from the 1984-people-watched-'1984'-yesterday dept.
Netflix tweeted that 53 people had watched its new Christmas film every day for 18 days in a row, highlighting its ability to track the viewing habits of its users:
Netflix has defended a tweet that revealed 53 people had watched its new Christmas film every day for 18 days in a row. "Who hurt you?" read the tweet, addressed to them.
The tweet caused controversy, with some saying it was "creepy" of the platform to keep such close tabs on its audience, and mock their choices. However, others found it entertaining - and unsurprising that Netflix should know what its customers were viewing.
In a statement, Netflix said the privacy of its members was important. "This information represents overall viewing trends, not the personal viewing information of specific, identified individuals," said a representative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:06PM (5 children)
Isn't there one since Robert Bork's rental records were exposed in the 1980s?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Booga1 on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:11PM
We can't let that stand in the way of datamining all that sweet customer, er consumer, habit information!
(Score: 4, Informative) by EvilSS on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:50PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:00PM (2 children)
Aren't they obligated to keep some records, to pay royalties?
And isn't it likely that those royalties have an "out" for re-views by the same account, like a dvd rental would?
This thing is the penultimate tweenage girl flick, and they will watch something like this over and over just to cover the conversation they are having on the phone or facebook at the time.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday December 14 2017, @01:51AM
I don't think that means what you think that means.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Thursday December 14 2017, @01:55PM
from https://ir.netflix.com/faq.cfm#Question31141 [netflix.com]
(Score: 2) by cosurgi on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:11PM
Netflix gets concerned for redditor's mental health after they binged The Office in 5-10 days:
https://np.reddit.com/r/MadeMeSmile/comments/7j4qp4/at_least_they_care/dr41qjp/ [reddit.com]
#
#\ @ ? [adom.de] Colonize Mars [kozicki.pl]
#
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:20PM
> "Who hurt you?"
"My children, but now they're old enough that I can use the TV as babysitter and get a break"
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Nuke on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:34PM (15 children)
I expect my nephew and niece were two of those. They watch the same few films over and over again; I find it mind-numbing. I guess their minds go blank when watching and they like the experience; equivalent to an adult being drunk. When I was a kid I never saw the same film twice - what would be the point? - but that was before DVDs or Netflix.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:41PM (2 children)
A Christmas Story [imdb.com] has been aired nonstop on TNT or TBS [cinemablend.com] from Christmas Eve to Christmas Day since 2002. It's a "tradition". That's not pre-DVD but it is pre-Netflix. Apparently, DVD rentals only outpaced VHS rentals starting in June 2003 [wikipedia.org].
What's my point? I just wanted to drop those factoids.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:04PM
Well lots of people just turn it on as a backdrop out of nostalgia. Same for the Wizard of OZ, I know a certain grand mother who can recite every line in that film in sequence.
This is too new to be that, but the storyline is bound to be a hook for tweener girls, who will watch over and over to fall asleep at night.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:08PM
For the future, may I ask you for the favor to drop them before they hit the page?
Resist the urge, man, you can assert control on yourself.
The Factoid Anonymous is here to help - look around, do see how many AC-es spew shit without providing any citations?
Don't you wish you could be like these normal people? If you try enough, it can happen one day.
(large grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday December 13 2017, @06:45PM (3 children)
I still don't much care to watch the same Movie / Video twice. I do with a few exceptionally good movies / videos, but usually quite some time apart. Unless, I'm watching what the Wife or kiddo wants to watch. Then, it's probably XYZ time having seen X thing. At least there's no Barney or other equal quality thing. Thank you You Tube and Netflix. :-) The Clangers, Sarah and Duck, and Puffin Rock are all much more acceptable. At least I don't feel anything like the horror of seeing an episode of Barney (Thankfully never seen a full episode) or whatever that banana one was.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Wednesday December 13 2017, @07:35PM (1 child)
at least you don't have to worry about rewinding a DVD.
The video hire place would charge extra if you didn't rewind before returning a video (yes, VHS, shelf after shelf of VHS)
Our video (player, but did anyone, ever say "video player"?) would sometimes have trouble with old videos - so we'd end up doing it by hand.
Desire to re-watch was offset by a desire to 1. not get a fine (we've rewound it - get it back to the store!) and 2. not to have the tape jammed in the player.
