#netflix dvd

[presidentalpaca]

in remembrance of netflix dvd being discontinued later this year, i feel everyone should know that theyve been using the discontinued "penis castle" cover art for the little mermaid under the radar all this time

[benaydogmayan]

- Fight club (1999)

[bearfoottruck]

I forgot to mention this yesterday, but I am PISSED because I found out that Netflix is discontinuing their DVD/Blu-ray delivery service in September. Some of you may make fun of me for being pissed at this, but here's the thing: I watch a lot of 70s-80s movies, and not all of those are available on Netflix's streaming service or Amazon rentals. That, and I also like the physical sensation of being able to put a disc in my Blu-ray player.

[forgotn1]

Yesterday, Netflix announced that they're going to be ending their DVD plans in September. Which I get, but also kinda sucks because I was thinking about restarting that as it's a good way to watch a lot of new & classic stuff that isn't available on streaming.

However, I realize I also have a potential opportunity here. If I get 2 8TB drives to upgrade my NAS storage, I think I'd have enough storage to be able to get the 3 discs out at a time plan and pirate the ever-loving-shit out of their movies until the service ends. I'm very curious as to how many movies I'd be able to rip in the next 5 months before it ends.

[xipe-slayground]

The DVD rental side of Netflix is shutting down. One of the first things I rented was the TV show Profit.

I still remember the entire summer I kept Daybreakers and watched it almost every day. I eventually broke down and bought myself a copy.

[im-the-son-of-rage-and-lov3]

I can’t believe they’re shutting down Netflix DVDs.

[rabidhiss]

This is so stupid. There are tons of movies unavailable to stream that I’d look forward to renting. Why not systematically upload the films first, then say “such and such films are unavailable to rent”?? A gradual separation. Better yet, most people have Blu-ray players, just switch from Netflix DVD to Netflix Blu-ray? Now it’s going to be having to find another dvd by mail service, and it’s probably going to suck.

[kingoftheu]

I've come to the conclusion that the DVD/Blue Ray was the ideal form for home media. Easy scene selection, less time skipping around if you want one scene. Special features and commentary, more content then a film/show just popping up on a streaming service. Also you owned the copy. It could not vanish into nothingness because of a corporate overhaul.

[johnryansullivan]

A Rant About Finding Movies

The past two weeks has made me cranky about streaming movies. So, I wrote about it.

The year is 2003. The place, Austin, Texas. My wife and I have been living here for several months and in that time have joined numerous video stores. We started with Blockbuster and Hollywood video, which are close to our home. Stopping in what I thought think is a record store I find another location, still quite close to home, that has a more diverse selection of movies. Soon I discover I…

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Netflix wants to chop down your family tree

Netflix has unveiled the details of its new anti-password-sharing policy, detailing a suite of complex gymnastics that customers will be expected to undergo if their living arrangements trigger Netflix’s automated enforcement mechanisms:

https://thestreamable.com/news/confirmed-netflix-unveils-first-details-of-new-anti-password-sharing-measures

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/02/nonbinary-families/#red-envelopes

Netflix says that its new policy allows members of the same “household” to share an account. This policy comes with an assumption: that there is a commonly understood, universal meaning of “household,” and that software can determine who is and is not a member of your household.

This is a very old corporate delusion in the world of technology. In the early 2000s, I spent years trying to bring some balance to an effort at DVB, whose digital television standards are used in most of the world (but not the USA) when they rolled out CPCM, a DRM system that was supposed to limit video-sharing to a single household.

Their term of art for this was the “authorized domain”: a software-defined family unit whose borders were privately negotiated by corporate executives from media companies, broadcasters, tech and consumer electronics companies in closed-door sessions all around the world, with no public minutes or proceedings.

https://onezero.medium.com/the-internet-heist-part-iii-8561f6d5a4dc

These guys (they were nearly all guys) were proud of how much “flexibility” they’d built into their definition of “household.” For example, if you owned a houseboat, or a luxury car with seatback displays, or a summer villa in another country, the Authorized Domain would be able to figure out how to get the video onto all those screens.

But what about other kinds of families? I suggested that one of our test cases should be a family based in Manila: where the dad travels to remote provinces to do agricultural labor; the daughter is a nanny in California; and the son is doing construction work in the UAE. This suggestion was roundly rejected as an “edge case.”

Of course, this isn’t an edge case. There are orders of magnitude more people whose family looks like this than there are people whose family owns a villa in another country. Owning a houseboat or a luxury car makes you an outlier. Having an itinerant agricultural breadwinner in your family does not.

