this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023

10 points (91.7% liked)

Technology

59605 readers

3175 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Amazon Prime Video is able to remove a video from your library after purchase. (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by szlwzl@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

59 comments fedilink hide all child comments

We are contacting you regarding a past Prime Video purchase(s). The below content is no longer playable on Prime Video.

In an effort to compensate you for the inconvenience, we have applied a £5.99 Amazon Gift Card to your account. The Gift Card amount is equal to the amount you paid for the Prime Video purchase(s). To apologize for the inconvenience, we've also added an Amazon Gift Certificate of £5 to your account. Your Gift Card balance will be automatically applied to your next eligible order. You can view your balance and usage history in Your Account here:

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Companies issuing refunds in the form of gift cards is just straight-up insulting

[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And it may be illegal in some states to not offer the customer an actual refund.

[–] Carter@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

£5.99 refund. Quite clearly not in the US.

[–] dansity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sssh.. Everyone lives in default country

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Default country is best country.

[–] dalekcaan@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Take me down to %DEFAULT_CITY where the grass is %DEFAULT_COLOR and the girls are %DESCRIPTIVE_ADJECTIVE

[–] odium@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I know they probably actually meant the States of the US, but...

They did say states with a lowercase s. 'States' = regions within a country, 'states' = can mean countries. Technically they aren't defaulting to the US.

[–] snail_hatan@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

[–] looeee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

£ is from a country that does not have states

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

But it IS a state. Sorry if you're not a native English speaker but just because your vocabulary is lacking doesn't mean they are wrong.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Remember, streaming only has a business model as long as it has a better user experience than piracy. That's why iTunes took off in the era of Napster. When a streaming service's user experience drops below that of digging up pirate treasure off a shitty ad-ridden torrent site, that service is not long for the world.

[–] Weslee@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I cancelled Netflix and prime and went back to piracy a few months ago, it's been a nice blast from the past

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In addition to piracy, I've also been checking out DVDs from my local library. It's kinda fun.

Surprised myself because I half expected I'd miss the convenience of Netflix, but I haven't missed it even a little.

"Was I a good streaming platform?"

"No."

[–] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The benefit of the library DVD is it takes away the "What will we watch tonight?" conversation. You're going to watch the DVD.

[–] AliasWyvernspur@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It just switches the question to the library: "What will we borrow tonight?"

Source: experience from my Blockbuster days.

[–] RanchOnPancakes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you can't save it, its not yours. Sail the seas.

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or buy it on physical media. More and more studios are pulling their disks and it is getting harder to find. If you have a disk, it can never be recalled.

[–] RoquetteQueen@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ever since Disney announced they are also going to ban account sharing, I've been going to thrift stores and grabbing any DVDs my children like or might like. I've gotten quite a few classics so far for less than the cost of one month of Disney+. I almost bought a VCR because the VHS collection at thrift stores here is huge and they are so cheap, but rewinding sucks.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] hiramfromthechi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's easy to scoff at this whole "You will own nothing, and you will be happy" phrase, but it's really gone too far already.

[–] Gerbler@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I'm really tired of hearing "you don't own it you own a license to it" like it's some revelation for people complaining. We're aware that the system has been constructed to benefit media companies at the expense of consumers.

To be honest; I never really bought the argument anyway. From a legal standpoint I don't give half a shit. From a layman's standpoint it's bullshit. Nowhere do they use terms like "rent" or "lease". They explicitly use terms like "buy" and it's not until the fine print that the term license even comes up.

They know they're pissing on you and telling you it's raining and the goobers doing their legwork by repeating the sentence like they just came up with it annoy me to no end.

[–] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Digital goods are just not physical goods, you don't really own them - which also mean you can't really steal them.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You don’t own the video file. You own access to their video file, which they also don’t own, they only own the right to distribute it. If their distribution contract ends and doesn’t gets renewed, then they can’t let you access the file. At least they refunded you. This system is one of the issues with the ongoing writers and actors strikes. Amazon can decide to stop making a video available, which cuts all dividends revenues to actors and writers. So having a video available for you to watch costs money to Amazon (or Netflix or Max…) but not enough content makes users unsubscribe, so they ride that thin line for maximized revenue. This means that older movies that aren’t blockbusters get dropped in favor of new content. Now new content doesn’t means good content, remember, it needs to be as cheap as possible. Aaand this is why steaming companies are spiraling down and everything is going to shit. Filmmaking is an art form turned into an industry. But art isn’t about maximized profit, it’s about art first. But you can’t make that art without millions of dollars and that requires the art to take a step back to maximize profit, but not too far back. It’s a really big issue in the film and entertainment industry.

