Have you accepted streaming into your life yet?

Have you accepted streaming into your life yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

twitch()tv/videos/122618701
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications_Inc._v._FCC_(2014)
youtube.com/watch?v=dYVgIGL1E34
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Yes

No, fuck off you dumb cancerous streaming faggot, and stop telling people to give up and let tv networks fuck up their scheduling.

I'm happy and sad that I was proven right.

Years ago I predicted that all media companies would create individual streaming services that require individual purchase to watch content. My friends just laughed and said that Netflix would be the main access portal for everything.

Yet, look at what we have with CBS, FOX, NBC, CN, Disney, ABC, and etc making their own streaming services.

>YFW cable 2.0 came to light.

I honestly prefer cable because it's more convenient to just be able to flip on a channel for background noise and all that, and I don't know why but I feel like watching the initial premiers of episodes is just... more enjoyable I guess? I also can't use half of the streaming services since you still need cable to use them and none of them are available with my company.

Its not going to last, as it will be more expensive then cable and streaming isnt really profitable. Expect the bubble to burst within the next two years, and everyone will come crawling back to cable.

>predicting something brutally obvious
Well, not to supporters of the "free market" I guess, where everything always works itself out in the consumer's favor. Even when said companies have a monopoly on their product...
Are you retarded? Those apps, and often even sites, are offered to cable subscribers only.

Are you retarded? Im refering to actual streaming services on roku, of which some networks like nick already have. But referring to the CN app, that will never be popular because they have barely any episodes of shows on it

They won't be returning to cable.

>>predicting something brutally obvious
This. Those that didn't see this change happening were blind fools that didn't want to realize the truth.

>pay for only the content you want
>no need to worry about scheduling
>most of the content is available on other platforms as well
>a lot of it ad-free
How is this cable 2.0?
>as it will be more expensive then cable
Find me the 14 dollar cable package.
>expect the bubble to burst
You're actually fucking stupid.

Yes, but not the legal kind

I've tried with some CN apps and I couldn't get any of them to fucking load.

>You're actually fucking stupid.
Yes, you are, have you seen netflixs debt recently?

>i predicted companies would put their content online in the digital age
Congratulations
Who has a monopoly on media? Are you fucking retarded? Anyone with camera can produce content.

>netflix's debt
How stupid do you have to be? Do you not know what an investment is? Netflix is controlling an increasingly large share of the content distribution market and continually expanding. 3/4 of their "debt" is just money commited to producing content.

Think, for once.

Care to explain whats so special about paying for cable?

Gee user it's not like net neutrality wasn't just cut for this exact reason.

>How stupid do you have to be?
Yes, how much mental gymmastics donyou have to loop through to convince yourself netflix is doing fine, and is not at the verge of bankruptcy

I actually like sitting down and watching the different shows on it, many of which arent even on streaming. Plus faggots use streaming as an excuse to ruin their networks with spams of awful shows, so thats why i hate people who think TV doesnt matter because they think its alright for companies to ruin their networks.

Nah. I spend all day at work two feet in front of a computer screen. I don't want to watch cartoons the same way.

>netflix is on the verge on bankruptcy
This is bait right? No one could believe something so stupid.

>I actually like sitting down and watching the different shows on it, many of which arent even on streaming

Every show is literally easily accessible online nowadays though. Unless you are actually talking about PAYING for services

>if i say an opinions stupid ill convince people the obvious truth isnt real
Idiot
I like watching them in reruns, instead of being forced to sit down on my computer and search through episodes. Sometimes people like unwinding in front of the TV. Again, its not an excuse for networks like CN to ruin their schedule.

>Who has a monopoly on media? Are you fucking retarded? Anyone with camera can produce content.
I said they have a monopoly on THEIR media, the legal fiction called intellectual "property".

In general though, major studios have a quasi-monopoly on quality media, due to economies of scale among other things. And it's practically impossible to break into the market on such a level.

I will when good content gets made. I welcome our stream overlords
>not having to pay for the 500 channels you don't want
>each channel will have to fight eachother for good content to get paying adults to purchase
>quality of content skyrockets

>Are you retarded? Im refering to actual streaming services on roku
Sounds like you're the retarded one here, because the post you were responding to didn't even mention it. And neither did you.

Except streaming has very little original content, and no channels at all. The industry is fucked.

>Go on service
>Hit "Random"

ez

Not even remotely the same thing, for a bunch of obvious reasons. But keep fooling yourself.

>I like watching them in reruns, instead of being forced to sit down on my computer and search through episodes.

You do realize there are sites like Twitch which pretty much make their own TV channels in streams right

twitch()tv/videos/122618701

Doesnt matter, i still like sitting on the couch watching conventional tv. Why are you so hellbent on making me reject cable anyways?