But everyone who is in the room when a cartel draws up a standard definition of what constitutes a household is almost certainly drawn from a pool that is more likely to have a summer villa than a child doing domestic work or construction labor half a world away. These weirdos, so dissimilar from the global majority, get to define the boxes that computers will shove the rest of the world into. If your family doesn’t look like their family, that’s tough: “Computer says no.”

One day at a CPCM meeting, we got to talking about the problem of “content laundering” and how the way to prevent it would be to put limits on how often someone could leave a household and join another one. No one, they argued, would ever have to change households every week.

I put my hand up and said, “What about a child whose divorced parents share custody of her? She’s absolutely going to change households every week.” They thought about it for a moment, then the rep from a giant IT company that had recently been convicted of criminal antitrust violations said, “Oh, we can solve that: we’ll give her a toll-free number to call when she gets locked out of her account.”

That was the solution they went with. If you are a child coping with the dissolution of your parents’ marriage, you will have the obligation to call up a media company every month — or more often — and explain that Mummy and Daddy don’t love each other any more, but can I please have my TV back?

I never forgot that day. I even wrote a science fiction story about it called (what else?) “Authorized Domain”:

https://craphound.com/news/2011/10/31/authorised-domain/

I think everyone understood that this was an absurd “solution,” but they had already decided that they were going to complete the seemingly straightforward business of defining a category like “household” using software, and once that train left the station, nothing was going to stop it.

This is a recurring form of techno-hubris: the idea that baseline concepts like “family” have crisp definitions and that any exceptions are outliers that would never swallow the rule. It’s such a common misstep that there’s a whole enre* called “Falsehoods Programmers Believe About ______”:

https://github.com/kdeldycke/awesome-falsehood

In that list: names, time, currency, birthdays, timezones, email addresses, national borders, nations, biometrics, gender, language, alphabets, phone numbers, addresses, systems of measurement, and, of course, families. These categories are touchstones in our everyday life, and we think we know what they mean — but then we try to define them, and the list of exceptions spirals out into a hairy, fractal infinity.

Historically, these fuzzy categorical edges didn’t matter so much, because they were usually interpreted by humans using common sense. My grandfather was born “Avrom Doctorovitch” (or at least, that’s one way to transliterate his name, which was spelled in a different alphabet, but which was also transliterating his first name from yet another alphabet). When he came to Canada as a refugee, his surname was anglicized to “Doctorow.” Other cousins are “Doctorov,” “Doctoroff,” and “Doktorovitch.”

Naturally, his first name could have been “Abraham” or “Abe,” but his first employer (a fellow Eastern European emigre) decided that was too ethnic and in sincere effort to help him fit in, he called my grandfather “Bill.” When my grandfather attained citizenship, his papers read “Abraham William Doctorow.” He went by “Abe,” “Billy,” “Bill,” “William,” “Abraham” and “Avrom.”

Practically, it didn’t matter that variations on all of these appeared on various forms of ID, contracts, and paperwork. His reparations check from the German government had a different variation from the name on the papers he used to open his bank account, but the bank still let him deposit it.

All of my relatives from his generation have more than one name. Another grandfather of mine was born “Aleksander,” and called “Sasha” by friends, but had his name changed to “Seymour” when he got to Canada. His ID was also a mismatched grab-bag of variations on that theme.

None of this mattered to him, either. Airlines would sell him tickets and border guards would stamp his passport and rental agencies would let him drive away in cars despite the minor variations on all his ID.

But after 9/11, all that changed, for everyone who had blithely trundled along with semi-matching names across their official papers and database entries. Suddenly, it was “computer says no” everywhere you turned, unless everything matched perfectly. There was a global rush for legal name-changes after 9/11 — not because people changed their names, but because people needed to perform the bureaucratic ritual necessary to have the name they’d used all along be recognized in these new, brittle, ambiguity-incinerating machines.

For important categories, ambiguity is a feature, not a bug. The fact that you can write anything on an envelope (including a direction to deliver the letter to the granny flat over the garage, not the front door) means that we don’t have to define “address” — we can leave it usefully hairy around the edges.

Once the database schema is formalized, then “address” gets defined too — the number of lines it can have, the number of characters each line can have, the kinds of characters and even words (woe betide anyone who lives in Scunthorpe).

If you have a “real” address, a “real” name, a “real” date of birth, all of this might seem distant to you. These “edge” cases — seasonal agricultural workers, refugees with randomly assigned “English” names — are very far from your experience.

That’s true — for now (but not forever). The “Shitty Technology Adoption Curve” describes the process by which abusive technologies work their way up the privilege gradient. Every bad technological idea is first rolled out on poor people, refugees, prisoners, kids, mental patients and other people who can’t push back.

