I'm personally seeing an explosion of people embracing piracy. People that were previously vehemently opposed to it (like my in-laws) are now pirating large amounts of content. The rise in streaming service costs while simultaneously reducing catalog content is pushing a lot of these folks over. What we have now is almost worse than cable TV, so it makes sense.
Most of my life I was strongly opposed to piracy for moral reasons. Now I... intentionally try to own (download/pirate) content I consume and I also do this for ideological reasons. So yeah, this effect is real.
On top of that, as long as big companies don't take the protection of my personal information seriously, why should I worry about violations of copyright laws? It works both ways.
Almost worse? Cable doesn't have unskippable commercials, we've had the DVR since 1999. In 1999 it was still possible for a new tech product to be user friendly.
Streaming was designed from the ground up to be user hostile with surveillance and reduced control over the video stream. People hold onto old specious ideas and don't update them.
If you're under the notion that your digital cable box wasn't surveilling you, then you just weren't paying attention. Of course that box knew what channel you were watching and what time meaning they knew what you watched since your name and address and phone number and email address were all linked to that box.
Best investment I made this year was an old refurbished PC to use as a home server. Having my personal streaming services is actually pretty amazing.
There was a point in time, around 10-12 years ago, that I thought that piracy would eventually die, as the streaming services were pretty cheap and offered good quality/quantity. How wrong I was.
But it is refreshing to be sailing the high seas after such a long time. Brings back memories. Contrary to paid services, piracy actually got much better and convenient. Better quality audio/video, etc
Sideloading was basically the main reason people picked Fire Sticks over more locked-down options. Without it, it just becomes another closed streaming box, and a lot of the “power user” appeal disappears.
I can count among my friends and family some 50 Fire Sticks, and we're all happy with them, as they do what they say on the box.
We Tech folks (and some more than others) live in a bubble, but the other 99% of the users couldn't care less about this.
... and one that has quite the merit. A few hours worth of watching Scammer Payback will do that to anyone.
The thing is, wide parts of the population are extremely IT illiterate. The governments didn't act to protect them (say, by threatening the host countries of the scammers aka India in the case of the US or Turkey/Bulgaria/Romania in the case of Europe), so private companies had no other choice.
And hell even the best of us like Brian Krebs can fall victim to attacks [1].
I'm really out of ideas how we can reconcile the needs of the 99% vs the needs of the 1% without making life hell for the other group.
There's lots of comments here where people promote trading the freedom of installing arbitrary code for the security of the app store keeping them safe.
You will have to be way more specific. Every time I see a post bringing up the topic of sideloading (like this one), it is a complaint that either another product is locked down or Google itself is trying to lock everything down.
I think it's grossly unethical and negligent that our DOJ/FTC allowed them to acquire film studios, subsidize them with outside business unit profit, put ads across their own properties, then give it all away for "free". This destroys actual healthy industries.
They bought Lord of the Rings for egregious sums, emblazoned ads on all of their delivery vans, printed it on their packaging, and put it front and center on all their apps. Any other studio would be out a billion dollars on that. Then Amazon just gives it away.
How do you compete with that?
Meanwhile Warner Bros has to fight an uphill battle to reach the same eyeballs, spend a fortune on production and advertising, and then ask customers for their money. Why would they go to theaters when they can get it for free on Prime later? Or just watch one of the shows already on Prime?
And of course now Amazon has offshored the jobs, further put consolidation pressure on the industry, gobbled up more studios...
Every single one of these giants needs to be broken up. They are a cancer in search of more growth, and unfortunately in order to find that growth they are killing the host (healthy American industries and jobs).
I mean by that they should burn most the VC funding to the ground, because for vast majority of companies that try to take market space where there is some competition around, that's exactly the play, run long enough at loss that you get enough market share, make the walled garden if possible, then gouge prices up once the VCs come asking for payoff
>I think it's grossly unethical and negligent that our DOJ/FTC allowed them to acquire film studios, subsidize them with outside business unit profit, put ads across their own properties, then give it all away for "free". This destroys actual healthy industries.
Film & entertainment is not the only area in which Amazon engages in this type of behavior.
They need to be broken up, and Bezos needs to pay his taxes.
GPL-3 dependencies are typically banned inside embedded device firmware. If a 3rd-party app uses those presumably it will be problem for the developer of the app, not Amazon.
GPLv3 doesn't entitle you to signing keys or the ability to remove them: you can release, compile, and inspect the source which will ostensibly still be provided - but not practically use it on the hardware you purchased.