>he thinks that garbage is comparable to actual, professionally-run, legitimate cable TV channels
This level of retardation is quite frankly terrifying.

I'm not, I'm saying these arguments have been brought up are are relatively solved for online streaming. Most TVs are internet enabled anyway its much cheaper to just stream instead of paying for garbage you dont watch

>>he thinks that garbage is comparable to actual, professionally-run, legitimate cable TV channels

Ah yes, the great professional TV channels, such a mark of quality

You're not getting this, each channel will have a service, and you'll see the OC when TV finally dies

Kek tumblrette, because tv channels are know to be bastions of quality

>professionally-run
If a channel has a schedule like that, it's run by hacks by definition.

Obviously that's subjective, and there are borderline cases... but that isn't one of them.

If cable TV dies, original content will mostly die with it. We would have seen somewhat more YouTube-level shit as the market desperately looked for an alternative, but with NN gone...

fpbp

>original content will mostly die with it.
What?

>NN gone

Title II was not net neutrality

I'm a guy, and I agree that current cable TV channels are mostly an aging crock of shit.
But the answer for the modern age is linear Internet TV, which is basically non-existent.

>an opinion
This isn't a matter of opinion. Netflix is doing well enough to commit to spending 15 million on future content and made six times it's previous years revenue in 2016, continues to dominate the streaming market, is growing massively overseas, and has multiple hit shows exclusive to it's platform.

You're more wrong than any thinking person has the right to be, but, of course you're not thinking, you're coming up with ridiculous reasons to attempt to discredit a new medium because it's not your preference. You're not just a moron, you're dishonest.

>they have a monopoly on THEIR media
This doesn't matter. Watch something else.

>major studios have a quasi-monopoly on quality media
They don't, this is completely untrue. Economies of scale are about cost. It cost almost nothing to tell a good story/joke. Random (constantly demonetized) youtubers make far better content than most popular media outlets.
>very little original content
Youtube has more hours of content than every tv network has produced in their existence, combined.
>if I don't like it they're not professional

>linear internet tv
Kill yourself

>What?
The streaming market is barely big enough to support legal reruns. It cannot support any original content on its own (once again, YouTube-level shit excepted). The difference in terms of profits, let alone revenue, compared to cable TV is several orders of magnitude.
>Title II was not net neutrality
I am sick and tired of repeating this, but here goes: Title II is not NN itself, but it is required for the FCC to enforce NN without a new law being passed. This is due to the following court decision, which (IANAL) prohibited the FCC from doing what it did in the 2000s: stopping ISPs from throttling or outright blocking sites.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications_Inc._v._FCC_(2014)

Not that user, but Netflix has been reported as in financial trouble numerous times. Every company wants to present itself in a better financial light, so external sources provide a clearer picture.
>This doesn't matter. Watch something else.
Sure... if the next problem I mentioned didn't exist. Also, copyright hoarding is done by the little guys as well, possibly even more so - lost media, even by active studios, is sadly a thing.
>They don't, this is completely untrue. Economies of scale are about cost. It cost almost nothing to tell a good story/joke. Random (constantly demonetized) youtubers make far better content than most popular media outlets.
If you actually thought that the shit on YouTube is remotely comparable to professionally produced media, there would be little point in our arguments here. But the thing is, you don't, and I'll explain why at the end.
>Youtube has more hours of content than every tv network has produced in their existence, combined.
I can set up a bunch of cameras filming scenes on the street, and have far more content in a short amount of time. Which, come to think of it, would be better than a shitload of YouTube content anyways... but still utterly worthless as media.
>if I don't like it they're not professional
Ignoring the second half of my post, eh? Fuck you too, then.

Linear Internet TV is the only thing that can save the TV industry as a whole, including original content. Idiots like you are the problem, except that I'm convinced you're either an outright shill for a major studio, or otherwise comfortably employed in a protected sector... which isn't particularly different, as you're in the same cesspool of entitlement.

>Netflix is doing well enough to commit to spending 15 million on future content
And it will get them into bankruptcy because its not a viable platform. Your point?

Yes and the argument is WHY they blocked the sites. Companies like Netflix painted them doing it in a malicious light but most of the true reason for it is for consumer accessiblity

youtube.com/watch?v=dYVgIGL1E34

>consumer accessiblity
Just like I explained myself in a few sentences, you need to explain this briefly. Because I'm not watching a 30-minute video on something I'm almost certain is going to be bullshit.