Their bodies are used to sand the rough edges and sharp corners off the technology, to normalize it so that it can climb up through the social ranks, imposed on people with more and more power and influence. 20 years ago, if you ate your dinner under an always-on #CCTV, it was because you were in a supermax prison. Today, it’s because you bought a premium home surveillance system from Google, Amazon or Apple.

https://pluralistic.net/2021/07/29/impunity-corrodes/#arise-ye-prisoners

The Netflix anti-sharing tools are designed for rich people. If you travel for business and stay in the kind of hotel where the TV has its own Netflix client that you can plug your username and password into, Netflix will give you a seven-day temporary code to use.

But for the most hardcore road-warriors, Netflix has thin gruel. Unless you connect to your home wifi network every 31 days and stream a show, Netflix will lock out your devices. Once blocked, you have to “contact Netflix” (laughs in Big Tech customer service).

Why is Netflix putting the screws to its customers? It’s part of the enshittification cycle, where platform companies first allocate surpluses to their customers, luring them in and using them as bait for business customers. Once they turn up, the companies reallocate surpluses to businesses, lavishing them with low commissions and lots of revenue opportunities. And once they’re locked in, the company starts to claw back the surpluses for itself.

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys

Remember when Netflix was in the business of mailing red envelopes full of DVDs around the country? That was allocating surpluses to users. The movie companies hated this, viewed it as theft — a proposition that was at least as valid as Netflix’s complaints about password sharing, but every pirate wants to be an admiral, and when Netflix did it to the studios, that was “progress,” but when you do it to Netflix, that’s theft.

Then, once Netflix had users locked in and migrated to the web (and later, apps), it shifted surpluses to studios, paying fat licensing fees to stream their movies and connect them to a huge audience.

Finally, once the studios were locked in, Netflix started to harvest the surplus for its shareholders: raising prices, lowering streaming rates, knocking off other studios’ best performing shows with in-house clones, etc. Users’ surpluses are also on the menu: the password “sharing” that let you define a household according to your family’s own idiosyncratic contours is unilaterally abolished in a quest to punish feckless Gen Z kids for buying avocado toast instead of their own Netflix subscriptions.

Netflix was able to ignore the studios’ outraged howls when it built a business by nonconsenually distributing their products in red envelopes. But now that Netflix has come for your family, don’t even think about giving Netfix some of what it gave to the MPAA.

As a technical matter, it’s not really that hard to modify Netflix’s app so that every stream you pull seems to come from your house, no matter where you are. But doing so would require reverse-engineering Netflix’s app, and that would violate Section 1201 of the DMCA, the CFAA, and eleventy-seven other horrible laws. Netflix’s lawyers would nuke you until the rubble bounced.

When Netflix was getting started, it could freely interoperate with the DVDs that the studios had put on the market. It could repurpose those DVDs in ways that the studios strenuously objected to. In other words, Netfix used adversarial interoperability (AKA Competitive Compatibility or ComCom) to launch its business:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interoperability

Today, Netflix is on the vanguard of the war to abolish adversarial interop. They helped lead the charge to pervert W3C web-standards, creating a DRM video standard called EME that made it a crime to build a full-featured browser without getting permission from media companies and restricting its functionality to their specifications:

https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/the-end-of-indie-web-browsers/

When they used adversarial interoperability to build a multi-billion-dollar global company using the movie studios’ products in ways the studios hated, that was progress. When you define “family” in ways that makes Netflix less money, that’s felony contempt of business model.

[Image ID: A Victorian family tree template populated by tintypes of old-timey people. In the foreground stands a menacing, chainsaw-wielding figure, his face obscured by a hoodie. The blade of the chainsaw is poised to chop down the family tree. A Netflix 'N' logo has been superimposed over the man's face.]

[melefim]

Hey @netflix honestly how do you expect people to watch your shows and invest their time and money into you when EVERY SINGLE TIME you have something people love you just throw it away?

What’s the fucking point if a show with a 92/90 on Rotten Tomatoes and that’s made MULTIPLE Best Of lists isn’t even given a chance to grow?

Let’s look at some comparisons of a few other recent Netflix shows that got a second (or more) season, shall we? How are they stacking up on RT?

Stranger Things: 91/90

The Sandman: 88/80

Bridgerton: 84/74

Shadow & Bone: 83/84

Wednesday: 73/85

Locke & Key: 68/56

Avatar: The Last Airbender: 61/72

Fate: The Winx Saga: 45/82

So good reviews and critical acclaim won’t do it. Multiple weeks on your top 10 won’t do it, making the Nielsen top 10 won’t do it. Engagement from a devoted fan base won’t do it. I’m curious, what’s the metric here? Just because it wasn’t an instant runaway sensation, it’s not worth it to you? Is that what it takes?

