice
     n0toose (n0toose@chaos.social)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:30 JST n0toose

     in reply to

     @libreleah And you get a worse streaming quality if you don't have a TV costing thousands, or if you choose to watch from a browser (or using Linux) instead of the Windows app.

     So you're basically punished if you don't use a computer in a way that merely represents a contradiction to the idea of not having control over your own devices. And the "well-protected" shows land on piracy sites in full quality after 30 minutes anyway.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:26:31 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     The problem with "legal" streaming services is you don't pay £8 per month. You pay £80 because not everything you want to watch is on a single service.

     You might pay for Netflix, Hulu, Apple TV, and a number of others. They still do geo restriction and DRM limits quality even if you pay, and they often still serve you advertisements.

     People who pay for gigabit internet and expensive computers that do 8k would not mind paying for streams but it's just that these companies don't do good service.

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:29:17 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @libreleah@mas.to @n0toose@chaos.social I'm also obvoiusly 100% ok with paying for stuff, but only if it is DRM-free. I will not pay them while they implement restrictions for me.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:35:09 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • n0toose

     @SuperDicq @n0toose I said it's a bad idea (well, I said I "wouldn't recommend it"), but it is naturally something they might want to do. For example, preventing you from downloading the video easily, so that you have to stream it again;

     In practise, such restrictions are always thwarted anyway, by the more wily of us, and we are then able to access those videos on torrent sites for example.

     It'd basically be a very half-assed thing for all the "normies".

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:35:09 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @libreleah@mas.to @n0toose@chaos.social If it's going to be a half assed easily thwarted thing for the "normies" why not just skip the bullshit entirely?

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:39:27 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @libreleah@mas.to @n0toose@chaos.social I do not want to work with or trick "the suits". I would much rather build a platform without approval or permission from "the suits". They don't care about what I think so I don't care about them.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:39:28 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • n0toose

     @SuperDicq @n0toose my sentiment exactly, but "the suits" would probably want something like that; the trick is to give them just enough of what they want

     it's really more of a symbollic thing if i'm being honest. i'm sure all these companies know that their shit's gonna get hacked on day one

     but think about the normies. you and i know how to access whatever we want, but someone like my dad doesn't know shit about computers and feels more secure with a big cable company telling them what to do

   • Embed this notice
     SuperDicq (superdicq@minidisc.tokyo)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:48:36 JST SuperDicq

     in reply to

     • n0toose

     @libreleah@mas.to @n0toose@chaos.social I think implementing payment options into Peertube alone would actually be a really good move and will not be unethical like implementing DRM.
     
     I know I'm going a bit outside of the scope of movie/tv streaming, but this is what I think what will instead make videomakers on websites like Youtube start to see Peertube as a viable replacement, which will in turn bring in tons of viewers to Peertube.
     
     From what I understand most professional Youtube people do not make a lot of money from Youtube's ad system, but instead make most of their money outside of Youtube on websites that allow users to fund videos like Patreon.
     
     If Peertube had functionality similar to Patreon where you could send videomakers tips, donations or monthly funding that would be big.

   • Embed this notice
     Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot (libreleah@mas.to)'s status on Friday, 20-Sep-2024 18:48:37 JST Leah Rowe is not a Rowebot

     in reply to

     • SuperDicq
     • n0toose

     @SuperDicq @n0toose I agree with you, but like I said, I'm thinking about how to socially hack their world, and how to technically implement what we want within it. what i'm proposing would be infinitely better than what we currently have.

     plus, there's always room to pick away more parts you don't like later on.