GammaWire is reporting: Netflix to Start Testing Warnings for People Borrowing Login Info
It's still a small sample size but we have confirmed from a number of Netflix users that the streaming service is starting to roll out a test of warnings to those allegedly borrowing account login information from users outside of their home or family.
For the time being, the number of users impacted seems to be relatively small (there is some loose chatter about specific users receiving these warnings on Twitter and other social networks, but nothing widespread yet).
The warning pops up and requests that users verify that it is in fact their account with a verification code. In other words, if you're borrowing your ex's account, good luck with that text asking for them to forward you the code.
[...] The most notable part of this whole test is that Netflix has long claimed letting people borrow passwords has been one of their strongest marketing channels. While never officially confirmed, there were reports that Netflix had metrics showing those who used other people's Netflix accounts were highly likely to sign up for their own accounts. This recent push to drive people borrowing passwords into signing up for their own accounts might indicate an internal shift in Netflix's customer acquisition data showing a worrying trend for the company.
Do you think users would bother setting up personal VPNs to masquerade as members of the same household?
Related Stories
The plan is to try to force Netflix customers to pay an extra $2-$3 every month for service for any users using your credentials outside of the home. An accidentally leaked Netflix help guide last week indicated that users who don't log into their Netflix account in a 31 day period would face the new surcharges, something that didn't go over well with either users or celebrities that travel a lot.
The company was then forced to backtrack, stating the guides were posted in error, and intended for customers in countries like Chile and Peru where the crackdown had already launched. Those efforts, as we'd mentioned previously, were also reportedly a confusing mess for subscribers in those countries, who say it was never really clear how the inconsistently-enforced system actually worked.
Netflix is embracing the move because the company's growth has hit a wall internationally, forcing it to begin nickel-and-diming existing subscribers if Wall Street is to get its improved quarterly returns.
[...] The question then is: is that modest bump in revenue worth alienating and annoying your existing customers in a competitive streaming market? We're apparently going to find out.
To be clear, I still think Netflix has value at its current monthly rate, and many people who complain about the new rate hikes are lazy and likely won't cancel. On the flip side, this move remains the latest signal from the company that it's done with being innovative and disruptive and has, as publicly traded companies usually do, shifted toward nickel-and-diming and turf protection as it attempts to fend off competitors.
Previously:
Netflix Fights Password-Sharing With Test of $3 "Extra Member" Fee
Netflix to Start Testing Warnings for People Borrowing Login Info
(Score: 4, Informative) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 14 2021, @12:49PM (7 children)
Only those with really good broadband, including great upload speed, even have the option. Think about it: If you watch Netflix over a personal VPN, the data stream goes into the home, and then back out; the latter with VPN overhead. Even if you have great download speed, it won't help you if the upload speed is not large enough. Remember, the A in ADSL stands for asymmetric; the asymmetry being that the upload speed is much smaller than the download speed.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @01:24PM (6 children)
Good point. I currently have 1000 / 35 mb/s upstream and my previous place also had 75 / 35 mb/s. Though, I did have to pick the second highest plan to get that 35 mb upstream at my current place, otherwise the only upstream speed is 10 mb.
Honestly I'd rather have 250 / 250 or even 100 / 100. Of course, the cable companies don't want you doing anything that might actually be useful. They want you to sit back and be a good little consumer. DSL companies are only a tiny bit better about that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @01:28PM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:53PM (1 child)
They'll be coming for them next. Then the jews.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:17PM
no, b/c they are the Jews.
(Score: 2) by NateMich on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:37PM
"DSL" and "better" being used in the same sentence? Only when talking about 56k modems.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @11:06PM (1 child)
IIRC there is a limit of asymmetry beyond which the huge download speed is useless. The receiver has to ACK the data so the sender keeps pushing bytes. I forgot how to calculate it (it probably involves RTT, packet size, window size, packet loss...), but a 28.6:1 ratio is rather extreme, maybe it works... maybe the ISP assholes just want to advertize 1Gbps that is never reached by hundreds (950Mbps would be OK, 500 is a con job). There are multiple studies (fuck, 35ms RTT with small packet loss and you are capped to less than 1Gbps) [researchgate.net], even RFCs (eg 3449) [ietf.org] about the topic.
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Monday March 15 2021, @08:22AM
The ACKs are only necessary for TCP connections. The biggest data these days typically are video streams, and AFAIK video contents are usually sent via UDP. Which means you can send huge amounts of video data, while only the small amount of control data needs the back channel. Thus if your only use of large data download is video streaming, you'll not notice the smaller back channel. And if high bitrate video works fine but your occasional large download goes slow, you'll more likely blame the download server than your internet connection.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by legont on Sunday March 14 2021, @02:08PM (30 children)
There are always two stages for any large company: 1. Build your customer base. 2. Screw your customer base.
Some, such as apple, managed to do it more than once, but usually one is enough.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Immerman on Sunday March 14 2021, @03:15PM (29 children)
And how exactly do you imagine "Warning non-customers who are stealing your service" fits into that narrative?
Is it also screwing their customer base when cable companies shut down someone they caught stealing cable? When utility companies shut down someone stealing power or water?
Honestly, seems to me Netflix could have their cake (attracting new customers) and eat it too (encourage them to actually become new customers), while *also* maintaining the moral high ground, simply by not issuing a warning until a month or two after some out-of-house connection starts using an account. You can give a friend free Netflix for a month or two, but it won't last unless you continue to lie about them being a family member.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @03:22PM (6 children)
If you pay for a two or four user account you should expect to be able to use two or four users at the same time. Who cares where those users are physically located or if another user is a brother, cousin, or friend.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday March 15 2021, @12:10AM
Exactly, they're just putting on the squeeze to see how much abuse their customers will tolerate.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Touché) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @02:18AM
You should - because the terms of service you agreed to specifically say the service is limited to your household. (first line of section 4.2 of the terms of service )
If you want to steal from them by sharing the service outside your household in violation of your contract, that's your business - but I'd really advise you actually read the effing contract so that you can make your decision with your eyes open, rather than getting taken by surprise when they come after you for violating it.,
(Score: 1) by slashnot on Monday March 15 2021, @08:23PM (3 children)
This.
One of the best things about streaming services is, they're not tied to a physical location like "the cord" was before I cut it. If I take my laptop with me when I stay at the shore, I damn well better be able to watch my Netflix there. Likewise when little Billy goes off to college, he's not going to open up his own account. I'll just change mine from 2-user to 4-user.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday March 16 2021, @12:15AM (2 children)
Then you'll be violating your contract, which clearly states that you can only share your account with members of the same household. Once little Billy moves out, he's no longer a member of your household, even if he comes home to visit for a few months a year.
(Score: 1) by slashnot on Tuesday March 16 2021, @09:11PM (1 child)
I respectfully disagree, and I would love for Netflix to challenge my on that. So long as I claim little Billy as a dependent on my tax return, he's still legally a member of my household.
https://www.healthcare.gov/income-and-household-information/household-size/ [healthcare.gov]
https://ttlc.intuit.com/community/taxes/discussion/if-a-college-student-lives-away-from-home-are-they-a-dependent/00/355167 [intuit.com]
https://www.hrblock.com/tax-center/filing/dependents/college-age-dependents-and-financial-support/ [hrblock.com]
(It just so happens, I'm doing my taxes this month.)
The point is, there is no clear rule Netflix can use to enforce this. Other examples are airline pilots, long-haul truckers, or deployed soldiers, who aren't in their own houses for months out of the year.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday March 16 2021, @10:30PM
Dependents are a different concept than household members - though there's certainly some overlap.
Fair enough though - there's a lot of gray areas Netflix would probably be wise to avoid the PR flak from cracking down on.
Somehow though, I suspect all such edge cases combined are greatly outnumbered by the unarguable contract violations - sharing passwords with friends, etc. who can't even begin to make a reasonable legal claim to being a household member.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:00PM (8 children)
They're charging based upon the number of simultaneous streams. There's no point in most people paying for all those streams if it's just one family located at the same house.
If it were all you can stream on as many devices as you like, this would be reasonable, but they're already including the number of simultaneous streams in the pricing.
(Score: 5, Funny) by NateMich on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:39PM (6 children)
You've never been in a house with more than a single person in it?
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:47PM (5 children)
Maybe they're so boring and conformist that they and all their family all like to watch the exact same things at the exact same time?
Or are poor, and have never lived somewhere with more than one screen in the house? That actually applies to lots of people - and Netflix is one of the cheapest babysitters around.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NateMich on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:57PM (4 children)
All those things are possibilites, but are exceptions to what is typical. I was merely pointing out that his statement was ridiculous.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:21PM (2 children)
We could watch the same thing together or have lives. I never wanted to watch something at the same time as anybody else in my family when I was living with them unless it was something they were watching. Not to mention the millions of households where the network just won't sustain multiple streams at the same time.
Most people's lives don't revolve around Netflix. We have jobs and hobbies and we used to go outside occasionally.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:49PM (1 child)
Go outside??? But it's full of bees!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @12:55AM
Used to bee. Neonicotinoids put an end to that as well.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @02:23AM
That first line at least was intended to be a joking reply recognizing that. Guess maybe I should have thrown in a :-D
Then the poverty possibility occurred to me, and I guess the second line brought down the tone of my post.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @12:03PM
"They're charging based upon the number of simultaneous streams. There's no point in most people paying for all those streams if it's just one family located at the same house."
The point in paying for more than one stream in the same household is that family members may not all want to watch the same thing at the same time. Multiple streams are the only way for two different shows to be running simultaneously.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:21PM (7 children)
What happens in families with shared custody agreements? The kid is most certainly a family member. Are they not entitled to use the family account at both parents homes?
Could get ugly. We’ve already had to deal with such situations during lockdown by ruling that the kid is part of both households, based on pre-existing custody agreements. Why should Netflix be different? Because it’s “on the Internet?”
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Immerman on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:41PM (4 children)
Umm, the account owner confirms (potentially under penalty of perjury), that yes, this is a family member, and things continue uninterrupted?
Or maybe Netflix changes their policy to limit usage to one household, and the kid only gets to watch Netflix at Mom's house unless Dad springs for his own account. Why should "over the internet" guarantee them special treatment that they'd never get from a cable company?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:56PM
> Why should "over the internet" guarantee them special treatment that they'd never get from a cable company?
because that's how the invisible mothefuckin HAND rolls, bitches
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:20PM (2 children)
The cable companies need to be broken up. They're a horrible business model for consumers and they are the opposite of what businesses should aim to become like. It's sad that the government goes after Google and Facebook when the elephant in the room is the cableco companies/ISPs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:51PM (1 child)
Google and Facebook took sides in the political stuff, so the other side at least pretends to "go after" them. Cable companies play it smart and pay off both sides.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 14 2021, @11:39PM
Netflix is pretty much Michelle Obama's pet project now. There is nothing on there to watch other than retconned capeshit with Black actors, Black male/White female couples, evil White men, and softcore child porn. They sure know their audience well.
I don't blame them for needing more revenue and acting accordingly, but their approach is ass-backward misguided -- typical of Jew-run services like pro sports and Disney, that like to dance around what is actually causing their revenue and adoption problems. It's much easier to blame Whitey for everything and their subscribers are stupid enough to believe it.
(Score: 2) by NateMich on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:42PM (1 child)
There is absolutely no way this is going to "get ugly". I hate to break this to you, but when you get divorced or just live in different homes, that's two households by almost any definition.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:43PM
(Score: 3, Insightful) by captain normal on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:58PM (4 children)
They sold the service with the promise that there could be 5 users in each account with no limit on amount of devices or where they could be located. Now I could see their point if there were more than one person using a name on the account from different ISPs at the same time. But from what I see they encouraged families and friends to share accounts from the beginning and now the bean counters are just mining more rent seeking.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Sunday March 14 2021, @10:34PM (3 children)
I don't know much about Netflix, but it sounds like the promise was 5 users in a single family, not you and four of your friends (thus enabling five families to mooch off a single account).
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @01:26AM (2 children)
Indeed. They might have changed it recently, but the current terms of service clearly state
https://help.netflix.com/legal/termsofuse
And I'm pretty sure they said that when I signed up several years ago.
However, they never really enforced that rule, people were on their honor to adhere to the contract they agreed to. And, surprise surprise, many people did not. And at least some of them are now showing themselves to be entitled assholes whining about how Netflix is cheating them by beginning to warn them that they're violating their contract.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @11:05PM (1 child)
They can say whatever they like in their license agreement, but they don't get to decide years later that they want to suddenly enforce it. Personally, I won't be getting their service if I have to pay, there's just not enough content on there. Even sharing the same account with my close family, there's still not enough to get me on more than a couple times week.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday March 16 2021, @12:26AM
Like I said...
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Sunday March 14 2021, @02:23PM (12 children)
Well, looking at TFA it seems they also send codes in e-mail, and since you more or less have to have Internet service to get Netflix, that is perfectly fine, and therefor any additional methods on top of that that some people may happen to have, is also fine.
It is just that I've just run in to more idiots recently that literally have no clue that there are people who do not have smell phones that can receive their stupid "texts". Also, "texts" are not a "phone call", and increasingly idiot's automated systems that send texts will not return an error if the "text" attempt fails.
(Score: 1, Troll) by NateMich on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:51PM (10 children)
Even the dumbest of dumb phones can receive a text.
This is entirely a problem of your own creation. It would be like getting angry at the world that so many people expect me to use the internet.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:47PM (4 children)
(Score: 3, Informative) by choose another one on Sunday March 14 2021, @08:38PM (3 children)
> Your home voice line phone can receive texts?
Mine does, has done for years. If the handset is SMS capable it'll display as text otherwise you get a call with automated conversion to voice.
It's done this across multiple different landline providers, so I have a feeling it is all landlines (in the UK - not sure about elsewhere).
(Score: 4, Informative) by helel on Sunday March 14 2021, @09:26PM (1 child)
I can guarantee you the text-to-speach thing doesn't work on my landline, which doubles as my only phone. Yes, I could "upgrade" to a cell phone but reception where I live is poor so I'd miss calls which would kinda limit the benefits.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @07:33PM
I live in the US, outside of Chicago.
My home phone line does not receive texts.
I have two different cell numbers my own email web and file servers and blah blah
so many places now demand a phone number to keep me secure -- so they can send an unencypted text message to the phone they they just stopped sending unencrypted MFA codes to because of 'security'--that I'm thinking of getting a dedicated phone just to use for MFA requirements, because I sure as hell am not giving up the number I use daily.
My insurance company is enforcing this -- and by agreeing to use the online account login, I must use the MFA via SMS texting -- and that also means I agree with their sharing the contact info for marketing purposes. There is no seperation of privacy and security -- they don't give the option. Either you are allowed to login online to your account on a desktop by giving them a working cell phone number that can receive texts and advertisements from them, or you get harassed to go paperless every time you receive your statement in the mail because surprise, they won't let me pay automatically anymore via direct debit on a schedule involving no people or phone numbers--because I didn't accept the SMS and advertising combo agreement.
I have to write them a check.