> “Installation Information” for a User Product means any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.
> If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
Meh. These sorts of restrictions are a problem with cell phones because you have two choices.
For this application, you can just get a raspberry pi for about the same price. And they’re not even taking it away from ones that I already had it. They just aren’t selling the ability anymore so you know it when you bought it.
Whoever ends up using these devices second hand will be in for a rude awakening, which is bad for that person (even if it means that it just ends up going to ewaste and they get nothing) and bad for the environment. It's also bad for anyone who orders one new and isn't aware of the changes, although I agree that that is less bad than with phones due to the fact that a pi largely mitigates it.
I'm personally seeing an explosion of people embracing piracy. People that were previously vehemently opposed to it (like my in-laws) are now pirating large amounts of content. The rise in streaming service costs while simultaneously reducing catalog content is pushing a lot of these folks over. What we have now is almost worse than cable TV, so it makes sense.
When Amazon introduced adverts, I Cancelled. Went from near $1k a year on Amazon as a whole to nearly zero.
I still pay for Netflix, Disney, Apple, Spotify and bbc. I’m happy to pay for my entertainment, I refuse adverts.
When Clarkson farm came back I looked at re subscribing to Amazon, there were three choices, all with adverts.
I’m sure it makes money, but for me you get greedy and you lose money.
>I still pay for Netflix, Disney, Apple, Spotify and bbc
I have to admit that's a lot of subscriptions. Most people here are relatively rich, but no wonder people are priced out.
Most of my life I was strongly opposed to piracy for moral reasons. Now I... intentionally try to own (download/pirate) content I consume and I also do this for ideological reasons. So yeah, this effect is real.
On top of that, as long as big companies don't take the protection of my personal information seriously, why should I worry about violations of copyright laws? It works both ways.
Almost worse? Cable doesn't have unskippable commercials, we've had the DVR since 1999. In 1999 it was still possible for a new tech product to be user friendly.
Streaming was designed from the ground up to be user hostile with surveillance and reduced control over the video stream. People hold onto old specious ideas and don't update them.
If you're under the notion that your digital cable box wasn't surveilling you, then you just weren't paying attention. Of course that box knew what channel you were watching and what time meaning they knew what you watched since your name and address and phone number and email address were all linked to that box.
Which is why my parents record they favourite shows on cable, and watch them later, fast forwarding over ads.
Best investment I made this year was an old refurbished PC to use as a home server. Having my personal streaming services is actually pretty amazing.
There was a point in time, around 10-12 years ago, that I thought that piracy would eventually die, as the streaming services were pretty cheap and offered good quality/quantity. How wrong I was.
But it is refreshing to be sailing the high seas after such a long time. Brings back memories. Contrary to paid services, piracy actually got much better and convenient. Better quality audio/video, etc
That’s because Walmart is also selling Android piracy site streaming boxes. So boomers/technologically out of the loop think it’s legitimate.
https://www.walmart.com/ip/S6-Elite-Ultra-2024-SuperBox-TV-2...
"Sideloading" is just a term to make installing software on your own hardware sound scary.
Sideloading was basically the main reason people picked Fire Sticks over more locked-down options. Without it, it just becomes another closed streaming box, and a lot of the “power user” appeal disappears.
"Basically the main reason"?
I can count among my friends and family some 50 Fire Sticks, and we're all happy with them, as they do what they say on the box. We Tech folks (and some more than others) live in a bubble, but the other 99% of the users couldn't care less about this.
So does the fire stick have any advantages over Walmart's Onn streaming sticks?
What's the best Fire Stick model that doesn't have this issue?
I don’t know how, but somehow this is Apple’s fault
Boy, I sure am glad that HN contributed to the vilification of sideloading.
Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find a way to blame the EU for this too.
How so?
We can't let people install the applications they choose because my grandma. Is a pretty prevailing opinion
... and one that has quite the merit. A few hours worth of watching Scammer Payback will do that to anyone.
The thing is, wide parts of the population are extremely IT illiterate. The governments didn't act to protect them (say, by threatening the host countries of the scammers aka India in the case of the US or Turkey/Bulgaria/Romania in the case of Europe), so private companies had no other choice.
And hell even the best of us like Brian Krebs can fall victim to attacks [1].
I'm really out of ideas how we can reconcile the needs of the 99% vs the needs of the 1% without making life hell for the other group.
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/security-journalist-brian-kr...
There's lots of comments here where people promote trading the freedom of installing arbitrary code for the security of the app store keeping them safe.