— I’m an IATSE local 600 camera operator.

[–] ilovesatan@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Being a pirate is alright to be

[–] MaxVoltage@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

steam scares me

if one day they go mental i will lose so many games.

i have a pc with a large ass harddisk just to download and save all single player games and never update them.

always play offline.

but they already changed it so you cant play offline really idk maybe it was just that game

[–] chic_luke@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think the fear mongering on Steam is excessive. The games stay offline on your disk, and most of them don't have a DRM. Gabe Newell has also said that, in case Steam ever shutters, an exit plan will be provided. As for the Steam native DRM, there are already open source implementations that can be used to bypass it and Valve hasn't done anything against it in years - so the only problematic DRMs are Denuvo and similar, which Steam does not control.

GOG used to be a valid alternative, but it isn't anymore. With CDPR themselves publishing games with DRM on GOG, on top of starting to be lenient on DRMs, they are literally having something similar to a DRM that is required for some games, a GOG Galaxy API that is completely closed source. And it doesn't support Linux, the FOSS operating system.

The fact that after years GOG still doesn't seem to care about Linux, CDPR releases their games for Windows only (and more often than not with DRM), and Cyberpunk 2077 only runs on Linux thanks to Valve's efforts is also worrying from a game conservation and ownership standpoint: Windows is a Proprietary operating system completely controlled by Microsoft, who can perform modifications remotely and is allegedly planning to popularize a model where people are sold very low spec PCs that only need to stream a Windows computer from the cloud with more powerful specs… not the platform I want to entrust the future of gaming to.

All in all, Steam is still the mainstream gaming platform I dislike the least and trust the most. If I'm going to buy a game and hope it's going to be playable decades into the future, it used to be GOG, but now it's Steam from me.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] MaxVoltage@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

actually that seems fair. they gave you an extra 5

if steam refunded all my games i would be so happy

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

If I take something from your home and then leave you what I've decided unilaterally is fair compensation for it, and you know nothing of the transaction until after it has happened, would that seem fair to you? Asking because I'm pretty confident you have a refrigerator and I know for sure that I've got a crisp, fresh one dollar bill.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

blu-rays are often as cheap or cheaper than "digital copies", and ripping them to my NAS is pretty trivial these days thanks to makemkv.

the best part is, uncle jeff cannot legally break into your house and take back the disc just because of some petty rights issue.

[–] PrawoJazdy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I recently bought a 4k Blu-ray player. My brother asked me if I also bought a fax machine because streaming is "where it's at" . Nah My 4k player cleans up DVDs really nice where streaming has artifacts and banding. Not only is it true ownership but a better quality.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

4k streaming is also way lower quality than a 4k blu-ray

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is misinformation. The quality disparity you're both pointing out is from streaming services compressing their media to much lower bitrates to ease bandwidth stress on their servers/clients and has nothing to do with a physical or digital medium.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

lower bitrate == lower quality when using the same compression algorithms.

most streaming services are using h.265, same as 4k blu ray, but at substantially lower bitrates

streaming dolby vision profiles are also gimped considerably compared to blu-ray dolby vision

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Doubling down on the misinformation, I see. H.265 is a high-efficiency codec, or in other words a better compression standard. Not a static compression level. This is why when you convert media there's an input for quality, even when using HEVC. And you can absolutely stream the same Dolby Vision profile as a Blu-ray with single track double layer.

You're still conflating digital medium with streaming services.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

i am more than well aware of all of this. nothing i said is misinformation. same algorithm, different settings. the primary means by which you reduce bitrate with h.265 is by reducing the quality setting. there is no magical way to cut your bitrate by 75% using the same compression algorithm without sacrificing quality. no commercial streaming service is offering video at the same quality level as a 4k blu-ray.

few streaming boxes even support dolby vision profile 7, and no commercial streaming service offers it. so saying you can get it through a streaming service is actual misinformation.

i have literally been doing this shit for 20 years

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

i am more than well aware of all of this. nothing i said is misinformation

Your entire presupposition that Blu-ray quality is better than streaming quality by default is misinformation, and I've already explained why.

no commercial streaming service is offering video at the same quality level as a 4k blu-ray.