I could dis-assemble our VHS in about 10 minutes to extract tape from the spools - enough practice that I knew I didn't want to repair electronics for living.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday December 13 2017, @08:03PM
Video player? VHS player? I think VCR was the common thing to say.
But it's all ancient history from a time before dual-core CPUs were common.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @09:55PM
With my memory, watching a movie a second time isn't that much different than watching it the first time.
(Score: 3, Funny) by nobu_the_bard on Wednesday December 13 2017, @07:05PM (3 children)
It is actually not uncommon for young children to do that. Many children in my family rewatch the same handful of movies on a regular basis for a few weeks before getting over it. This is at their own request; not because we just didn't have anything else for them to watch.
I've heard a couple of different theories about why it is, but I haven't done much reading about it, and don't have numbers on hand though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:17PM
I personally have well over 1500 movies. 6000+ individual tv shows. 3500+ CDs. I watch/listen to a lot of the same stuff over and over.
I find it relaxing.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:21PM
From times when story books were more common than TV-es - very young kids like to be read the same bedtime story again and again. Do you find it surprising?
Anecdote: about 20-25 years ago, while still in the (non-English speaking) country of origin, the kid (about 4yo) of some friends of mine started to learn English by himself only by watching (again and again) 3 movies from VHS - two of them were Robocop and Mad Max 1 (can't remember the 3rd). Nobody pushed or asked him to, and I reckon he didn't actually set himself "to learn English" as a goal. No only he learned to read (starting from the subtitles), but 3 years later he could watch and understand English movies without subtitles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:56PM
It's about the pleasure they get from knowing what's about to happen, kind of like how people like to sing along to their favourite songs. It's an important development stage. My kids really struggle not to blurt out spoilers because they want to show everyone that they know what's happening next! This also applies to their friends. Talk about spoilers!
Now that I think about it, why do we enjoy listening to the same songs hundreds of times over, yet pooh-pooh people who want to watch a movie more than once?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Aiwendil on Wednesday December 13 2017, @08:00PM (2 children)
Considering 98%** of the movies are very predictable, what is the point in watching them in the first place?
Currently I'm into my *looks at logs* 16nth run of watching this playlist of Countdown but that simply is because I can't be bothered to decide what music to listen to so I just left the thing on repeat a few days ago.
Kinda like how lots of people use the radio for company or just to control the soundscape, but one advantage with the same thing all the time is that you have no surprises whatsoever.
Oh yeah, it might also be that they found the show less boring/tedious to rewatch that their other offerings of stimulation - or maybe they tried to shut out how the felt, angry adults, creepy visitors or whatever.
** = I watch a lot of indie and art-movies, hence a score lower than 99.8%
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday December 13 2017, @08:13PM (1 child)
OMFG I think you have made this "~99% of movies are bad!" rant before!
No wait, it was these peeps [soylentnews.org].
https://www.theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-televisi-1819565469 [theonion.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:37PM
Dude, if only 99% of new movies was bad I'd probably bother hooking the antenna up to my TV (currently its primary use is as a secondary monitor).
But in all honesty, a lot of good movies are still being made - primarily in S.Korea and Japan however, with the occasional good thing from Thailand, havn't seen a good US or Euro movie in about half a decade* however (a few good series from that area though, like Rick&Morty). I guess being utterly unimpressed by special effects or big name stars kinda ruins things for me (also, in the west we seem to have lost the touch to make movies that are harsh on the mind - to take something more lighthearted from back when we could take a look at After Hours (1985) by Martin Scorsese)
* = Tucker And Dale Versus Evil (2010), before that the last movies I enjoyed from west was Dead Air (2009), Shrooms (2007), Scenes Of A Sexual Nature (2006), Dirty Boots (2005), Die You Zombie Bastards (2005).. oops, seems to be a pattern.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Thursday December 14 2017, @02:55PM
You think that rewatching is more likely when there's a huge choice of what to watch?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:36PM
The Nielsen box system has sent many TV shows to the graveyard. But in 2017, Netflix knows you watched the same sappy film 18 days in a row (and counting?).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Funny) by acid andy on Wednesday December 13 2017, @05:51PM
"This information represents overall viewing trends, not the personal viewing information of specific, identified individuals," agreed approximately 53% of Netflix employees, and definitely NOT one specific, expendable representative called John.