Search iPhone or app store on this website. Read the comments.
You will have to be way more specific. Every time I see a post bringing up the topic of sideloading (like this one), it is a complaint that either another product is locked down or Google itself is trying to lock everything down.
People like their iPhones but I'd describe the prevailing sentiment towards app stores as "critical".
I’d happily wager any amount of money I have access to that the people actually doing the implementation of these things are among the userbase.
Someone has to write the code and I doubt many people would quit their jobs over it.
By that logic just about anything the tech industry does could be attributed to HN
A lot of imbeciles white knighting for Apple when EU regulations threatened to break their walled garden.
So goodbye FireTV sticks.
Getting worse on every metric isn’t a system seller
Everything is a platform play.
I think it's grossly unethical and negligent that our DOJ/FTC allowed them to acquire film studios, subsidize them with outside business unit profit, put ads across their own properties, then give it all away for "free". This destroys actual healthy industries.
They bought Lord of the Rings for egregious sums, emblazoned ads on all of their delivery vans, printed it on their packaging, and put it front and center on all their apps. Any other studio would be out a billion dollars on that. Then Amazon just gives it away.
How do you compete with that?
Meanwhile Warner Bros has to fight an uphill battle to reach the same eyeballs, spend a fortune on production and advertising, and then ask customers for their money. Why would they go to theaters when they can get it for free on Prime later? Or just watch one of the shows already on Prime?
And of course now Amazon has offshored the jobs, further put consolidation pressure on the industry, gobbled up more studios...
Every single one of these giants needs to be broken up. They are a cancer in search of more growth, and unfortunately in order to find that growth they are killing the host (healthy American industries and jobs).
I mean by that they should burn most the VC funding to the ground, because for vast majority of companies that try to take market space where there is some competition around, that's exactly the play, run long enough at loss that you get enough market share, make the walled garden if possible, then gouge prices up once the VCs come asking for payoff
>I think it's grossly unethical and negligent that our DOJ/FTC allowed them to acquire film studios, subsidize them with outside business unit profit, put ads across their own properties, then give it all away for "free". This destroys actual healthy industries.
Film & entertainment is not the only area in which Amazon engages in this type of behavior.
They need to be broken up, and Bezos needs to pay his taxes.
How does this work when apps use GPLv3? Isn't the user supposed to be given a way to replace/update the code themselves?
GPL-3 dependencies are typically banned inside embedded device firmware. If a 3rd-party app uses those presumably it will be problem for the developer of the app, not Amazon.
Right... how can the app developer enforce their license if the user cannot replace the program themselves?
> How does this work when apps use GPLv3?
Android Open Source Project is mostly Apache licensed, it runs on the Linux kernel which is GPLv2.
This situation with the firesticks is essentially the same play that TiVo pulled way back when, and the GPLv3 is supposed to counter.
GPLv3 doesn't entitle you to signing keys or the ability to remove them: you can release, compile, and inspect the source which will ostensibly still be provided - but not practically use it on the hardware you purchased.
It very much does.
> “Installation Information” for a User Product means any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because modification has been made.
> If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM).
Okay, I'll bite. What do you think is the difference between GPLv2 and 3?
v3 was just the one stipulated by your grandparent comment's question that your parent answered.
But Amazon has infinite money, so licences are meaningless.
On the plus side, they'll probably vibe code a bunch of security vulnerability and the highseas will be filled with a new generation of pirates!
Meh. These sorts of restrictions are a problem with cell phones because you have two choices.
For this application, you can just get a raspberry pi for about the same price. And they’re not even taking it away from ones that I already had it. They just aren’t selling the ability anymore so you know it when you bought it.
Whoever ends up using these devices second hand will be in for a rude awakening, which is bad for that person (even if it means that it just ends up going to ewaste and they get nothing) and bad for the environment. It's also bad for anyone who orders one new and isn't aware of the changes, although I agree that that is less bad than with phones due to the fact that a pi largely mitigates it.
Yeah, but then you are not the target audience, watching Amazon Prime and Netflix on the Raspberry Pi.
Is this supposed to stop Android folks?
Vega OS isn't Android, Amazon has moved away from it.
It is a Linux distro, and apps must be written in React Native (C++ libraries supported), or Web.
Ah, appreciate the clarification.
I am guessing there's better devices out there now than a Fire Stick
It’s to avoid making it easy for people to buy them put on plex or jellyfin clients and paying for access to pirate services.