>Netflix has been reported as in financial trouble numerous times
No legitimate financial expert would tell you this. The facts completely contradict this. A cursory glance at independent growth estimates, valuations, market share, or financial records, paints a picture of a company doing just fine if not great.
>If you actually thought that the shit on YouTube is remotely comparable to professionally produced media, there would be little point in our arguments here. But the thing is, you don't, and I'll explain why at the end.
I'm glad you know my opinions better than I do.
>but still utterly worthless as media.
Quite subjective
>Linear Internet TV is the only thing that can save the TV industry
It's not going to be saved and shouldn't.
>including original content
Yet Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon continue to produce OC, and networks like Disney and CN release OC through the same method. And youtubers make funy and original content daily and find new ways to monetize their content.
>you're a shill
Or I don't work in entertainment and don't care about tv because it has been outclassed by the internet as a method for consuming content since newgrounds and youtube became popular.
>And it will get them into bankruptcy because its not a viable platform
Yet you haven't provided a single coherent reason for this and are contradicted by not only the statistical facts about the subject, but by even the slightest bit of common sense.

>I'm almost certain is going to be bullshit.

Why is that?

Not him but
>you should reduce this issue to a few sentences that because i have the attention span of an earth worm
>It cannot support any original content on its own
Yet Netflix continues to produce hit series.

Because there is absolutely no valid reason to allow blocking so much as a single site that doesn't have outright illegal content on it (which is itself highly questionable, depending on what content it is).

And "consumer accessibility" sure doesn't sound like it's a good case for an exception, more like it sounds like marketing speak really.

>Not him but
I believe you so hard it hurts. But regardless, your expectations of (ab)using other people's time make you a dick.
>Yet Netflix continues to produce hit series.
See my first reply in

It is if the bandwith is slowing down the whole network. There aren't really any instances of ISPs outright BLOCKING sites.

Are you a idiot? Most streaming services are on tv now or you can just connect your laptop to a tv. 2018 user, get with the times

Based on what the Paramount case set as a precedent, and I know it was about theaters, shouldn't it be illegal for a Studio to have their own streaming service?

No?

>It is if the bandwith is slowing down the whole network.
And I assume this is what the video is talking about, right? Do you really think this argument hasn't been made, and heavily debunked, about a million times already?
>There aren't really any instances of ISPs outright BLOCKING sites.
You're lucky that I'm too lazy to locate and crosspost that list of ISP abuse from I saw a while back. Because I'm pretty sure it had actual blocking on it, not just throttling.

How's it feel to be 65 and browse Sup Forums?

What case?

>. Because I'm pretty sure it had actual blocking on it, not just throttling.

It doesn't

>No legitimate financial expert would tell you this.
What the fuck is a "financial expert"? Not a meaningful job title, that's for sure.
>The facts completely contradict this. A cursory glance at independent growth estimates, valuations, market share, or financial records, paints a picture of a company doing just fine if not great.
The "facts" provided by the company itself? There are legal ways to massage financials, you know...
>I'm glad you know my opinions better than I do.
I'm not. There are too many people like you, and being aware of that isn't a good feeling.
>Quite subjective
Are you shitposting now? You can't be serious.
>It's not going to be saved and shouldn't.
Say goodbye to TV shows, then.
>Yet Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon continue to produce OC, and networks like Disney and CN release OC through the same method.
Not remotely comparable to cable TV in terms of quantity, if not quality.
>And youtubers make funy and original content daily and find new ways to monetize their content.
Are you shitposting again? The overwhelming majority of YouTube channels are basically the equivalent of utterly bankrupt businesses.
>Or I don't work in entertainment and don't care about tv because it has been outclassed by the internet as a method for consuming content since newgrounds and youtube became popular.
In which case you work in a different protected industry, like I said. I recognize your attitude.

I'd be very surprised if that were true. But if you found the list, post it or at least a link to it so I can check that without trawling through the archives.

I'm too lazy too Kek if I stumble upon it I'll post it

I mostly used the Nick or Cartoon Network apps, since I stopped having cable. Most recently on the Nick app, I need to sign in with a tv provider to get access to any new episodes.

I have [as] to stream Toonami.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.

>What the fuck is a "financial expert"?
Anyone who actually studies finances, are you daft?
>The "facts" provided by the company itself? There are legal ways to massage financials, you know...
Everytime I think you can't say anything more devoid of reason
>Say goodbye to TV shows, then.
And hello to internet shows
>Not remotely comparable to cable TV in terms of quantity
Yes, they have far greater amounts of content as they not only create but also license content. And as the market grows more services will grow with more content, as it has been happening for years.
>The overwhelming majority of YouTube channels are basically the equivalent of utterly bankrupt businesses
So is most tv content.
>In which case you work in a different protected industry
So am I to understand you work in the TV industry and are at risk of losing your job? Or is this a complete non-argument that has nothing to do with the issue, as though working in the entertainment industry somehow changes the facts of the situation.

>I recognize your attitude
I recognize yours actually, you're a brainless monkey who managed to delude yourself into thinking obscurantism was a legitimate form of argumentation and is sheltering himself from reality because engaging with it might make you realize you're wrong and you can't handle that.