Here’s a hot tip: if you want people to continue to pay for a subscription to your service, maybe give stuff a chance to grow. Maybe invest a bit of time into actually advertising a show before it premiers.

One of the most popular tweets about Dead Boy Detectives when it came out was someone saying they didn’t want to watch it because they didn’t trust you not to cancel it and break their hearts. There were THOUSANDS of people agreeing with it. Thousands of viewers, thousands of accounts you missed out on because people didn’t trust you. So how is this move going to help that?

How are you planning to get people to stick around when one of the best shows on your platform isn’t given a chance? How are you expecting them to ever give your shows a chance when you’re proving again and again that you can’t be trusted to follow through?

Dead Boy Detectives is a great show. It’s a quality product. The cinematography, the lighting, the sound design, the sets, the props, the COSTUMES. The scripts are good, the acting is great, the effects are believable. the cast and crew poured their hearts into it and you can see it on the screen. The characters are relatable and real. This is a show that is rewatchable. A show that is fun. A show that is entertaining. That has a good message, that deals with heavy topics with care and sensitivity. That’s got comedy and drama and horror and mystery. That’s got representation and diversity. That means something to people. Means A LOT to people. But that’s not important to you.

Dead Boy Detectives was THE reason I renewed my account. I watched it multiple times. (See how many magnifying glasses there are after my name up there? Fun fact: I added one every time I watched the full season.) I was even making a list of other shows and movies I was planning to check out. But that’s not happening any more, because I’m canceling my account as soon as this post is up. And I know I’m not the only one.

[marshmallowgoop]

no thoughts just Heiji Hattori (HD)

[saijspellhart]

Guys, buy physical media it’s dying. They are taking it from us.

My local Meijer (a regional variant of Walmart) has stopped selling physical media. Like outright. It’s now gift cards for streaming services, and online shit. They are phasing out physical video games too. They are phasing out laptops, DVDs players, blueray players.

I know, I know, streaming services are so easy and convenient. But like, you don’t own it. You are at the mercy of the services. Once they kill physical media completely they can hike up the prices as steep as they like, $30, $40, $50 and more a month. Because it will be the ONLY way (short of pirating) that you can watch shows and movies. They will make it cable and satellite premium levels of expensive. And you won’t be able to stop them. They’ll hold your favorite shows hostage behind paywalls and micro transactions. They’ll vault up shows and movies and make them unavailable for long periods of time. You’ll have to have 7 different streaming services all costing $40 bucks a pop to watch the things you want.

You’ll have access to NOTHING without paying a premium. And remember, you already pay money to have an internet connection. Are streaming services really as affordable as you think? Internet price + the price of each service? That adds up. And they keep raising the price, and will keep raising the prices, because they know you’ll keep paying.

Having physical media means you get to watch your favorite shows and movies anytime. With or without internet connection. Broke as fuck? You can still watch it, because it’s yours. Did they lock up your favorite show or movie to make it more exclusive? You can still watch it with physical media because you own it. Want to let your friend borrow it? You can lend it to them, or burn them a copy. No need to fret about stupid services cracking down on password sharing. Want to watch the movie or show with online friends? You can stream DVDs over Discord so friends can watch with you.

(Am currently streaming Teen Titans the original animated series with my best friend over Discord. It’s mine, so neither of us pay anything to watch it together.)

Companies are writing off physical media as unprofitable. They are culling it. Taking it out of stores, making it less accessible.

People around me talk about all these movies and tv series they’d love to watch, but have to buy another streaming service to access it. And I offer to let them borrow the DVDs or Blueray, and they straight up tell me they don’t own DVDs or dvd players. Why?! WHY!? They subscribe to 4 or 5 different service instead forking out $50+ a month. But they put themselves at the mercy of these services, at the mercy of internet connectivity and access. They can’t even borrow a movie or show from me, because they are so dependent on internet and streaming.

Did you know there are literally ways to save your movies digitally and take them on the go? Streaming should be a neat little thing that’s convenient, it has its perks and uses, but it should NOT the only way to watch media.

Save physical media.

Buy a dvd player.

Buy movies.

Buy shows.

Own your media.

Stop renting it. Streaming is just glorified rental.

Stop renting it.

Because soon that’s all you’ll ever be able to do.

[professionalfobtrash]

Fortunately for him there's a whole subgroup of tumblrinas in the house md fandom that start barking loudly anytime he leaves even one (1) additional button on his shirt open (affectionate)

[civetside]

Oh my goood You guys wanna come over to my house and watch cartoons on DVD so bad it makes you look stupid