What does that have to do with digital media?

This is also demonstrably untrue if you take 5 seconds to research self-hosted streaming services.

few streaming boxes even support dolby vision profile 7, and no commercial streaming service offers it

Plex on Nvidia Shield. EZPZ.

there is no magical way to cut your bitrate by 75% using the same compression algorithm without sacrificing quality

I never said anything in contradiction to this. I don't know who you're shadow-boxing.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

OK i see the problem. you’re hung up on the fact that i said “streaming” without specifying commercial streaming services.

however, my context should have been made clear by the fact that i was talking about ripping blu-rays to my fucking NAS, where they get streamed from.

i’m saying “you don’t get the same quality from streaming services as a blu ray”. does that make you happier?

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

i’m saying “you don’t get the same quality from streaming services as a blu ray”. does that make you happier?

Yup, words matter. I'm not saying this to be snarky or pedantic, I just don't want anyone to think that they're getting something inherently inferior if they want to go digital.

however, my context should have been made clear by the fact that i was talking about ripping blu-rays to my fucking NAS, where they get streamed from

It's also really ironic you'd say this, because I've seen you completely ignore the original context in my thread on another post and could provide it as an example.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

scroll up. my very first comment, which is the top level comment in this thread, makes it pretty damn clear.

read the whole context before you go off half-cocked and accuse people of spreading misinformation when they aren’t.

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'll do whatever the fuck I want. Thanks.

Start choosing your words more carefully and it wouldn't be an issue. Your original comment says nothing about streaming and your follow up comment doesn't clarify anything:

blu-rays are often as cheap or cheaper than "digital copies", and ripping them to my NAS is pretty trivial these days thanks to makemkv. the best part is, uncle jeff cannot legally break into your house and take back the disc just because of some petty rights issue.

4k streaming is also way lower quality than a 4k blu-ray

I know how a NAS works, but other people might not or possibly even mistake you to mean you transfer media to another machine for viewing. Additionally, I didn't have any evidence to speculate that you knew there was a tangential reason for the quality disparity despite your comment being easily misconstrued.

My very first comment in this thread laid out the correct details you missed and you still debated it as if I said something incorrect. So much for 20 years of experience.

Some people...

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

let’s think for 5 minutes here.

I know how a NAS works, but other people might not or possibly even mistake you to mean you transfer media to another machine for viewing.

I meant what I said. If you interpreted this incorrectly, that is your problem. stop trying to pretend someone else doesn't know what a NAS is, they are perfectly capable of looking up words they don't mean. me using a word someone else does not know is not misinformation on my part, it is ignorance on theirs.

learn to comprehend the whole conversation, don’t reply to individual comments like they exist in a vacuum. language doesn’t work if you interpret everything hyper-literally. do you fall apart when people use euphemisms or turns of phrase? because those are far more vague than anything i said.

maybe most importantly though, don’t be an absolute dick to people when you ask for clarification.

[–] stonedemoman@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

learn to comprehend the whole conversation, don’t reply to individual comments like they exist in a vacuum

Again, would you like me to show you exactly where you're guilty of this in another thread?

The fact you keep repeating this is hilarious, as is your attitude that you're so infallible that there's never any need to correct anything you say.

Your argument falls apart when you look at how you misinterpreted my first reply, too. It happens. If your ego is so hurt that somebody can't clarify something you said without you launching into a full-blown narcissistic meltdown, that's not my problem. Especially when it's misleading at best or unfathomably misconceived at worst.

I'm done coddling your arrogant assertion that I need your permission for elucidating truth and your deeply neurotic misconception that people can't be mislead to form the wrong conclusions no matter the context, as you've literally done yourself twice now.

[–] beefcat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

wait a sec, are you using a bunch of alt accounts with the exact same username from various lemmy instances to upvote your own comments?

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] parsiuk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You know where Amazon (and any other company for that matter) can't pull content from? My Jellyfin instance. Yo-ho-ho!

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] torpak@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only thing that surprises me is that anyone is surprised by this. If you buy a physical book from anywhere, you own it. If you "buy" the rigth to play a movie (or read a book) from amazon, you own nothing. Usually they don't show that so clearly but that's the reality.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Mr_nutter_butter@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's just a long term licence to watch it

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

🏴‍☠️

load more comments