Too obscure? I'll get me coat...
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday December 13 2017, @06:02PM
Oh, the *same* 53 people watched it every day? I was trying to figure out whether they were complaining that 18 days * 53 people a day was too few, or too many, or what.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday December 13 2017, @06:19PM
I was thinking that's a really small number of people, but realized they'd been watching the movie every day for 18 days. Still not a terribly high number of people considering how often my Wife plays certain things for my kiddo. It's typically a particular show / movie, nearly every day. Kiddo still gets plenty of outdoors / play time, but there's not a whole lot of switching around once she's found something the kiddo likes.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Wednesday December 13 2017, @06:23PM (3 children)
Of course a service knows which users performed which activities. It would be weird if they didn't. Who is surprised by this?
Talking about is kind of tasteless. In fact, the tweet is actually pretty damned mean - the kind of thing that makes one think the author was probably a bully or a mean girl in junior high. Whoever emitted that tweet needs to be moved somewhere out of contact with the public; maybe some kid should pee in the locker, for good measure.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @07:59PM (2 children)
Those are overlapping sets.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday December 14 2017, @03:17AM (1 child)
But boys rarely get called "girl"
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @07:46AM
A bully is a bully regardless of what reproductive organs they have.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday December 13 2017, @06:33PM (1 child)
People going to hate, but it was an insensitive comment. Probably shouldn't be receiving the amount of flak they are from the comment. Though, perhaps that's what they were wanting? In some cases, more publicity is better, especially since, it's not like they were being deliberately evil.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @08:02PM
There. FTFY.
(Score: 4, Informative) by NotSanguine on Wednesday December 13 2017, @07:57PM (2 children)
Obviously, Netflix knows who watches what. But that they would be so cavalier about publicly mocking their own customers like this is pretty crass.
That some folks are up in arms that it's 'creepy' just shows that they don't understand either how puerile marketing drones can be, or the GIFT [penny-arcade.com] phenomenon.
It's almost enough to make you want to go to the nearest Targét [target.com] and buy (for cash) the crap out of the clearance DVD bin.
I suggest VPN+[favorite media download mechanism] for a less obnoxiously spied upon experience.
Or even better, read a book. Possibly even an actual paper book, bought with cash.
Alternatively, purchase stored-value cards (preferably with cash) to pay for spying-ridden services and give them throwaway emails from Hushmail or the like. If they require a phone number (and they want that to spy even harder), use a number from a prepaid (in cash, of course) SIM that is just used for such crap.
Many people complain (and rightly so) about government spying on your activities. Corporations have much more extensive dossiers on you and data brokers buy and sell PII to anyone who wants it.
Unless you take some steps to curtail such data collection, those corporations can (and do) compile enough information tell you what you do all day, every day.
I, for one, do not welcome our (not so) new marketroid overlords.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @08:17PM
#bookz on undernet.
cheaper than physical books, and much better selection than the goodwill down the street.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @09:57PM
Sometimes that kind of thing can produce some interesting results [politico.com].
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13 2017, @10:47PM
... now we have proof they are watching... we can play their system! Who knows, those 53 people could have actually been trying to achieve this?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by choose another one on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:06PM (3 children)
No one seems to have pointed out yet that what Netflix have is the data that 53 "users" watched it 18 days in a row - which isn't the same as people.
I mean, no one uses one netflix account for the whole family/household, or shares netflix usernames/passwords, ever, right?
When your TV logs you into netflix by your face or fingerprint, _then_ you can start to worry about them collecting data on actual people (or when the next samsung doesn't get caught).
Face/fingerprint login to p**nhub is still going to be more worrying though...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday December 13 2017, @11:31PM (2 children)
Now I started to wonder... would other biometrics related to the topic offer the same level of uniqueness to act as an individual identifier?
Skipping the morphology/resemblence of the nether regions - would wank-analysis be as reliable as gait analysis [wikipedia.org]?
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @12:16AM (1 child)
What happens when you use the Netflix socks [netflix.com] another way?
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Thursday December 14 2017, @03:32AM
You mean like Jean Claude Van Damme on the beach?
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex