return to table of content

A Return to Blu-ray as Streaming Value Evaporates

tombert
104 replies
1d

I have a pretty extensive blu-ray collection (almost 500 movies now, about 40 complete series). I almost never watch blu-rays directly, because I don't want to muck with physical discs. Immediately after buying a movie, I remove the DRM with MakeMKV, and put it onto a Jellyfin server.

I know it's (probably) not strictly legal for me to break the DRM of my movies, but I think I'm ethically in the clear; I'm not distributing the movies on ThePirateBay or anything, I just watch them within my home network...I think it would be pretty hard for anyone to demonstrate any damages from my habits.

Streaming is absolutely more convenient than physical discs, but it's also objectively horrible for a company to be able to arbitrarily remove my media. With my discs, I always have a physical copy, so it's more failure-proof.

That said, maintaining a server is a huge pain in the ass, and it's something that really is limited to geeky people. Sure, as a software engineer I know enough to install NixOS and Jellyfin and I even get some kind of masochistic enjoyment from fixing things when they inevitably break, but I cannot imagine my mom going through anything like this, so for her the media landscape has gotten only worse.

Blu-rays really aren't being produced anymore, so I suspect that the only sustainable preservation effort will end up being piracy, and this has been an issue long enough that the large media companies cannot pretend to not understand that.

dfee
26 replies
1d

How big of a NAS do you have?

tombert
11 replies
1d

Keep in mind before you read this: I use my server for a lot of stuff other than movies so it's really over-provisioned. I play with LLM models sometimes, and I also have a Kafka server with tons of stock-trading info being written to nearly all the time taking a lot of space.

That said, I have 24x16TB hard drives in ZFS RAID. It's three separate RAIDZ2's, so the amount of space on there is 18x16TB, so about 288TB. It's a fairly expensive amount of waste, but it's nice to be able to lose up to six disks at a time without having to worry. I could fairly easily get another 8 drives in there if I really needed it, but thus far my total consumption is only about 50TB in total, and I delete actually stuff when I'm done with it.

BLKNSLVR
6 replies
20h53m

Ok, now I need a description of the setup.

Specifically:

- What hardware caters to 32x disks (24+8)? (I'm picturing enterprise gear)

- What software are you using to coordinate it? TrueNAS?

tombert
4 replies
18h45m

So bear with me and hear me out on this.

It's a fairly typical 1U HP Proliant server, which counts as "enterprise gear". I don't remember the model but it's somewhat unremarkable. It only has like six bays in the front, and I use one for a NixOS install, and two of them with SSDs for read and write cache. It has an old 10 gigabit ethernet card for connectivity. The server I bought used for around $150, the ethernet card I got for about $35 used on ebay.

The actual disks live in 8 bay external chassis, and connected via USB3.0. This may sound horrifying, but USB3 is rated for like 5 gigabits, way more than you can easily get from a home RAID with spinning disks. I have a PCIe 3.0 x16 USB3 card in there, with four plugs, each with a dedicated controller, meaning that in theory each port could get 5 gigabits. The reason I could fairly easily get eight more in there is that I'm only using three of the four ports, so without much effort I could buy 8 more drives (of any size I suppose), put them into another 8 bay chassis, and just add vdev to my RAID. This particular PCIe USB card was $41 on eBay.

I use ZFS for a software RAID.

This sort of happened accidentally; I didn't used to have a rack mount server, I was using a bunch of Nvidia Jetson Nanos, and as such there wasn't a real way directly plug hard drives in, so I ended up having to use the external chassis. Eventually I bought three of those cases, had all the drives in there, and when I decided to buy a "real" server it was substantially easier and cheaper to just add proper USB support to a server than it was to find a decent 24-bay server at a decent price, particularly since I already had the cases.

In hindsight I probably should have got chassis that have eSATA support, but they've been getting decent speed and it's an extremely convenient system. It's also come in handy once when I accidentally broke my server, and I needed to get files off the RAID; all I had to do was plug them into my laptop and mount the ZFS RAID there.

ETA:

Forgot to answer what I use to manage it. I installed NixOS on my server with a pretty vanilla ZFS on Linux install and an NFS mount. I do the tmpfs-on-root trick, so the root partition gets nuked on every reboot. https://elis.nu/blog/2020/05/nixos-tmpfs-as-root/

I don't use any fancy GUI tools or anything; NixOS does a good enough automating away the un-fun parts of maintaining a server, and if I break my server I can very easily roll back to a previous state, and if I really have to, reinstalling it from scratch takes like 20 minutes since I can just copy over my configuration file (which I back up on Gitlab) and have everything automatically set up again. NixOS is pretty cool.

ETAA:

According to `dmidecode` and `lscpu`, server model is `ProLiant DL380 G7`, 24 cores, 128GB of RAM. I think it's actually 12 cores, and it says 24 because of hyperthreading.

It's pretty unremarkable. I like it a lot, but it's a fairly typical and bog-standard used server.

Handy-Man
3 replies
16h15m

`Kafka server with tons of stock-trading info`

Can you talk more about this? I personally have a Dell R720 and about 90TB available for use, and use 40TB of it for my media server. I'm wondering if that's some use case I want to look into.

tombert
2 replies
15h58m

DISCLAIMER: I don't really know what I'm doing. My knowledge of trading basically amounts like a few Coursera classes.

I wanted to play with paper trading strategies. I listen on websocket streams of cryptocurrency and stock ticker stuff [1], and the service listening on that socket just plops it into Kafka, with the partition key being the ticker name.

The reason I bother adding Kafka largely comes down to the ability to use the Kafka Streams API. Kafka Streams allows me to do time windows of different trades, or lets me do a sql-style join across two different streams, or lets me filter out data that I don't think is relevant.

Kafka Streams gives you most of the fun of a map-reduce framework, but without having to administer a map-reduce server; it's even smart enough to handle internal state by creating intermediate topics and/or creating local RocksDB instances. It's pretty cool.

There's also has the advantage of allowing me to set retention, so I don't have to worry about doing any kind of manual cleanup; I only have to worry about having N days of stuff on the server, and it's trivial to change that.

Also, I have a number of topics, each with 32 partitions, meaning that if I do find any kind of strategy that works, I can very easily scale it up without changing any code.

I'm basically using Kafka as a streaming-only database. I think it's neat but I haven't actually found any strategies that make or lose money. It's just been a fun way to play around with different bits of server stuff.

[1] https://docs.alpaca.markets/docs/real-time-stock-pricing-dat...

Handy-Man
1 replies
11h56m

Awesome! Yeah, seems like a great learning opportunity. I did 2 Coursera courses during Covid of trading as well, but didn't touch it after creating one strategy, mostly using RSI, Moving Avg etc lol. Will give this a try, thanks.

tombert
0 replies
1h55m

Yeah, I had no delusions I would become a billionaire from anything I did. I just find that I learn stuff better if I have a direct goal instead of just dealing in abstracts.

I can read about all the fun theory behind trading math and for distributed systems, and that has some value, but I will understand stuff a lot better if I give myself a real project to do stuff with. I guess I am more of an engineer than a mathematician.

davidzweig
0 replies
20h18m

You can fit a SAS card (like LSI 9207-8e) and hook up external disk shelves (like ds4246). This gear is on ebay and is mostly plug and play on linux.

m463
3 replies
19h39m

288TB

that is a lot.

maybe it (and this comment) will be subsumed in the next 10 years, but for now it is spacious and amazing.

xyst
1 replies
18h49m

It’s amazing until you have drive failures.

tombert
0 replies
18h33m

Yeah, I really don't think there exists always-online data storage that you don't have to babysit. I've broken my setup so many times that I can almost rebuild it from scratch in my sleep.

I should point out, part of the reason I do this is as a learning tool. I feel like you learn a lot of neat tricks when you build and run this stuff on your own, and I think that there's really no negatives in the software engineering world to being proficient with the command line and server administration.

tombert
0 replies
18h37m

I mentioned in a sister comment, I don't think I have ever gone over 50TB, so it's very much overkill, but it makes me feel cool.

One advantage, though, is that when you have a "nearly-unlimited" place to dump data, it kind of changes how you think about problems. If I want to do some experiment with video encoding, there's really nothing stopping me from encoding a video into 100 different configurations so I can directly compare stuff. I don't have to be sparing, and there at least won't be any surprise bills from Amazon or Google later.

They're spinning drives so I don't really worry about the write-cycle stuff.

crispyambulance
6 replies
1d

It's not ~too~ geeky to maintain a NAS. I got a Synology. It has 5 drives, and the ones I have are fairly quiet so the thing goes under the TV counter.

However, if you want to rip 4K blurays, you've got to flash the firmware on your bluray drive and then run MakeMkV + handbrake (or much harder CLI stuff) to process a disc into a useable media file which can THEN go into Plex. All of that takes time and effort, and usually some trial and error.

I also keep a bluray player next to the NAS. Simply because it's too much of a pain to deal with ripping sometimes. I still have to get through my 30-disc Ingmar Bergman Criterion Boxset that I bought 2 years ago. Much easier to pop a disc in the player!

sroussey
4 replies
23h4m

Details of the flash firmware?

bombcar
1 replies
16h38m

This plus a reencode with handbrake is what I use. I reencode to get size down and make it more compatible with what I have.

aspenmayer
0 replies
15h27m

I reencode to get size down and make it more compatible with what I have.

I’ve heard that some setups struggle with higher resolutions and bitrates, which is compounded on 4K (HDR also with its own quirks for downsampling in post processing for playback on unsupported devices) versus 1080p. These factors are exasperated when direct play isn’t possible due to incompatible files, unsupported container formats and/or codecs, or insufficient bandwidth, especially when remote mounts, caching, and transcoding come into play.

crispyambulance
0 replies
18h18m

Yep, that's it. It seems to be the only way to rip a 4K. No drives (that I know of) allow ripping 4K "out of the box"!

tombert
0 replies
22h29m

Yeah, I actually have one of the drives that's ostensibly flashable to be 4k compatible, but I haven't been able to get it working.

Honestly, I've been happy enough with 1080p. I think 1080p blu-rays still hold up pretty well visually. My biggest TV is 70", and I watch it from like 15 feet away, so I don't think I'd benefit much from the increased resolution.

I know that there's other variables that are enhanced with a 4k blu-ray, but they haven't been significant enough for me to bother collecting/ripping them. When I buy a 4k blu-ray, I've just been ripping the regular 1080p blu-ray that always comes with it.

compsciphd
6 replies
1d

a single 1080p bluray movie (not including extras on the disc) is generally going to be in the low to mid 20GBs to 40GB range. Lets take 40GB for a fairly conservative measure. a single 8TB drive can therefore fit 200 (or possibly more) movies (or double for 16GB drives).

i.e. one doesn't need "crazy" (i.e. more than a handful of consumer hard drives) amount of storage to store a lot of bluray movies and tv shows and keep them online available to you.

vondur
5 replies
1d

I compress mine using Handbrake. It gets them down to the 2.5->8GB per movie range.

tombert
2 replies
1d

I used to compress them and generally that's fine, but honestly storage has gotten cheap enough to where I don't bother. Every now and then the compression would introduce artifacts, even at a relatively low CRF level in ffmpeg, and just for peace of mind I decided to keep the raw movies.

That said, since I have an elaborate tape backup system now, I've debated keeping the "masters" as archives on the tapes, and keeping compressed versions for streaming, but laziness has kind of won out on that.

extragood
1 replies
20h56m

Agreed on your points about cheap storage and compression artifacts.

I've entertained setting up a tape drive local backup for my NAS (4x 14 TB) for a few years. Is it worthwhile from your experience?

tombert
0 replies
18h9m

Yes, the tape drive is something I am very happy that I ended up doing.

I have two LTO-6 tape drives. They only connect via SAS, which is a little annoying, but I bought a 2-port used SAS card on ebay for $20. I ended up buying a pack of like 100 LTO-6 tapes on eBay two years ago for a steal, like $150 in total. Each tape is 2.5TB, so I can pretty easily back up my movies. Each movies is written to two separate tapes. I keep a spreadsheet of which tape every movie lives, in case I need to restore a specific backup.

I would really like to get an LTO-7 or LTO-8 drive with Thunderbolt, but they cost an arm and a leg even used on eBay right now. If you get lucky, an external SAS LTO-6 drive can be had for about $200-$300.

It's a slightly expensive up-front cost I'll admit, however, it came after I was using Google archive storage, and when I did a restore of 21TB of movies, the next day I had a bill for like $700!

It's saved my ass one time thus far; I accidentally broke my ZFS RAID and lost everything, but fortunately I was able to restore all my blu-ray rips from tape, and it was pretty easy, and more importantly, didn't cost me anything extra.

If you decide to go down this road, I do recommend getting one that has support for LTFS; otherwise you're going to be stuck using tar commands I think.

vundercind
0 replies
19h6m

4.5-10GB in h.265, depending on the movie (length, how many low-contrast scenes, how much quick movement) and how well-tuned the encoder was, is indistinguishable from the 1080p blu ray on my 10’ diagonal screen at 6-10’ viewing distance.

4k, something like 25GB-45GB, depending, but I have several in the teens of GB that I wouldn’t guess weren’t full quality.

I reserve full-quality rips for movies I both care about a lot and that benefit from it. I don’t need more than 4.5GB dedicated to Happy Gilmore or what have you.

Retric
0 replies
23h55m

Why bother? You're spending time saving ~50 cents per blue ray and you get some artifacts.

You could just buy DVD's if you want to save space and are willing to take a hit to image quality.

screamingninja
15 replies
1d

Do you watch those movies / series more than once? I have always thought of Blu-ray disks like books. You consume it and then lend it to a friend. I get that this is not what the media companies would want, but purchasing media/books and not using them more than once just feels wrong.

nox101
7 replies
23h44m

I am slightly embarrassed to say that yes, I watch movies over and over. All of them off of a shared hard drive using Kodi on an Apple TV to watch.

I recently through away all my CDs, DVDs, and BluRay after carrying them from apartment to apartment for years (in notebooks) and never once opening them during those years.

As for the embarrassment. I get from some POV it's a waste of time but I easily have a list of ~400 movies all of which I've watched 3-20 times each. Examples might be a movie like The Matrix I'm sure I've watch 10+ times. A movie like Harvey, 2 or 3.

badpun
2 replies
22h12m

Same here. Great movies (most of the imdb Top 250 easily qualifies) can be rewatched every couple of years IMO, unless you have unusually good memory.

tracker1
0 replies
17h23m

For me it depends, I'll usually go 8+ years before rewatching something.

andirk
0 replies
21h58m

Or watch them after staying up way too late with a couple libations. I remember my opinions of the film but not the content.

emeril
1 replies
20h23m

what's your approach to using kodi on ATV?

do you have a paid $99/year dev account?

bombcar
0 replies
16h47m

I had a Kodi box but now I just use Infuse on ATV to Jellyfin. I encode such that it doesn’t scream for payment.

rpdillon
0 replies
19h45m

I also watch movies multiple times! Typically it's several months or years apart, but sometimes it's more frequent. I remember the first night I saw Primer, right after it ended I started it all over again because I needed to understand. Unfortunately, the second watch did not provide as much clarity as I was hoping.

TaylorAlexander
0 replies
16h19m

I watch movies while doing other things (cleaning the house or certain design tasks at the computer) which makes it very easy to watch them again! I go through them quickly and will tend to go back to them after about a year. I recently watched all of the Mission Impossible movies over the course of a few days.

tombert
2 replies
1d

My rule of thumb has generally been "if there's any chance I'll want to watch the movie more than once, I'll buy the blu-ray."

Until about two years ago, I was happy enough to pay for two streaming services (HBO Max and Hulu), along with Amazon Prime, and I treated that like my "rental store". The first viewing would be to see if I like the movie, and if I did then I would immediately order the blu-ray.

Now I've canceled all my streaming services because I don't want to pay for a million of them.

Just a note, I will very frequently put a movie or TV series on in the background while I work on other things, probably even more frequently than I turn on music. I just like having noise from a movie or show that's familiar for me.

tracker1
1 replies
17h25m

mostly the same... still have Amazon Prime and Netflix for my SO... I'd be fine dropping them all.

tombert
0 replies
17h15m

It's just gotten farcical. I am not opposed to paying for my entertainment, but I'm not going to pay in perpetuity $15 a month to ten different services when they will happily delete the content I like for a tax writeoff and replace it with reality TV. I haven't even used Amazon Prime streaming since they started forcing ads on us.

It's how I justify running a server 24/7; the increased power costs are lower than what I'd need to pay to have all the major streaming services every month.

mlrtime
0 replies
6h11m

One benefit of getting older nobody says is that some movies you can rewatch for the first time again. YMMV (Your Memory May Vary)

layer8
0 replies
16h46m

I buy Blu-ray disks exactly because I watch most things only once, because the one time I watch them I want to watch them in the best quality available. What you do with the Blu-ray after watching is a different question.

jdofaz
0 replies
23h11m

I only buy the bluray if I've already seen it and know I'd want to watch again when I receive it. Keeps me from collecting stuff that doesn't get watched.

I loop through the collection by putting a watched disc back in a separate spot until I've gone through them all and then start over.

XorNot
0 replies
18h53m

Some part of it now is having them available for my son to experience.

krustyburger
11 replies
1d

Isn’t ripping your own media the sort of use case where Plex really shines as a solution and is fairly user friendly?

tombert
6 replies
1d

I mean, it's "user friendly" in the sense that it's the easiest solution, but it still requires understanding how servers work, knowing how to administer a RAID, knowing what kind of transcoding settings to set etc.

Also, I think anyone that tells you that you can just have always-online media that you don't have to babysit is lying. As far as I can tell, that doesn't exist. Your server will break at some point, for no apparent reason, and you're going to have to fix it. Usually the fixes are easy on their own, but you end up accidentally nuking the RAID and losing all your rips. It's hardly "user friendly".

This isn't crapping on Plex, it's sort of the nature of the beast

mastax
4 replies
1d

There are NAS devices from a bunch of manufacturers where you can just buy them, plug them in, run through the setup wizard, and click install on the Plex app in their built in App Store. Not much more difficult than getting printer drivers installed.

That’s certainly more than many people are able (or willing) to put up with, and it requires a several hundred dollar investment. But NAS ease of use for common tasks is pretty good theee days.

loloquwowndueo
2 replies
23h58m

Not much more difficult than getting printer drivers installed.

Dude, really bad example, printers are hell to set up.

ndriscoll
0 replies
23h54m

These days pretty much every printer should support IPP. You just plug it in and it shows up to devices on your network.

michaelmrose
0 replies
22h48m

Plugged it into Ethernet logged into web based config set password. Installed distro package for HP printers instantly usable on void linux and Windows.

I think 99% of problems are wifi related or trying to share the USB connected printer over the network.

Johnny555
0 replies
18h44m

The problem is that if you don't understand the basic concepts around how NAS works, you can still get yourself into trouble even with a setup wizard. Hang out in any NAS forum and you'll come across regular posts from people looking for help because they chose a form of striping ("because that option gave the most disk space, and no, I didn't see the popup warning about data loss") and then asks for help recovering data after a hard drive failure: "I bought a replacement drive, how do I get my old data copied to it?"

ndriscoll
0 replies
1d

You don't need a RAID. Just have 2 hard drives and copy stuff from one folder to another. Click skip all for identical files that already exist.

I've had jellyfin serving my music, family videos and youtube rips (e.g. university lectures) for years. Haven't had to touch it since I set it up. I just plop files into folders and it picks them up.

I got a lot of family videos from my mom, who keeps them on her computer plus an external hard drive, which she brought to me to copy. Copying files to USB drives as a backup and sharing that is pretty understandable for non tech people.

jokethrowaway
1 replies
1d

Nowhere near user friendly for a large part of the population

HumblyTossed
0 replies
23h25m

True, but given legal constraints on ripping, etc. it would be nearly impossible for anyone to make it drop dead simple.

m463
0 replies
19h40m

I think plex sort of sold out. Jellyfin is under your control.

izacus
0 replies
1d

That's that the original poster means with "Jellyfin", it's just an OSS version of the same type of software.

lloeki
8 replies
1d

I know it's (probably) not strictly legal for me to break the DRM of my movies

At least in France (possibly EU) it is (droit à la copie privée), there's even a tax for that, paid on every storage device, whether or not it's intended to store such media. Yup the tax is about paying for a copy of something you already own.

You can rip anything all you want from a source medium you own. But you can't fetch it from another source even if you do own an original medium and the resulting data is 1:1 identical down to the last literal bit. The bits have a legal colour depending on where they come from!

saurik
3 replies
23h57m

France is on the hook -- along with the rest of the EU -- for having a similar anti-circumvention law to the US (which is part of a treaty that the US pushed forward), but apparently hasn't implemented one yet? I hadn't realized this (I thought everyone had long ago put in place similar laws) and am excited to have found a good reference on the status for various countries.

https://cyber.harvard.edu/media/files/eucd.pdf

Mindwipe
2 replies
23h25m

That paper is nearly twenty years old.

Breaking DRM to format shift in France is illegal and has been for many years.

saurik
0 replies
16h59m

Oh, thanks. I somehow remember considering it was obsolete but then had some apparently very wrong reason why that wasn't the case. This matches my understanding better.

lloeki
0 replies
10h52m

It's quite a lot more involved than such a blanket statement.

This has been ruled in court. See the "Mullholand Drive" case, where a consumer (backed by UFC Que Choisir) sued producer/distributor/whatever for the inability to rip their DVD.

Case was tortuous with back and forths, ultimately Cour de Cassation 28 février 2006 ruled that the use of DRM was legal in consideration of international agreements and so that the case was moot.

Then Cour d'Appel Paris 4 avril 2007 ruled that copie privée is not a right but an exception and that as such it meant that a consumer cannot sue on limitations caused by DRM, but that they can use the exception as a defense should they be accused of copyright infrigement.

DADVSI is more annoying, as it regulates the making, distribution, import, possession in view of selling, lending or renting, of DRM breaking tools, as well as (defined separately) working around DRM is made illegal, irrespective of exceptions.

BUT this only applies to DRM schemes that are deemed effective, which DVD's CSS is not (I seem to recall this has been ruled somewhere), making libdvdcss legal to use and distribute. It is in fact OOTB packaged in VLC, hosted in France, and if it were illegal Videolan would have been sued to oblivion. Arguably MakeMKV decodes BluRays with actual keys, so is arguably not an DRM breaking tool (like libdvdcss is) but merely a decryption tool using a legit process and legit keys, no different than a BluRay player.

One could argue that rendering the file immediately to a screen or to a file is fundamentally different, but these laws take all sorts of considerations like copies in buffers and whatnot (and yes in the debate at some point majors wanted you to pay for the in-memory buffer copies that happens when decoding MP3 which is astoundingly ridiculous). So the decoding process is not DRM breaking and the storage of the decrypted result is not that different from these buffers, except it's a bit longer lived.

But there's one more thing: in addition, the same DADVSI defines that DRM must not prevent interoperability as long as author rights are respected, as well as cannot oppose free usage of the work or protected item in accordance with author rights.

Well, Conseil d'Etat 16 juillet 2008 ruled that usage of FOSS software to work around DRM for interoperability purposes is legal. The pain point is MakeMKV is only partially FOSS but DADVSI says nothing about things being FOSS and I don't think anyone is going to ever get sued for making private copies of their legally owned BuRays for their sole usage in order to play content on a variety of devices and OSes they use and would otherwise be unable to play without being decrypted.

https://www.droit-technologie.org/actualites/le-regime-de-le...

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libdvdcss#En_France

tombert
2 replies
1d

I believe in the states, it's technically illegal to break DRM most of the time, though I think there's a million possible exceptions, and I don't know how much it has actually been tested in court.

I figure, though, that if I'm buying a legit copy of the blu-ray, and I'm not distributing copies to people, I'm probably not very high up on Disney's "sue them" list, even if I am technically breaking a rule.

sp332
1 replies
22h51m

Ripping your own media is a civil violation, small stakes for a blu-ray collection. Where people really get in trouble is distribution. Private sharing like a Plex server among friends could get you in more trouble, but public sharing like bittorrent, or anything commercial like charging for access to your Plex, is where it really starts to attract attention from the lawyers.

tombert
0 replies
22h34m

Yeah, more or less what I figured. Right now at least, I don't even have the port opened on my network, so the only way to watch it is to be logged in via my network, or do some kind of VPN/proxy into the network. I really doubt that it would be worth it for a company to sue me for it.

To be honest, I think that it's a pretty stupid law; obviously distributing the media makes sense to be illegal, but I think it's idiotic to make breaking DRM illegal.

thfuran
0 replies
1d

In the US, you're legally entitled to create a backup copy, but breaking the encryption on the disc to actually do so is illegal.

rrix2
7 replies
20h13m

as a software engineer I know enough to install NixOS and Jellyfin and I even get some kind of masochistic enjoyment from fixing things when they inevitably break, but I cannot imagine my mom going through anything like this, so for her the media landscape has gotten only worse.

Jellyfin supports multiple users, she can mail you some disks ;)

xyst
6 replies
18h50m

Now op has to teach mom how to access vpn.

baby_souffle
3 replies
18h45m

Now op has to teach mom how to access vpn.

Or OP can just host public; I've got some disks I can send in, too. I'll chip in $/month for OP's troubles.

generalizations
1 replies
18h30m

And suddenly GP's ethics are no longer in the clear.

A4ET8a8uTh0
0 replies
16h28m

Yep, the moment money changes hands, things become messy. It is relatively easy to argue 'personal use, fuck off', but it is much harder to defend 'I am only getting $x for this'.

Bluestrike2
0 replies
17h40m

And then the OP is back where it all started, only this time, he's the owner of the streaming service in question. Truly, there is no escape :).

tracker1
1 replies
17h28m

Reverse proxy with a dns name via Caddy... you'd need to know the domain name, everyone else gets a 404 on default response.

kadoban
0 replies
15h9m

Domain names aren't secret, that doesn't sound very reassuring.

javajosh
5 replies
18h13m

Isn't this a device waiting to happen? A small form factor PC with a blu ray reader that lets you watch blu rays. But it also rips them (ideally while playing!) such that you never need to put the disc in again. Slap a couple 20T drives in there, charge $1k for it. Don't even let it connect to the internet.

tombert
3 replies
17h49m

That would be cool but I suspect a legal nightmare.

It's one thing to have a personal collection of movies that you painstakingly ripped on your own, but if you were to try and sell a machine that automatically circumvented DRM, I cannot imagine that I wouldn't get sued and/or arrested by multiple entities.

This of course, makes me sad, because it would be nice to have a system that wasn't just a nerdy custom setup.

Solvency
1 replies
17h40m

So why not a machine with everything but the ripping part (being pre-installed)?

Why must running a media server be such a chore when it's just TBs of movie files?

aembleton
0 replies
8h44m

Because it's more than just some movie files.

I think most media servers also have an operating system, software to transcode and serve the media files. You will also want a client to be able to read the served content and your server needs to stay up to date with the client.

javajosh
0 replies
17h10m

> a personal collection of movies that you painstakingly ripped on your own

I would argue that such a device does indeed represent painstakingly ripping your own movies. After all, it is slow - I think it's safe to assume it takes at least 1:1 to rip a blu ray. And it will take you a long time to watch your collection even once.

There are two difficulties. First, the fact that people might never own, or stop owning the blu-rays they've ripped. This is in part mitigated by the fact that such a device would be expensive, and as such its a luxury item not a piracy item. Second, you'll have the stray ornery hacker who'll want to do something more with the device, and dammit I paid for it so its mine! They'll insist on seeding torrents with it or cloning the hard drives and selling them or something and honestly I don't think this is mitigable.

bombcar
0 replies
16h44m

It exists or existed for high end home theaters years ago. I remember seeing it - something like $20k base starting price. Not sure what happened to it - high end $100k+ home theater is batshit insane.

prepend
4 replies
17h52m

I did something similar with all my kids movies. I just ripped their dvds because they were destroying them every few months and I probably bought Madagascar three times before ripping it.

The UX is better than any streaming service.

Fortunately I had a synology nas already as a backup server so I just installed Plex on it and it was so easy. This was probably 15 years ago and I still have all those video files and the dvds are in a box somewhere untouched.

bombcar
3 replies
16h48m

Jellyfin + Infuse + Apple TV is so easy even the kids can find their movies instantly.

Only real maintenance I’ve done is replace the DVD rips with Blu-ray rips slowly over time as I figure out which ones are most watched.

Kerbonut
2 replies
12h39m

What is Infuse?

sussmannbaka
0 replies
11h53m

Think Kodi but made to be useable by users instead of by people who will edit xmls

CobaltFire
0 replies
4h43m

It’s a very slick app on AppleTV. It can operate as a front end for media servers or it can act as a player for a network share.

Super easy to run as a player for a network share, you just lose by account things (save your spot and pickup anywhere, content filtering, etc).

rakoo
3 replies
17h27m

I cannot imagine my mom going through anything like this,

That's why we have to post individualistically and learn that everything is social, that solutions are societal. Your mom might never be able to self-host, and you might never be able to make the wine that you drink. That's fine, and that's why we share responsibilities as a group. Be the one that "knows how to do that king of things" for your group, host services for you, your mom, your friends... It's fun to do and a very good way to collectively re-appropriate our digital lives. You'll be the technical person, but all governance, directions, values can be decided collectively: that's what democratic societies are, after all. If you can't/don't want to be there 24/7, let the group know that it might break but maybe the group will decide that it's fine enough.

tombert
0 replies
17h21m

I am that person for my parents. I actually did set up a small Jellyfin instance for their house to serve their home movies.

I'm also the person they usually call with any kind of tech support questions.

amrangaye
0 replies
3h30m

lol - just out of curiosity: are you doing this yourself? Provide tech support to all your aunties and uncles, cousins, friends etc (already bad enough - now formalized) then you add installation and maintenance (including on all their devices), keeping everything updated etc. And having to troubleshoot every single problem they run into.

“make decisions as a group” sounds great and democratic - but you really think anyone cares about this enough amongst non-techies to be part of all this “decision making” about what apps to use? And this is in addition to your day job. And please don’t say well we can evangelize - again: no one has time for that.

It sounds great esp to us techies - that’s how WE would solve the problem as a group. Doing that with non-techies esp with family and friends would be HORRIBLE in practice. Unfortunately I have a feeling I’ll get responses of the type “well you never know till you try” and “maybe YOU can’t / don’t want to do it but others will”. To which I say more power to you :) but this is def not a solution outside of hacker forums where we can pore over tech surveillance and freedom etc. and create a bubble where everything is libertarian and can be solved if only we had the right systems in place for the normies.

TaylorAlexander
0 replies
16h20m

I agree with you and unfortunately if me and some friends decide to rip our media to a server and share it, there’s some men with guns that might decide to interfere with our cooperation.

In practice I see plenty of people sharing access to plex servers, but it is unsettling that someone could somewhat arbitrarily be subject to violent interference for sharing media with friends.

davidmurdoch
3 replies
18h32m

masochistic enjoyment from fixing things when they inevitably break

This should be the tag line for those of us building homelabs for little to no practical reason.

A4ET8a8uTh0
2 replies
16h21m

There is some pleasure to be derived from bending matter to one's will.

transpute
0 replies
10h36m

TS-435XeU NAS configured because it "should exist":

  1U short-depth (12") chassis
  Low-power Arm SoC
  4x3.5HDD, 2xM.2 storage
  2x10GbE, 2x2.5GbE NICs
  QNAP OS replaced by Devuan (no systemd)
  serial port
  ECC SODIMM

aoeusnth1
0 replies
55m

Well put, I like doing things because I can, because it’s something I can control and own fully myself. It’s a playground, and the more challenges I overcome, the more fulfilling it is. Any practicality and ease is irrelevant or even counterproductive to its true purpose.

GauntletWizard
3 replies
17h42m

My plan is to make backup copies of the DVDs whole, so I have all of the features and extras, and am certain that I can verify that they are the exact blu-rays that other people have. We don't exactly have a list of hashes of the entire contents of the discs, but the volume keys will decrypt the data, and there's checksums on that, so we should be able to verify all the way down the chain.

(If anyone knows how to do the actual checking, I'm all ears - I'm an Exact Audio Copy guy for my CDs)

bombcar
2 replies
16h43m

The problem is that Blu-ray codecs stink. A 4K Blu-ray rip can be like 80gb, whereas a recode will fit on a dvd.

GauntletWizard
1 replies
14h53m

I don't disagree, but at the same time - a 20tb HD is $300, and it can store 250 disks. Even with a 500 disk collection, and redundancy, I'm looking at only about $1200 in storage costs. Even assuming replacing one of those disks per year, the price of storage is only going down.

Not that I'm not planning on re-encoding for everyday use, but I'll take the hit in storage costs to keep the "originals" around.

bombcar
0 replies
1h8m

My originals are the Blu-rays themselves; ready to be ripped again if needed.

AzzyHN
3 replies
21h36m

As far as I'm aware, it's perfectly legal (in America) to make copies of media for your own use, even if that means removing the DRM.

mlrtime
0 replies
6h10m

Until there is a court case on this (I don't know if there is) nobody will know.

kmeisthax
0 replies
21h32m

You're probably right, because the part of DMCA 1201 that criminalizes individual acts of breaking DRM has about 40 different exceptions, plus a general "this is not intended to overturn fair use" clause, plus a rule-making process that lets the Copyright Office add more exceptions if they feel they are necessary. Given that there is already caselaw in favor of format shifting (e.g. RIAA v. Diamond) it's highly unlikely a court is going to say format shifting is wrong if DRM is involved.

None of that matters because nobody is going to try and litigate against individual disc rippers, they are going to litigate against the people who actually wrote the ripping software, and DMCA 1201 is far more harsh to them. There is basically no exception to the prohibition on DRM-breaking tools - I'm not even 100% sure that, say, verifying each individual's usecase before letting them break DRM is enough to escape DMCA 1201's ire.

cmgbhm
0 replies
17h0m

IANAL but things are still like they were with DeCSS. One of the problems the DMCA made is breaking media copy protection (like makemkv) is separate from why (making the legal backup copy)

SamuelAdams
1 replies
19h18m

I tried JellyFin but I cannot get Dolby Digital sound to play to my Denon receiver. Plex handles this fine on the same speaker setup and configuration and film. The last time I tried this was maybe 2 months ago.

Is this something you are able to work around?

weberer
0 replies
19h10m

I play videos on LibreElec using the Jellyfin plug-in and everything seems to work fine. The audio signal goes to the TV via HDMI, then from TV to the sound system via optical cable. Are you connecting directly from the player to the sound system?

wnevets
0 replies
22h41m

does the iOS Jellyfin client have Chromecast support yet? That is my main roadblock to switching to jellyfin for everything.

Dalewyn
0 replies
16h47m

I know it's (probably) not strictly legal for me to break the DRM of my movies, but I think I'm ethically in the clear; I'm not distributing the movies on ThePirateBay or anything, I just watch them within my home network...I think it would be pretty hard for anyone to demonstrate any damages from my habits.

Obligatory IANAL.

You should be in the clear (including the circumvention of DRM) since all you're doing is making an archival copy for your own personal use.

Legalese:

* https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117

* https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

Bluestrike2
0 replies
16h53m

... I cannot imagine my mom going through anything like this, so for her the media landscape has gotten only worse.

I setup a Jellyfin server for my parents. It works, but ripping blu-rays--even with my efforts to largely automate and simplify things--is a nuisance they tend not to bother with. You can expect some phone calls and/or stacks of discs that were "forgotten" when you're around :).

Even then, it's still a more pleasant experience for them than the fragmented mess streaming has become, where added friction and annoyance are the glue that hold streaming apps together. IMO, setting up your own server is worth the occasional added hassle. Not that it eliminates streaming, sadly.

Now, if you're willing to spend a large sum of money to make the process painless, Kaleidescape[0] makes home media servers for the ultra high-end home theater/home AV market. They originally sold massive 300 Blu-ray disc changers you'd hook up to their system, adding more as your collection grew, but now you buy servers from them and download movies with with Blu-Ray-level bitrates from their store.

Of course, the same ~$300-500/TB for just the servers alone will buy you a hell of a lot of tech support for a Plex/Jellyfin setup.

0. https://www.kaleidescape.com/

jsjohnst
32 replies
1d

It’s frustrating to me how every studio / network feels it needs its own streaming service, one where they control the entire experience. It’s stupidly user hostile and yet there’s no alternative other than physical media (with all its negatives) or piracy.

rolobio
22 replies
1d

Agreed. When Netflix had just about everything, piracy took a big hit.

We need a return to Blockbuster-like selection, but streaming. A streaming service should purchases however many copies they are streaming, and replace them on a schedule as the copy “wears out”, like Blockbuster.

cdchn
18 replies
1d

What they could even do is buy physical Blu-Ray and mail the out to people who would return them after a few days, for a subscription fee.

dylan604
17 replies
1d

If that was profitable, the service you describe would not have shuttered.

bee_rider
9 replies
1d

I don’t think that’s true; it might be the case that mailing out dvds is profitable, but too low revenue for modern Netflix to bother with. I mean, it was possible to build a business on it at some point…

dylan604
8 replies
23h54m

I don’t think that’s true

Easy to find out by coming up with a business plan, and then pitch it to investors. If you are right, then you'll be the next Reed Hastings. If not, you'll just be another person with an idea nobody else believes is worth investing

patrickthebold
3 replies
23h31m

I think your are missing the GPs point. Netflix, of course, started with mailing dvds and recently ended it. As far as I know, it was always profitable. Unfortunately being profitable is not the same as "worth investing", investors are chasing the highest returns and won't invest in something with a low return on investment.

You are kind moving the goal posts with your first statement "If that was profitable, the service you describe would not have shuttered." and this one.

andsoitis
1 replies
23h10m

The trend has been clear for a long time. The future is a streaming, not physical media. Profitability is necessary but not sufficient to be a successful business over the long term, you also need to grow and change according to market dynamics, otherwise you will find yourself dead.

cfmcdonald
0 replies
18h43m

This article is all about how streaming is a big money loser for almost everyone. So it has growth without profitability. I'd rather have profitability without growth.

dylan604
0 replies
23h16m

No, I'm not missing the point. Yes, I said profitable. But let's all agree that profitable doesn't just mean making one dollar more than all of your expenses. By definition, that's making money which is technically profitable, but that's not what anyone would consider a profitable business. So while technically right might be the best right, it's technically useless in this conversation and does nothing to actually move the conversation in a positive direction.

Saying that a company is profitable but not worth the investment is not going to solve the streaming is our only option. We are looking for a solution other than streaming that is still legal so that people do not have to resort to pirating. If you are suggesting that a service providing shiny round discs through the mail or any other brick&mortar Blockbuster or mom&pop video rental solution is going to be profitable to the point of sustaining a business, then there's a bit of realism that needs to be brought back into the conversation. This seems to not be wanted and instead point back to me not understanding what words mean.

bee_rider
3 replies
22h27m

I disagree that that is necessary to run that experiment, somebody already did it, proving that it is possible.

Also I don’t think suggesting a giant task like starting a business is anything but a bad faith rhetorical tactic. I’m not going to pitch a DVD mailing company to investors for reasons that have nothing to do with whether or not it is viable (I’m a programmer, not a businessman, and I don’t care to run a business, for one thing).

dylan604
2 replies
21h57m

Of course I wouldn't expect some person as a programmer become a CEO of a physical media shipping company. I always forget that I must be explicit in these types of forums where the you is never considered as the royal you. Everyone takes things so personal.

bee_rider
1 replies
21h7m

It seems a little unnecessarily confusing to have “you” refer to different people in the same sentence.

But anyway if you meant “you” as just a hypothetical person, we’ve already got one, Reed Hastings.

dylan604
0 replies
20h58m

right, and Mr Hastings has decided it was no longer a viable business and shut it down. what's confusing about that, and how it was applied to this conversation?

it's like we just want to argue and not actually have a conversation

therealdrag0
2 replies
18h10m

Is it actually dvd or do they have Blu-ray’s?

bombcar
0 replies
16h12m

They have Blu-ray all over the site.

blendergeek
0 replies
4h16m

I believe they have both.

cogman10
2 replies
23h2m

It may actually be profitable again. The entire reason media rentals ended up dying is because of Netflix coming out with just about every bit of media available for streaming.

Now that everything has fractured into a million pieces, media rental once again seems like it may make sense. Redbox is still around still lending out blurays. It wouldn't shock me if that model made a resurgence.

dylan604
1 replies
21h34m

redbox isn't nearly as convenient as having it delivered to your house.

however, it does make me wonder if owning/operating/maintaining all of the boxes is more or less expensive than paying the USPS to deliver and collect on behalf of your service.

bombcar
0 replies
16h14m

Redbox is about as convenient as the library (or more so, with a cost) and it has all the latest.

The key is they don’t have to pay for mailing, AND I can get something last minute with a short walk or a short drive (which puts three in range).

Mindwipe
2 replies
1d

When Netflix had just about everything, piracy took a big hit.

So never then.

(Also if this is circa 10 years ago every study suggests piracy is lower today than it was then.)

dgfitz
1 replies
23h41m

Because people don’t know how to pirate anymore. Circa 2000 everyone I knew was pirating everything. There is no Kazaa or bearshare or Napster anymore.

Ekaros
0 replies
23h13m

And even I'm kinda warry of using bittorrent... Usenet is fine from legal stand-point for sourcing my linux distros. But networks where you share got enough legal trolls to make want not bother. And I don't consume enough linux distros to make any special setups.

izacus
3 replies
1d

The fact that we never legislated to force providers to allow any client connect to their streaming API (keeping software like Winamp, VLC, relevant for new world) and instead doubled down to allow complete control of content providers over our culture is one of big societal mistakes of last decades.

Following the example of Hollywood which forcefully split content studios and cinemas would create a much much healthier market.

thfuran
2 replies
21h45m

We should just shorten copyright back to 14 years and not grandfather anything.

yieldcrv
0 replies
21h6m

and nothing of value will be lost

izacus
0 replies
21h43m

This.

suddenclarity
0 replies
1d

Partly because no one wants to be dependent on another company. Look at what happened to Reddit apps when they began charging for their API. Netflix with a monopoly and their own movie production would be an impossible negotiation position for production companies in another 15 years.

novok
0 replies
23h16m

It's their version of cutting the middleman.

crysin
0 replies
1d

It's getting even dumber because these studio curated streaming services don't even have their entire library available on their dedicated service. Want to watch 2007 Transformers in the US? Well too bad, no one is actively streaming that one. Want to watch Transformers 2? Better have Max! Super frustrating as a customer.

briffle
0 replies
1d

They all have their own streaming platform, that doesn’t always have their own shows. I remember being so frustrated trying to find the actual correct spot to stream Yellowstone. (Been a few years, trying to remember)It was on the paramount channel, but not on paramount plus streaming. It was apparently on the peacock streaming service, but only on their most expensive tier, and my tv didn’t work with peacock tv at the time…

JadeNB
0 replies
1d

It’s stupidly user hostile and yet there’s no alternative other than physical media (with all its negatives) or piracy.

Physical media isn't always an alternative either. Movies usually still come out on physical media, but TV shows increasingly often don't.

r0ze-at-hn
31 replies
1d

For those that have not visited your local library lately. Along with books, I regularly borrow audiobooks, whole tv series, movies, switch and ps5 games. And they give me access to yet another movie and music streaming service that they pay for. Once I add in the library system and requesting stuff from other libraries it is rarely that I can't get access to something I am interested in.

This isn't the library I went to as kids that had a tiny rack of VHS tapes in the back. They seem to have fully embraced the digital era.

TylerE
12 replies
1d

Some have, but this is far far from universal and it’s a bit annoying when people insist that it is all libraries.

duneisagoodbook
11 replies
1d

it's possible! encouraging people to go to the library is a net good on society.

darby_eight
10 replies
1d

It's insane to me anyone would downvote this comment (edit: or flag my disbelief for being somehow irrelevant to conversation). The public library system is quite possibly the best thing this country has ever invented.

mopenstein
4 replies
20h50m

I don't see a societal benefit in people borrowing video games and watching DVDs that aren't educational. At least non educational books might expect the reader to expand their minds, and to a lesser extent movies.

But the majority of video games and movies being produced are empty wastes of time. It seems to me loaning those items is just an attempt to stay relevant lest libraries become vacant and useless. What other value is there in loaning out PlayStation games?

theshackleford
0 replies
9h16m

Without video games exposure as a youth I’d likely be an unemployed failure. It stoked an interest that has since sustained a twenty plus year career. Piracy gained me that access back then, glad to hear it’s now more easily available to fuel the passion of a new generation.

goykasi
0 replies
14h24m

Off the top of my head, it seems like a great way to give access to content (games, movies, etc) to those that may have been able to afford it on their own. It may not have a ton of educational value, but some mindless entertainment goes a long way towards happiness sometimes. A happy citizenry is probably a societal benefit.

duneisagoodbook
0 replies
12h30m

"I don't see a societal benefit in people borrowing video games and watching DVDs that aren't educational." "loaning those items is just an attempt to stay relevant lest libraries become vacant and useless." you have answered your own question.

deadbunny
0 replies
20h10m

Because like books, games, films, TV, etc. are culture and everyone should have the opportunity to experience culture no matter what.

Trying to limit libraries to "educational" content is preposterous.

cookie_monsta
1 replies
19h10m

The public library system is quite possibly the best thing this country has ever invented.

If you are writing from Egypt I think you have a strong case

darby_eight
0 replies
7h23m

It is true that there have been some level of public libraries available throughout history. I am referring to the wide availability of public access that effectively democratized literacy (in concert with the public school system, of course).

pierat
0 replies
17h41m

There are people here (venture crapitalists) that would love to disassemble all public libraries for something much more horrible.

It was likely one them, or their lackeys, that -1'ed you.

jtriangle
0 replies
1d

The library system and national parks are both absolute bangers.

halJordan
0 replies
10m

The problem with the statement is it's naive insistence that i live in op's world. It's the inane insistence that we dont live in the third largest country and the insistence that everything has been homogenized and is one simple vanilla flavor.

Frankly at this point it's just virtue signaling on the order of "I'm not a raging consumerist like you, I use a public good instead." The demand to be thanked, and the refusal to be criticized are part-and-parcel of the virtue signal.

mch82
8 replies
1d

Anyone know how to donate a movie or audiobook to a library (in situations where they don’t have them)?

I’m interested in the concept of donating media to the library instead of buying it for myself. However, it doesn’t seem like there’s a simple way to do that…

thfuran
4 replies
23h55m

They don't get to use regular consumer digital media. They have to use specially licensed extra-expensive versions that permit lending.

TylerE
1 replies
13h9m

It isn't that it's actually illegal, but you can't sell/lend/rent what the distributor refuses to sell to you, and video stores would have the in demand new releases weeks or even months before they'd be sold on the consumer market. They got them because the likes of Blockbuster were willing to pay $70 or $80 in 19800's dollars for that privilege.

rahimnathwani
0 replies
3h15m

Can you give an example of a Blu-ray disk that's available to borrow at your local library, that isn't yet available for purchase on the consumer market?

bombcar
0 replies
16h24m

I’m not sure that’s the case for physical items like DVDs, because I’ve never seen anything indicating it’s special and the replacement costs are in line with “buy it on Amazon”.

bombcar
2 replies
16h23m

Depends on the library and its staff.

Most libraries have way more than they can fit on the shelves, but if you talked with the purchasing person you might be able to work something out.

TylerE
1 replies
13h7m

The vast vast majority of donated media goes straight into the "sell at the next fundraiser" pile. Partly this is because much of what's donated is not in high demand (They tend to get lots of Time-Life picture histories and things like that that were hawked by the millions on infomercials). Mostly it's because what they need is funding - they already have way more material than they have shelf space for most of the time.

bombcar
0 replies
1h9m

Yeah the most likely “work things out” is they’ll let you buy brand new releases and donate them the day after release (saving them from having to buy it).

bibliotekka
4 replies
1d

Add on: ask your local library if they have: Libby, Kanopy or Hoopla

dublinben
1 replies
20h37m

Libby / Overdrive for ebooks are a racket. The publishers sell ‘disposable’ licenses that expire after something like only 20 uses or a few years, whichever comes first. Support your local library, but don’t support greedy publishers.

therealdrag0
0 replies
18h18m

Don’t libraries negotiate the licensing? If I want digital copies what else can I do? Libby or Amazon which is worse?

dhritzkiv
1 replies
1d

Kanopy is great, and very nearly as good as the mainstream streaming platforms in terms of selection and software quality.

Hoopla, however, is abysmal both in selection (though this depends on your local library) and in software/service quality. The search is broken, and it has some of the most confusing UX I've ever experienced. It's as if it actively wants to prevent you from watching anything.

salad-tycoon
0 replies
23h23m

That’s just what the internet was like many years ago, slow, bad search, clunky, jerky not smooth, and with lots of right angles.

Hoopla is just based off a relic.

jtriangle
1 replies
1d

My library has this too, and a ton of ebooks, and a 3D printer that you just have to cover the cost of material to use, and they occasionally have free museum passes, national/state park passes, etc.

Far cry from what they used to be, and, well, you're paying for it anyway via taxes so silly to not use it.

bombcar
0 replies
16h26m

Amusingly I have requested and received over a hundred dvds and some books from my library, but am still on the waiting list for an ebook of one book that I already got in hardcover and read.

thayne
0 replies
1d

That depends a lot on the library. My local library has a pretty limited digital selection.

cmrdporcupine
0 replies
1d

Many have streaming digital checkouts, too. Either through themselves or through broader networks.

zer00eyz
24 replies
23h51m

I no longer care that "piracy is wrong"

You know whats wrong, you price gouging me for 15 services that are all awful.

Unlike TV where channels compete for eyeballs, unlike the theater where they only make money when you show up streaming services have perverse incentives.

What is the ideal streaming customer: one who pays, and never watches. The content only has to be good enough often enough to make you not want to unsub and resub. I have to suspect that these servcies are programing this way.

It explains why free + ads is a model for better content. You only get paid for what I watch... It means that 800 hours of shit content isnt worth having up, and you need to have better stuff.

thfuran
9 replies
23h27m

No, free + ads is a horrible mess of perverse incentives. Pay per view is the model that aligns interests.

zer00eyz
7 replies
23h7m

You realize that ads are pay per view. Rather than cash its attention and eyeballs. It's an arbitrage one can win if smart.

andsoitis
4 replies
22h36m

You realize that ads are pay per view.

Fun quip but not a sophisticated view on business models.

The big categories include: AVOD (advertising subscription on demand) is a different business model from SVOD (subscription video on demand) is different from TVOD (transactional video on demand).

There are 3 kinds of TVOD:

* Pay-Per-View (charge viewer every time you watch)

* Download-to-Rent (access title for limited time)

* Electronic-sell-through (one time fee for unlimited access)

Some business start with one simple model but embrace some hybrid for different content types or to reach a more diverse customer base.

zer00eyz
3 replies
22h0m

* Pay-Per-View (charge viewer every time you watch)

If I pay 99 cents to watch a movie once that's Pay Per View.

Are you making the argument that me sitting through ads for 99 cents worth of value to the streamer is different than a direct transaction? The money per stream is still changing hands, Be it from my hands or an advertisers to the streamer and then the content producer.

Because of modern profiling you could make the argument that the no sign up services are tracking who watches what at a household level (shadow subscriptions). But that does not change the fact that in a pure ad based model If I dont watch no one gets paid...

Regardless of who is paying for the view, myself to streaming service, an andversiser or sponsor, me to a theater... if the product isnt quality no money changes hands. This is in direct contrast to streaming service where the ideal customer pays and does not watch (or watches the minimum)... where consumption reduces profit.

thfuran
2 replies
21h4m

Are you making the argument that me sitting through ads for 99 cents worth of value to the streamer is different than a direct transaction?

Are you seriously trying to argue that it isn't? You're basically arguing that making waffles at home is exactly the same thing as getting pancakes from IHOP because the farmers get paid either way, never mind that the meal isn't actually the same and neither are the parties involved.

zer00eyz
1 replies
20h21m

If you pay $5 or $2 to watch a film and I choose to pick the no money ad version what IS the distinction.

Nothing really if we both enjoy the content. If it sucks however we both have choices. I move on to the next thing and enjoy it. IF you move on, then you're paying again, if you stay your funding shitty content and wasting time.

IshKebab
0 replies
8h25m

I think you're misunderstanding - when they say "pay per view" they mean the consumer pays with real money, not attention. Yes the producer is paid per view. They're the same from that point of view. But that doesn't make them the same.

The most important differences are:

* pay per view doesn't have advertisers to satisfy * people's time is worth much more to advertisers than it is to the average viewer. People are only going to pay cash for things they really specifically want to watch (e.g. Game of Thrones), not channel hopping trash (24 hours in A&E) - but they'll happily watch adverts for the trash.

thfuran
1 replies
22h57m

No, they're a third party fucking everything up. The person watching the stream should pay the streaming service.

zer00eyz
0 replies
21h31m

Right:

Netflix is an all you can eat buffet... It's cheap and the food is half assed at best. Every now and again the come out with something good but your gonna eat a lot of mediocre to get your moneys worth.

I can pay Amazon or a theater to watch ONLY what I want to see. I pick it I pay for it. If it sucks I'm out 3-6 bucks for a rental or 15+ for a theater. Unlike a restaurant, you're never getting a refund or a freebee if the content is bad.

Or I can watch something like tubi. Where I don't have a true profile... I get to watch ads' to watch content. IM trading a bit of my attention for not pre paying for the hope of good content and being able to abandon something if it is bad with a minimum of loss.

Give me a streaming service with a reasonable amount of ad's and give me a micro transaction to skip them when I really want to...

yieldcrv
0 replies
21h8m

good news, now we have paid + ads, just like cable

thinkyfish
7 replies
20h5m

Why do we tolerate this? Shouldn't there be consumer protections that say that if you don't use the service, you shouldn't have to pay for that month? Where do we get our refunds?

lotsofpulp
6 replies
19h28m

People should be responsible enough to be able to tap a few buttons to cancel while they are taking a shit instead of watching TikTok.

autoexec
4 replies
17h11m

Why should we waste any of our time doing that when they could just charge for minutes watched, like the gas/electric company. They're already tracking that data.

codegladiator
1 replies
16h21m

I am sure you are suggesting this in good faith, but I think that pay per minute would actually make things even worse.

autoexec
0 replies
15h44m

That depends on how much you watch. It would at least incentivize them to produce content worth your time. On the other hand, it could lead to a lot of content being stretched out and padded to increase minutes spent...

wepple
0 replies
16h28m

Gas and electric charge for “delivery” as a flat fee, then actual usage on top of that.

If streaming services did similar, you likely wouldn’t be that much better off

Plus, but not unsubscribing, you’re reinforcing their current business model.

lotsofpulp
0 replies
17h9m

Unless you are in the business of making and selling media, I don’t see how you could claim that. The cost structures of utilities as well as demand curves seem like they would so different that the comparison is nonsensical.

Instead of telling other people how to run their business, perhaps people should be putting their money where their mouth is and create the media and try selling it by the minute, and see how successful they are.

EasyMark
0 replies
15h19m

Exactly. I think we've grown spoiled. I've actually gone back to mostly books from the public library for entertainment in the evenings. When I get that desire for visual entertainment, I'll go catch a movie. It's the same laziness I think that results in people not voting and not spending a couple of hours helping out with charities instead of not doom-scrolling for a while.

lotsofpulp
3 replies
19h27m

You know whats wrong, you price gouging me for 15 services that are all awful.

No one is price gouging. You can easily survive without watching ANY media. You can also easily only pay for the exact media that you want at the exact time you want. You can also easily pay for less than 15 services, even just 1, anytime you want.

People seem to like to complain about not being able to afford a luxury, which is more affordable than it has ever been in the history of media.

Edit: to reply to comment below, consider the price for 1 month of the subscription to be the price of the media.

Edit 2: the root cause of all these complaints is excessive copyright terms. Make copyright expire after 10 years, and there will be plenty of streaming competition.

autoexec
1 replies
16h38m

No one is price gouging. You can easily survive without watching ANY media. You can also easily only pay for the exact media that you want at the exact time you want.

It's 2024, we shouldn't be content with only what's needed for "survival" and we shouldn't accept being exploited in order to have access to art and culture. With modern technology and nearly free and instant global distribution art and culture should be increasingly made more accessible to everyone, but instead the paywalls grow ever higher and arbitrary restrictions are put in place.

Sadly we can't always pay for the exact media that want. The amount of lost works is increasing. Streaming services are pulling content and refusing to release it on physical media making it unavailable, and they are censoring content making unedited works unavailable at any price (at least legally). Expect the problem to get worse.

lotsofpulp
0 replies
15h20m

Agree with everything, but the way to do that is lower copyright lengths. A much simpler, cleaner way to solve the issue across all businesses with minimal government intervention and opportunity for corruption.

zer00eyz
0 replies
19h19m

> You can also easily only pay for the exact media that you want at the exact time you want.

Great where is the three body problem available for its fair market value.

Wait it isnt, it's locked behind a monthly subscription.

How about the bear... nope locked up in another service.

I would happily pay fair value for these items. Marking them up like its blockbuster new release shelf circa 2000 or in 15 different pay per view services is ... dumb.

This is why folks stole cable and got cracked boxes. This is why piracy ran rampant in music for so long. Video has yet to catch up and its leading to a new round of piracy...

The DOJ went after apple but we cant reflect on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic....

garbagewoman
0 replies
18h24m

Did you ever care? What changed for you personally?

denkmoon
0 replies
17h39m

I refuse to watch ads and would sooner change my lifestyle to exclude watching TV or youtube than watch ads. It is blatant psychological manipulation. Fortunately there are technological means to avoid ads and get to watch the things I want to watch, so I will continue to do that for now.

I like youtube premium because it is ethically correct to pay for the cost of the content I watch + a reasonable profit for everyone involved, and youtube manages to be a highly centralised location for everything I care about video wise and I spend about 20hrs a week of watch time. I'm not paying for a billion different services Disney, HBO, netflix, blah, blah just to watch maybe a few hrs of content a month on each (at most). The value proposition of all streaming services besides youtube premium is atrocious.

stevekemp
16 replies
1d

My wife has churned through a few video services, netflix, amazon, disney, etc.

I've seen her frustration as series come and go from the catalogs, and the lack of things that we can watch together. So recently I've gone back to DVDs.

Many local shops sell used DVDs for €1 each, and I recently discovered a store in Helsinki which is lined with DVDs basically from floor to ceiling - a little more expensive, but not much. It was fun spending an hour browsing around looking for things I remembered or wanted to see for the first time.

Sure DVDs won't last forever, but I think having TV shows, and films, on disk is going to keep me going for the next 10+ years quite happily. Maybe after that I'll switch to something else, but I struggle to imagine it.

t-sauer
11 replies
1d

I don't necessarily need 4k Blu-ray quality myself but DVD quality is unbearable in my opinion.

sourcecodeplz
6 replies
1d

I never got this. Yes, higher res looks better but I watch movies/shows for the story.

verwalt
2 replies
1d

I mean, I totally get your side, but DVD is 1/24 the resolution of 4K and actual 4K with HDR on an OLED is simply another dimension of immersion for me.

toast0
1 replies
1d

As with all compressed media, resolution takes a backseat to quality of mastering / compression.

I've yet to see a poorly mastered Blu-Ray, and only watched a couple Blu-Ray 4k discs, but online streams at 1080p or 4k are sometimes rather bitstarved so...

With DVDs, some, perhaps many look just fine on a larger screen, but there are some whose mastering is very poor, and those will look really bad on a larger screen. My copy of Forest Gump features closeups where the characters face translates around on their head. But most of the other DVDs I've watched are fine. Yes, Blu-Ray would be better, but not so much that its worth rebuying.

verwalt
0 replies
23h10m

I myself saw "Road House" on Thursday, 4K stream. A lot of dark scenes, perfect for OLED. But also very vulnerable to bitrate related quality problems. And it was fine.

But other examples, like the first season of "Reacher", look like shit in 4K. Many artifacts resulting in skintones that get pushed into green or red. Super weird.

Good encoding comes a long way, and not all services go the extra mile.

theshackleford
0 replies
9h13m

If ALL I wanted was the story, I’ll read a book, not watch with my eyes.

diggan
0 replies
23h51m

Matters a lot depending on what you're viewing it on. If you're watching something bad quality on a big 4K OLED panel, you'll be a lot more distracted compared to watching the same on a small smartphone display.

_ph_
0 replies
9h58m

It is faszinating that people keep saying this. Yes, the story is important. But a huge thing with movies (vs. traditional tv productions) is cinematography. Which is why movie theaters are magical: you watch the movie in high resolution on big screens.

It was a big relevation to me watching classic movies carefully remastered on Blu Ray.

tylerflick
2 replies
1d

Agreed. On modern TVs 480p looks rough.

0xcde4c3db
1 replies
22h57m

I don't mind 480p upscaled with a decent filter. Depending on the content, even 240p can work. What kills watchability for me is 480i. Maybe I just don't understand how things are suppposed to be done on modern setups, but it seems like the combination of deinterlacing plus upscaling is something that used to "just work" ca. 15 years ago and now it's almost impossible to get good results without either hooking up an old DVD player or getting a Ph.D. in ffmpeg.

bombcar
0 replies
16h18m

You have to understand the various TV types. OLED especially can look like crap if you don’t tune it right, because the pixels go on and off instantly, at least if what I heard was correct.

480i was built for the exact opposite, CRTs where pixels fade slowly.

bombcar
0 replies
16h20m

In my experience DVD looks bad when you hit pause, but a decent upscaler and not hitting pause is fine for most things.

If I really like it or watch it more than twice, I’ll get the Blu-ray or 4K Blu-ray.

verwalt
0 replies
1d

Now rip them to a Plex server and have something like your own streaming service.

And by ripping I of course mean "create a private backup".

tombert
0 replies
1d

FWIW, a USB DVD or Blu-Ray drive can be had for a very reasonable price, and MakeMKV is pretty straightforward and works pretty much perfectly on the big three OS's (Windows, Mac, Linux). If you're afraid of the DVDs breaking, it's not necessarily a bad idea to just keeping a digital backup somewhere.

Of course, if you're not careful you end up like me having spent multiple thousands on disks and servers and data tape backups, so be less dumb than me.

circusfly
0 replies
1d

Sure DVDs won't last forever

"No termination date. I didn't know how long we had together... Who does?"

TylerE
0 replies
1d

The thing that’s really stood out for me of how the vast majority of things produced for these services - often at great expense - are just flat out garbage.

ninkendo
9 replies
20h31m

I may be crazy but I just pay to rent movies on my Apple TV. $5 or so for a movie once it’s available to rent, watch it, and I’m done. Essentially every movie is available this way… if its on blu-ray, it’s on the Apple TV. If we know we’re really going to like a movie we sometimes buy it. I know we don’t really “own” the movies because they’re DRM’d, but I feel like Apple will keep them available for quite a long time, essentially “forever”, and if they ever lose the rights or shut the service down I’ll feel a lot more justified in pirating any movies I lost access to.

Decades ago my wife and I would go to blockbuster every Friday night and pick the movie we wanted to watch for the weekend. Now we do the same thing, just by streaming it instead of getting a physical copy and having to take it back. I have no complaints.

lern_too_spel
4 replies
18h37m

You'll lose access as soon as you stop using Apple devices.

ninkendo
1 replies
18h24m

That’s probably the most realistic way I’d lose access, yes. But so far no competing set top box has been able to beat the ATV in the overall experience, so I’ve been continuing to use it by choice.

Every time I go to a friends house and experience how terrible all the competing bargain bin chromecast/shield/fireTV shit is, watching every button press take seconds to result in a screen update, taking ages to type in anything (vs ATV’s dictation or just the built in remote app on iOS) I feel more and more confident in this. The current gen ATV is ridiculously responsive and quick by comparison.

lern_too_spel
0 replies
14h7m

The clunky LRUD interaction model is much slower than simply finding what you like on your phone and casting, which even my TV supports.

easton
1 replies
16h6m

Apple has apps for other platforms that at least allow playback of stuff you’ve bought, even if you can’t buy more. I’ve watched mad men through on a Fire TV on Apple TV, worked fine.

lern_too_spel
0 replies
14h9m

Not on my Android phone or on my Linux computer.

bombcar
1 replies
16h21m

How do you “rent to own” for $5? That’s usually just the “rent for 48 hours” (which is totally fine, I’ll pay to rent digitally and then buy the Blu-ray if I want to see it again: anything watched twice will probably be watched many times.)

ninkendo
0 replies
14h47m

This sentence was the key one:

If we know we’re really going to like a movie we sometimes buy it.

I meant buying instead of renting in this case.

Renting costs $5-ish, the “buy” option is often $20.

peab
0 replies
19h7m

I do the same thing on Youtube. It's incredibly convenient.

jeffbee
0 replies
19h6m

There are tons and tons of films on disc but not on Apple TV or any streaming service. Just off the top of my head: Hal Hartley's "The Unbelievable Truth", along with almost every other Hal Hartley film.

beoberha
9 replies
1d

I think at the end of the day the economics of streaming just aren’t there. Rights holders saw how much Netflix was making off their content and realized they could get way more if they cut out the middle man. But the cost of creating quality content requires selling it for way more than a monthly subscription that people are willing to pay (or else you get ads). There’s a reason movies cost 5 bucks to rent on Amazon or 15 bucks to buy outright.

mstipetic
8 replies
1d

What natural law mandates that DiCaprio has a 50-100 million salary per movie? You think if the amount of money is reduced actors won’t act anymore?

beoberha
4 replies
23h30m

I don’t understand your point. The natural progression of things is how we got to this point. You’d need some massive shock to the system (like a legislative law) to change it at this point.

Ekaros
2 replies
23h19m

Or a crash in market. Where they simply run out of the big money. So the big ticket items like stars simply do not get hired and everything is done with less people and less VFX.

badpun
1 replies
21h37m

Stars are hired because they make the studios money (as a marketing vehicle), not on some money-wasting whim.

mstipetic
0 replies
21h27m

They’d still do it for less money if there’s less total money in the market. It’s not like a bridge where a pound of steel costs X and not much you can do about it

mstipetic
0 replies
21h30m

Argument is that making these things is inherently very expensive, but the actor salaries tell me there’s plenty of left over once production ends. There’s static costs and there’s more fluid ones

cherrycherry98
0 replies
15h14m

I never understood why Hollywood insists on using A list actors to do voice acting for animated features. Most of the time it's not even apparent who's performing and I hardly find it a draw that some big name is listed on the billboard.

Dis we really need Chris Pratt and Jack Black to do the voices for the Super Mario movie? Especially when Chris Pratt is basically using his regular voice the whole time?

asveikau
0 replies
22h47m

If DiCaprio asked for such a price and the companies didn't think they could make it back, he wouldn't get it. He is able to set that price due to demand for DiCaprio specifically. I don't necessarily agree with it either but they do consider these things, and they wouldn't pay him that much otherwise.

andruby
0 replies
22h34m

If a movie with famous actor makes 100M more than without them, why shouldn't they get a significant portion of that?

Is that DiCaprio number salary, or profit/revenue sharing as a producer? Looking at [0] it seems like his highest salary was $30M. He made more on Inception and Titanic, but that was total income, not salary.

Anyway, when thinking about it as cost and value, then it makes sense in our economic model.

wtcactus
5 replies
23h33m

For me the straw that broke the camel’s back was Amazon Prime wasting billions in shows that almost no one wants to see (Rings of Power, anyone?) and now realizing they have to show me ads to stop them from hemorrhaging money.

No, I’ve gone back to pirating everything with Radarr, Sonarr, Jellyfin and the likes. Enough is enough.

metabagel
1 replies
18h26m

I don't get the hate for Rings of Power, and it does seem that a lot of people agree with you. I thought it was brilliant.

IMO...

Return of the King < The Two Towers < The Fellowship of the Ring == Rings of Power

And I never bothered to watch The Hobbit, because I can tell I wouldn't like it. A friend described it as "Hobbits of the Caribbean", because it has that helter skelter style where they somersault from one set piece to the next. Very unhobbitlike.

chiph
0 replies
17h44m

I'm waiting for Disney to have a "Mr Baggins' Wild Barrel Ride" in their parks.

iamacyborg
0 replies
20h47m

On the flip side, that resulted in great shows coming out like Too Old to Die Young, which would have never otherwise come out.

The net result of what you’re asking for is crap reality tv and a million more generic superhero movies.

andsoitis
0 replies
23h7m

Amazon Prime wasting billions in shows that almost no one wants to see

And remember that is money that is coming from their customers. Thats why it is important for streaming companies to use the money to invest in content that people want to watch and produced at a price that makes sense.

If you make a bet that turns out bad, it is better to cancel the series rather than continue to waste subscribers’ money on another season.

Ekaros
0 replies
23h21m

I have for while wondered how have many of these media productions in general come so inefficient. Both in video and gaming. Massive teams, massive expenditures and content is well mediocre or just outright bad or critically flawed...

How come more of stuff is not made more efficiently, with all the computers and such?

mathewsanders
4 replies
21h49m

I live in a smallish apartment building with 50 apartments and in the basement we have a little building community library where people put books/DVDs/Blu-ray disks that they’re done with. Last weekend I grabbed The Goodfellas and The Dark Night and will put them back when I’m done.

I think it would be really cool if there were ways for people to share their physical media because I don’t have the room to maintain a big media library, and also don’t have the energy to rip and store locally.

I also want to add that I’ve changed my streaming behavior- I will subscribe and immediately cancel the subscription so that it expires after a month so that I don’t end up with a bunch of active subscriptions that I’m not actively using.

When I do subscribe I always pay for the more expensive ad-free versions but recently I couldn’t get anything to play on Paramounts streaming service. After some trial and error I found that their “ad-free” service won’t run with my blocker running on my router and I needed to allowlist some ad services for it work. That’s pretty annoying.

robinsonb5
1 replies
19h40m

Where I live most of the charity shops are selling DVDs very cheaply - often 5 for £1. So I frequently buy a handful, watch them, then re-donate any that I don't want to keep.

coffeebeqn
0 replies
17h9m

That is a great way of doing things. I did this when I was younger and found tons of movies I would’ve never run into on a streaming website - especially Hong Kong and Japanese movies from the 90s

kibwen
0 replies
21h17m

Many local libraries offer DVDs. Libraries aren't just for books! My local library has all sorts of weird things, e.g. I can borrow a cake pan for if I don't want to buy a pan just to make a single bundt cake.

dpkirchner
0 replies
21h9m

Paramount's LG app is the worst I've used. It doesn't support the pause feature reliably, ffs! Even browsing TV episodes is a jittery mess (and you must browse because it does a bad job of resuming a series where you left off). As soon as we're done with Star Trek we're gone.

buescher
4 replies
21h39m

Do any of the media server solutions retrieve metadata (that someone has made, if they have) for you? I would happily rip discs while I do other things so I can have the convenience of playing from a server and the ability to pick up where I left off. But I draw the line at entering all the metadata and sample images and stuff for seasons of a TV series.

iamacyborg
1 replies
20h42m

Plex can definitely grab metadata from a number of sources, yes.

sgerenser
0 replies
17h38m

Watch out, though. Plex metadata matching is not always reliable. One day my wife send me an angry text asking why I was adding porn to the Plex library. Turned out it decided to match a random movie (something innocuous like Jurassic Park) to some obscure Chinese adult film, complete with the expected cover art.

deadbunny
0 replies
19h35m

Yes but not quite the same way as you might have experienced with Music CDs. Generally when ripping a CD it does the metadata scraping in the program ripping the CD which then gets stored in the resulting files (MP3, flac etc).

Media servers match based on the directory/filename then store the metadata in their own way (files stored with the video, their own database, etc).

So if you're ripping your discs you'll need to name the files correctly, easy enough for films, a little time consuming for TV show episodes.

BLKNSLVR
0 replies
20h37m

Plex and Jellyfin definitely do. Cover art, cast lists with pictures, genres, as well as remembering where you're up to in a movie or TV series.

bloomingeek
4 replies
1d

A couple of things: Most Blu-ray discs require an internet connection to play on most players and PCs. (don't really know why, but discovered this at work.) In order for this to happen, the DVD and BR makers are going to have to ramp up quite a bit.

Personally, I like the disc options because of no commercials. However, it does take us back to the storage problem and surely they will start putting commercials on the discs.

haunter
0 replies
1d

Most Blu-ray discs require an internet connection

That's only for BD-Live which is very limited for a few releases. Most studios only released a couple of films that way and ditched the whole thing years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray#BD-Live

fomine3
0 replies
23h16m

Discs don't require internet connection, but genuine BD player app on PC requires frequent AACS keys update to play latest discs.

Mindwipe
0 replies
1d

Most Blu-ray discs require an internet connection to play on most players and PCs

No they don't. It's not even in the spec (it is in the BD+ and UHD Blu-Ray specs, but no disc has ever been released that used it for anything other than interactive extras).

GloomyBoots
0 replies
1d

Is this true? I’m not saying it isn’t, but I buy Blu-ray’s pretty regularly and my player is offline but hasn’t had any issues. I mainly buy older films, so maybe I’ve just been lucky in avoiding protection used for new releases.

hintymad
3 replies
1d

Realistically speaking, would it be the return of piracy streaming or VPN + BitTorrent?

maxgashkov
2 replies
18h18m

It never really went away. Last decade is truly a golden age marked by the *arr suite of tools, most of them are better maintained than an average streaming app.

BriggyDwiggs42
1 replies
15h7m

I’ve been pirating everything with years with qb, but never heard of these tools except in this thread. What are the beast ones?

defrost
0 replies
14h53m

As with many tools there are forums (reddit, etc) and wiki's - you might start with an arr-wiki: https://wiki.servarr.com/en/radarr, your mileage may vary (I've been aware of the suite for years and talk with people that use them, but haven't felt the need myself so far).

aosmith
3 replies
23h54m

Physical media was dead on arrival. This was a product of poor infrastructure eg it's faster and cheaper to ship a DVD vs transferring several GB. This no longer holds true. While streaming and ownership are complicated there's no reason to go back to physical media unless you like vinyl.

greedo
2 replies
23h47m

The quality of a blu-ray disc is usually a magnitude better than the best streaming service. And a 4K blu-ray is years ahead of what streaming platforms even dream of.

aosmith
1 replies
22h36m

Sure but storing blu-rays is silly, just rip them to disk. Use a lossless codec if you're picky.

zamadatix
0 replies
21h53m

Agreed on turning them digital. If you care about quality just remux them though, all a lossless codec is going to get you is a 10x larger file with the exact same output.

volumo
2 replies
1d

Here at Volumo (a specialized music store for pro DJs that have I co-founded) we see our future in downloads (DRM-free, of course), not streaming. With a download license, you can do anything you can do with streaming, and much more. And it allows the author to get a decent royalty instead of some "microcents".

It can sometimes take an effort to explain to an outsider why we don't do streaming and don't want to. It's like we are swimming opposite to the flow. But I see streaming as something geared towards casual listeners, while downloads are for professionals and enthusiasts.

zamadatix
1 replies
21h50m

This makes perfect sense for DJs but I'm not sure it makes sense for the streaming market in general. DJs are expecting to use specialized equipment (be that a full set or a laptop and some speakers), software, and to manage their own content library as a thing in itself but most consumers just want to turn the TV on and watch content without dealing with where it goes.

volumo
0 replies
9h2m

It's definitely not about general market. We are first and foremost a professional's tool.

porphyra
2 replies
1d

bluray also just has better image quality and it is a little sad that the image quality of the average movie watcher has decreased slightly from bluray to streaming.

tombert
1 replies
1d

I noticed with Fight Club. It was available for streaming on Hulu in 4k, and I had a blu-ray in 1080p. Comparing the two versions, the blu-ray looked a lot better. The resolution wasn't quite as high, but the colors were much more saturated.

I guess it comes down to bandwidth considerations; a blu-ray has between 25-50gb to play with and there's basically no reason not to fill up the disk. With streaming, there's a direct advantage to reducing bandwidth costs.

zamadatix
0 replies
21h58m

It's also a guaranteed play rate - if it's playing, it's playing at max bitrate.

nsagent
2 replies
23h43m

I also recently ditched the streaming services I was paying for (Netflix, Youtube, and Max). I'd love a recommendation for an external Blu-ray drive for ripping media onto a streaming server.

That said, I recently discovered Tubi, which is completely free, has a crazy amount of shows and movies, and ad blockers seem to work fine. Re-watching Andromeda while I finish up my dissertation. It's been great fun.

doublepg23
0 replies
23h13m

With regular Blurays it's pretty easy to find a good USB3 model on Amazon for MakeMKV. I have the prior model of the Pioneer BDR-XD08 and it works great - the current model uses USB-C even!

On the other hand UHD/4K drives require flashing firmware to get them to rip with MakeMKV and manufacturers have been seemingly patching them. I've not given it an honest try yet.

andsoitis
0 replies
23h5m

How much do you pay per Blu-ray Disc? When you compare to the subscriptions you cancelled, are you getting more value for money?

emrah
1 replies
18h59m

As an alternate pov, i don't care to own any movies or series because i don't care to rewatch any of them, with very few exceptions. I simply can't seem to sit through the same movie a second time when i know what happens and how it ends. The very few exceptions are the ones that make me feel a certain way. I rewatch them to feel that way again

theshackleford
0 replies
9h5m

One of the rare few advantages to ADHD is I can bare to watch things over and over again and eventually even hopefully piece them together into its entirety from the portions I manage to ingest each watch!

atum47
1 replies
21h1m

Values evaporates and corporations decide what's offensive or not. They are removing excellent episodes from great tv shows just because it might be considered offensive.

Here's an example https://youtu.be/HjJQBX2Nw2A?si=awZAc-a9ZYjJv8BY

metabagel
0 replies
18h8m

I remember watching The Duke's of Hazzard in the 80s, which I enjoyed, but I was simultaneously disgusted by the Confederate flag on the General Lee, the Dodge Charger which the Duke boys drove (and named after an infamous American traitor).

On the other hand, All in the Family was offensive, but it served to highlight existing racism.

It can be hard to know where the line should be drawn. But, I do think the line should be drawn somewhere.

andrew-ld
1 replies
20h38m

bue-rays can evaporate even faster, thanks to drm, you often find yourself with players that don't allow old blue-rays or computers with cpu's that no longer implement some protection mechanism

galleywest200
0 replies
20h27m

You can bypass this by ripping the Blu-Ray.

Animats
1 replies
23h50m

Can you get a Blu-Ray player that doesn't have an Internet connection?

mrandish
0 replies
23h19m

My Panasonic BR player has an internet connection but I've never connected it and it works just fine (I updated the firmware once from a USB stick).

I'm pretty sure it works better not connected than if it was connected because prior experience with disc players which wanted to be online was they would boot slower and play discs slower due to doing online DRM updates, content checks and load movie studio web pages containing nothing but promos and ads - all while providing no actual end-user value from being online.

yieldcrv
0 replies
21h8m

wait till they hear about bittorrent

tills13
0 replies
23h13m

No, a return to piracy, unfortunately.

I WANT to pay creators I just don't want to also pay for 10 different services to watch what I want.

sourcecodeplz
0 replies
1d

I just use streaming sites from Asia... ad-block ftw

sangnoir
0 replies
17h38m

I fully expect to read the following copy in the next 18 months from a company backed by a certain Tolkien-loving investor:

"Introducing the Mauhúr-1 indoor drone from Curunír Defense. This quiet and nimble drone revolutionizes clandestine operations and urban warfare by bringing unparalleled combat situational awareness to all war fighters in the base scout configuration[1]. Enemy combatants will have nowhere to hide with the infrared loadout. It can also carry out offensive duty with 4 anti-personnel shaped charges.

1. Base model starts at $500,000"

This tech is cool as hell, it's too bad it a couple of steps towards the inevitable killbots. The other major milestone will be when drones can identity and turn door knobs...

paulmd
0 replies
16h0m

Well, if these fixed sales are cutting into our recurring revenue then they’ve got to go! Vault them all. Every last one.

Surely the problem is that we just haven’t gatekept popular culture well enough? It’s the children who are wrong.

neilv
0 replies
22h43m

I was watching Blu-rays for awhile (mostly borrowing them from a nearby public library branch, and also occasionally buying a boxed set of a good series I wanted to watch), and had a few problems:

1. The Blu-ray software/data design itself is a monstrosity, seemingly designed for hostility towards users, and otherwise indifferent to user experience and reliability. (DVD wasn't too bad by comparison, with the only offenses being DRM and the obnoxious unskippables mainly used for threatening police-state messages at the start of your entertainment.)

2. Even with a better recent Sony Blu-ray player, I frequently had problems playing, which slams the brakes on whatever entertainment you were having, and turns it into a work task or frustration. I guess causes probably mostly from library disc wear, but also a few discs that just wouldn't play due to to what appeared to be software problems.

3. Modern surveillance capitalism behavior by devices. Virtually all companies, and some non-companies, will spy on you and then sell/give the data to sketchy other parties, with how normalized this has gotten. Just finding a modern player console that was airgappable but should work with all/most discs was difficult, and it wasn't a great ergonomic solution.

4. Assembling a better media player with Linux (despite being very familiar with Linux tinkering) looked time-consuming, duct-tape-ish, and legally questionable. Out-of-box solutions I tried seemed piracy-oriented, with disc-playing an afterthought. And search hits would overwhelming be SEO pages full of BS-ing sales pitches to sell sketchy VPN services or occasionally trick people into installing malware.

(Streaming, OTOH, has gotten ridiculous, with the services I've tried recently having mostly disposable content, and sometimes user-hostile UI. I canceled Amazon Prime mainly because Prime Video had gotten blatantly user-hostile in such ways that I think Bezos would've picked up that customer's chair in a meeting, and thrown it at people pitching the changes. But Netflix does some anti-user things too.)

More generally, my current mode as a consumer who doesn't like to be violated is to pick up tablescraps of value while minimizing harm. While wistfully keeping an eye out for the elusive collaborations of people who aren't just expending their energy towards extracting money by making the world worse for everyone else.

meristohm
0 replies
1h45m

I'm happy with DVDs from the public library. I find higher-resolution videos disturbing. Like, it's already fake, just really sharply so. Fuzz it a bit and I have an easier time suspending disbelief.

liampulles
0 replies
16h5m

I've got several bookshelves filled with DVDs I've accumulated through the years: through charity shops, pawn shops, other collectors, estates, etc.

Its always wonderful to discover something amazing going for a steal. And I think DVDs hit a good sweet spot between having good-enough quality (after some upscaling), being cheap, and being quick and "fun" to rip and backup.

Its on the more minimalistic side of hoarding at least.

leokennis
0 replies
21h11m

I maintain an Apple TV+ subscription and that one is definitely worth it. For the rest I’m sailing the high seas, and whatever I manage to catch in my nets I enjoy via a combination of a cheap WebDAV server in the cloud + Infuse on all my devices.

jokethrowaway
0 replies
1d

The problem is that government helping big corporations make piracy less effective (dmca, forcing telco to give up customer names) and the lack of effective piracy doesn't put enough pressure on media company becoming better and offering a decent service

haunter
0 replies
1d

I buy collector's edition blu-rays of films I love but mostly because of the film stock bookmarks, I love those. But I actually never ever watched a film from blu-ray disc (or DVD). I just make a copy with MakeMKV.

hagbard_c
0 replies
1d

Services like Popcorn Time and the many spin-offs will just continue to improve and show what 'streaming' can be like if not for the futile attempts at trying to contain the technology. When commercial streaming took off there seemed to be a sigh of relief, finally the industry has gotten the message than people are willing to pay for 'content' just as long as the user experience is up to par. Well, the message seems to have entered one ear to escape out the other and the high seas have started to look quite inviting again. Arrrrr, matey!

ge96
0 replies
16h44m

What annoys me is when you buy something UHD and they won't stream it in UHD because of DRM.

HBO Max is good, YouTube is not for example

I have so many UHD movies on YouTube can only watch in 480P less I buy an ad ridden tv

demondemidi
0 replies
1d

where I live in Portland Oregon there is a store called Movie Madness that has about a 80 thousand titles on dvd and vhs (you can rent a vhs player with an adapter). The films are sorted by director country and genre. It’s pretty amazing. I’m there every week because it’s a few blocks from my place, it blows away streaming because they have everything I come across online.

dbcooper
0 replies
23h52m

I have a nice Sony OLED TV, I have calibrated it with a hardware colorimeter, and I use MadVR ML upscaling to 4K for all my files. I have a ripped a lot of blu-ray discs (especially Dario Argento). Is there a quality issue, rather than censorship, to go beyond that?

Sadly, I suspect that pirate torrent sites will preserve a lot of this stuff better than the streaming owners of the IP. We are in kind of a golden age for quality transfers of niche films. Even if there are still significant gaps.

dangus
0 replies
1d

The article was good and I was happy to learn about Arrow Video, which reminds me a lot of Limited Run Games.

I will say there is a big downside of physical media that has to be mentioned: the physical space. In my apartment it really makes the whole thing a bit of a non-starter unless I’m willing to discard jackets and put discs into soft binders like my old CD setup that I had in my 1999 Civic.

That issue can be made worse if you’re just not the type of person to watch and rewatch content over and over. That’s where streaming shines: I’m sure to some people, the fact that content rotates in and out isn’t that much of a downside. They just want to watch “whatever is on.”

I am also not a big fan of how much ripping and data hoarding becomes a hobby. In terms of the fact that you’re doing something illegal (breaking cryptographic protection to rip a personal collection), your risk certainly minimal, but it’s technically a non-zero risk. You’re technically supposed to keep those movies on their discs and not decrypt their content in order to back them up.

With that in mind if you’re already getting into ripping content and setting up Plex/Jellyfin for yourself you might as well just go the whole way and start downloading off of Usenet.

Aside from that, I also think that digital purchases and downloads can be a decent way to go. I’ve heard of some providers like Sony removing purchases from libraries but that also seems extremely rare. I have a few random movies purchased on iTunes (now renamed/moved to the Apple TV app but still available) and they’re still there many years later, but it would be nice to get that as more of a guarantee. Apple’s streaming quality is also second excellent and certainly close enough to what you get on Blu-Ray for 99.9% of people.

costanzaDynasty
0 replies
23h0m

I went full streaming in 2007 and I always knew that it would become this. So I made a rule that when Netflix got ads I'd bail on streaming altogether. I've been digital only for video games for a few generations so just picked a video ecosystem and buy content when it's at its cheapest. I'm not playing this game where my collection requires extra time and maintenance. If a company takes a license away then the won't get anymore money from me. There are a few video game companies that will never get money from me ever again. They need my money more than I need to give it to them.

cmarschner
0 replies
22h37m

Just lately there was an article about one of the last 50 surviving video stores in Germany that has recently seen an uptick in customers. They have a huge collection of DVDs. They get a lot more requests for DVDs rather than Blu-rays.

https://www.br.de/nachrichten/bayern/dvd-vs-streaming-eine-d...

bilsbie
0 replies
22h11m

Has anyone looked into recreating the original Netflix with dvd by mail?

Yes, streaming is that bad.

atum47
0 replies
1d

I've been using my raspberry pi 4 as a server for my local network. Just plugged in some external hard drive, some samba configuration and I'm all set. I was thinking about investing in my offline catalog again, since I get less and less content worth watching in streaming platforms.

Update: https://i.ibb.co/52Q5cfr/Screenshot-20240323-152512.png

asveikau
0 replies
1d

I started picking up blurays and DVDs at record stores that also stock them. I got into record collecting during the pandemic as many did and more physical media is not a big leap from there. You can find good movies sometimes for cheaper than on Amazon or itunes.

I was just learning to rip blurays onto my disk server. I did this a lot during the DVD era, but the tooling is now slightly different. (Still ffmpeg or mencoder and the like, but now libaacs. And matroska is much more of a thing.) Sometimes I'm picking up higher res copies of stuff I already collected from that era.

altairprime
0 replies
1d

The cost of being able to watch a reasonable cross-section of media has risen faster than wage growth. All of the diffuse streaming services without sharing agreements have, in their greed to not share the pie, put themselves into competition with grocery stores. Being able to afford two streaming services — or one, based on Netflix’s hostility to account sharing! — is a luxury that fewer can afford each year. They can scrabble all they want for the shrinking pie of available money to spend on entertainment, but unless they stop siloing and start accepting cross-membership across the board, they’ll all go bankrupt once someone realizes that the Blockbuster store model with its $2 rentals and the collapse of commercial real estate is about to become viable again.

UberFly
0 replies
23h53m

"Where will streaming video go next? My guess is that media conglomerates with ties to communications companies will form a team-up. Comcast (NBCUniversal) and AT&T (Warner) may partner with Disney to take the lead on at least one unified streaming service"

The end result of the streaming services era seems like it will look no different than the cable era that people were fleeing.

DrNosferatu
0 replies
18h37m

Physical UHD disc players will only be worth it when there’s a UHD release of “No Country for Old Men”.

ByQuyzzy
0 replies
18h39m

Blu-Rays? No thanks. DVD's all you need. Plus they're dirt cheap used.

BryantD
0 replies
23h20m

The boutique Blu-ray market has become fairly well served in the last five years. I suspect this may partially be because of the pandemic, but it seems to be sustaining.

Most people have heard of Criterion and of course they’re still going strong. But there are easily a dozen labels of various sizes dedicated to physical media these days. Arrow is one. Vinegar Syndrome tends to focus on more exploitative titles plus they act as distributor for many smaller labels. Severin does a lot of horror. The UK’s Radiance Video is carving out an interesting niche in more obscure genre offerings. Kino Lorber has a lot of classics. And so on, and so on.

I don’t know the financials behind this but a lot of the print runs seem to be around 3K copies and many of these labels have sustained for a few years now. Radiance and Vinegar Syndrome both have subscription programs which probably help with predictability. Some people buy these for the movies, some because they’re collectors, and some for both reasons.

https://www.indiewire.com/features/craft/blu-ray-labels-film... is a decent article on all of this.

BriggyDwiggs42
0 replies
15h22m

I love pirating everything. I pay 5 bucks for my vpn. You guys should do that.

Brajeshwar
0 replies
14h7m

A question/poll on the choice ethics, legality, and convenience.

Is it OK/legal to download/torrent a movie/show (media) if you buy/own/paid for a physical copy Blu-ray/vinyl, etc.?