Tech's broken promises: Streaming is now just as expensive and confusing as cable. Ubers cost as much as taxis. And the cloud is no longer cheap.
www.businessinsider.com
Some tech is getting pricier and looking a lot like the older services it was supposed to beat. From video streaming to ride-hailing and cloud computing.

Tech’s broken promises: Streaming is now just as expensive and confusing as cable. Ubers cost as much as taxis. And the cloud is no longer cheap::Some tech is getting pricier and looking a lot like the older services it was supposed to beat. From video streaming to ride-hailing and cloud computing.

  • Эшли Карамель@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    5·
    1 year ago

    where I am currently living, you can’t even rip stuff for PERSONAL use, which I think is ridiculous. I understand making it illegal if you’re profiting off it, or selling it, etc. but if it’s only ever used personally by you, I don’t see why not?

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialEnglish
      5·
      1 year ago

      If you see the law as an extension of collective democratic interests and compromise, then yea, it should absolutely be legal.

      But if the law is an extension of the interest of capital, as it is in the US, then why should you be allowed to do that? Every ripped DVD is opportunity cost for streaming or renting services.

      Edit: if IP holders got to litigate this is court, they’d argue that “most people” who rip DVDs only do that to illegally share them, and most “normal people” prefer the flexibility and choice in a streaming service. The same argument is now routinely used in defence against rent control and public housing: most people who rent want to be renters, otherwise they wouldn’t pay the HUGE FEE for the privilege over buying a house.

      Completely blind to the coercion involved in making those choices the only reasonable options, and that it does NOT constitute consent