Come the next enrollment period, I will look for some other insurance provider -- but I mean I have to get real -- I won't know what a new providers sms and advertising requirements are until after I already signed up, I am sure... and of course, I cannot use a secure hardware token with my insurance company, because it isn't a phone number they can advertise to.
Up until now--I had my landline as my primary means of contact, because for insurance purposes, it is my primary means of contact. My cell phone isn't. but hey, I am both a product and a customer. If I want to complain I can send a secure email to them, but I need to sign up for MFA to my phone first to validate it's me sending it.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @10:59PM
Yea, you must live in one of those wussie countries with consumer protections that refuse to suck cell phone salesmen's dicks by keeping popular services limited to cell phones.
(Score: 5, Touché) by richtopia on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:59PM (4 children)
Could you please provide me with some tech support then? My desk phone is a Cisco 7962G. It has a big display for the company directory, but I have yet to figure out how to receive texts on it!
My parents have a similar issue with their phone. All it has is a number pad and receiver, I'm not sure how a text would even be displayed. But you clearly know how all phones can receive texts.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @01:29AM (3 children)
You haven't lived until you've texted from a rotary phone!
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday March 15 2021, @08:37AM (1 child)
Indeed, that would be a cool project: The rotary cell phone. Take an old rotary phone, add a a cell phone chipset, write some software that turns the rotary pulses into virtual keypresses and text-to-speech software for the “display”. Also add a battery pack (the size of the phone should allow for plenty of power). Bonus points if you can recharge it over the analogue phone cable.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @02:22PM
I'm not a big one for useless products - but it would be pretty funny to have your phone ring at the bar, and pull an old rotary out of your bag...
Heck, that massive battery might even make it useful for some sufficiently remote locations. Maybe even toss in a USB port of two for powering other things. I shudder to think of how long it would take to charge at the 1W available from a phone line though...
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday March 15 2021, @03:13PM
Trust me, I can live a very long time without ever having experienced said abomination.
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: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:55PM
For years I resisted getting a smart phone. Only had a cheap flip-phone in my car for emergencies. I gave in when I realized that damn near every company was building their communication channels with the assumption that of course everyone has a smart phone -- and if you don't have one their systems no longer are capable of dealing with you. So I submitted just so every my day wouldn't consist of fighting against the tide.
(Score: 2) by ledow on Sunday March 14 2021, @02:44PM (9 children)
"showing a worrying trend for the company."
What? Asking customers to pay?
No wonder some of these companies are in the mess they're in, they're not giving away tons of free stuff to non-paying customers!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @03:25PM (7 children)
You pay Netflix for a certain number of users. Who cares about the exact relationships of those users or their exact locations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:05PM (6 children)
You do... because it's in the contract you entered into with them.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:22PM (1 child)
If you want high def streaming, they force you to pay for 2 streams minimum. It's a racket and bootlickers like you part of the problem.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @01:20AM
Hmm, it sounds more like the exchange theory of value in action to me.
I switched to torrent.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by rleigh on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:26PM (1 child)
If they are going to enforce the contract terms that strictly, then they will lose a massive number of subscribers. It was that flexibility that got and retained their subscriber base in the first place. If it's inflexible and not price-competitive, then it will get cancelled.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @11:08PM
There's a number of ways that plays out and most likely none of them will result in more profit. Personally, I'd cancel and perhaps sign on for a couple months a year to binge the bit of content that interests me. Personally, I wouldn't have a subscription at all if it wasn't provided by T-Mobile. There's some good content, but not anywhere near enough to justify the price. Having a blind eye turned towards sharing passwords means that they get one subscription when they likely would have gotten zero subscriptions as there wasn't enough content to justify one plan for any of the people sharing their passwords individually.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Sunday March 14 2021, @08:48PM (1 child)
I've checked and there is diddly squat about location except at the country level:
"You may view the Netflix content primarily within the country in which you have established your account "
and even then it is only "primarily".
The only sharing restriction is on "household" which is everyone (and anyone) living together in a house - but nowhere does it say they have to watch only from that house (in fact the opposite is implied by the "primarily" on the country clause above). A household does not stay in a house all the time (except at the moment, maybe).
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 15 2021, @03:18AM
Check again:
4.2. The Netflix service and any content viewed through our service are for your personal and non-commercial use only and may not be shared with individuals beyond your household.
https://help.netflix.com/legal/termsofuse [netflix.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:06PM
They're trying to avoid providing the streams they promise. You get multiple streams at once in some plans and this means that the extra streams can't be used due to this rule. The result is that they're robbing customers of the use of those extra streams.
If you pay for hi def, you get 2 screens at the same time, the only way not to pay for streams you don't get would be to get the cheapest plan that only includes one stream at a time.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Mojibake Tengu on Sunday March 14 2021, @04:54PM (5 children)
Avoiding Netflix completely will save you both money and time.
Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @05:56PM (1 child)
There are so many streaming services out there most people are going to have to avoid a few of them. And free stuf … unbelievable but true - some people can spend all day on Tik-Tok.
Netflix is probably feeling the pressure from people who’ve binge watched everything they are interested in the Netflix has to offer, and figure they’ll hop to another service for a while to binge watch other stuff. Lather-rinse-repeat.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:20PM
>> some people can spend all day on Tik-Tok
Another unintended consequence of the closing of state mental hospitals in the 1950s.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:01PM
Yes but how else will you get the missus to stop talking?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Tork on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:09PM (1 child)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 14 2021, @11:13PM
Because internet is essential in the modern world. While Netflix is merely entertainment.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @06:21PM (2 children)
If you're white and you fund netflix, you're providing material support to the enemy of your own people. Stop being sch a dumb slave.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @12:21AM (1 child)
You're shaking so hard with impotent rage that you can't even type.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 15 2021, @06:48AM
Are you sure he's impotent? Maybe it's just with you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PinkyGigglebrain on Sunday March 14 2021, @07:45PM (2 children)
I remember Microsoft being really loose about people making unautherized copies of Windows 3.x and Word/Office back in the mid '80's to early '90's. Seems the strategy was to let people learn the OS and word processing programs at home so when they put "I know Windows and Word" on their resumes the business would be more likely to buy Windows and Word/Office because "everyone already knows them".
Then once Microsoft had a majority of businesses locked in they started getting hard line on the copyright infringement, implementing Windows activation for Win 95 and creating the Business Software Alliance to force into buying licenses for all their software. Which they would because it was cheaper than switching, and "it's what everyone else uses".
Kind of like how drug dealers will give you the first try for free, then they start upping the price to what they charge their long term addi^Wcustomers.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 14 2021, @11:23PM (1 child)
Except that unlike with operating systems and office software, you don't really depend on a streaming service. If the companies decided to stop using operating systems or office software, they'd have been out of business quickly. If you decide not to use a streaming service, all you lose is one source of entertainment. And while switching to another operating system or office suite would have had a high cost for those companies, switching to another streaming service comes at almost no cost for the users (note that I'm not speaking about the cost of the software or service here, but of the cost specifically of switching).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Monday March 15 2021, @08:04AM
Never said it was an equivalent situation, just that the current move by Netflix reminded me of what Microsoft did back in the 1980-90's.
Your points about Netflix not being essential are spot on, But that doesn't stop Netflix's upper management from thinking it is and trying to leverage that for a profit. I've noticed that CxO's tend to be a bit disconnected from reality on many levels.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14 2021, @10:49PM
I spent months during the start of covid getting Netflix network errors because they thought I was being a bad consumer. Eventually I gave up. I didn't use network for the last six months until it expired. "Netflix won't deliver content" is what I say to people. Screw them.
If they had an issue with me they could have emailed me. Not just made my life hell. I paid for a service. They chose not to deliver. They can wither away. 'The future of TV'. Yeah, right.