OT Reducing cable to "basic"

[whaler11]

Eh, you can't stop the internet. I watched almost an entire UConn basketball game via periscope once while on vacation. Was I stealing or was the UConn fan who linked it to Twitter?

Back on topic. I got the best PS Vue package offered. Think it's like 50 channels for 64 bucks a month including HBO and Showtime. Saving 90 bucks a month from what DirectTV was charging me. I lost some channels, but overall well worth it. I have a lava antenna I'm going to mount as well and may look into adding a Tavo receiver to go with that but not sure yet.

DirectTV did offer to bring my bill down to 75 a month with no contract and 65 a month with a two year contract. I thought about it for a few days, said no thanks and then they even offered to waive all monthly equipment costs.

That was the kicker for me. The fact that they were willing to waive the 35 buck a month equipment fee told me they're just scraping us for every dime they can. This is why I don't worry about "stealing", as whaler says. They've been stealing from us for years.

Here is the thing the big whole home DVR, that I was paying the most money for, I called to tell them they did not send a big enough box to ship it back and they said I had two options, save it, or recycle it also known as putting it in the trash. Go figure.

It's not 'stealing'. It's stealing. It could not be more cut and dry.

I don't know the terms on periscope - but I imagine rebroadcasting a UConn (or NBA/MLB/ect) game is not within them.

Like I said it's bizarre. 99% of the people who think this isn't stealing would never walk into Stop and Shop and just boost things - but it's the exact same thing.

By this logic I can go take computers at Best Buy because in 1998 they overcharged me for a 486. There is no way that computer was worth 1,499 - so my next one is free.

FWIW - you aren't stealing from Comcast or
Directv - you are stealing from the people who produce the content.

 

[JMick]

It's not 'stealing'. It's stealing. It could not be more cut and dry.

I don't know the terms on periscope - but I imagine rebroadcasting a UConn (or NBA/MLB/ect) game is not within them.

Like I said it's bizarre. 99% of the people who think this isn't stealing would never walk into Stop and Shop and just boost things - but it's the exact same thing.

By this logic I can go take computers at Best Buy because in 1998 they overcharged me for a 486. There is no way that computer was worth 1,499 - so my next one is free.

but you're not actually taking anything.

 

[noeynox]

It's not 'stealing'. It's stealing. It could not be more cut and dry.

I don't know the terms on periscope - but I imagine rebroadcasting a UConn (or NBA/MLB/ect) game is not within them.

Like I said it's bizarre. 99% of the people who think this isn't stealing would never walk into Stop and Shop and just boost things - but it's the exact same thing.

By this logic I can go take computers at Best Buy because in 1998 they overcharged me for a 486. There is no way that computer was worth 1,499 - so my next one is free.

I get it. You are right. But they were also charging me 20 bucks a month for an item they literally told me to toss in the garbage. That is straight BS.

 

[whaler11]

but you're not actually taking anything.

Tell that to the people who produce what you steal.

 

[whaler11]

I get it. You are right. But they were also charging me 20 bucks a month for an item they literally told me to toss in the garbage. That is straight BS.

You are confusing the middleman with the producer.

Being mad at Comcast or Dtv isn't really a reason to say it's not stealing to illegally download GOT.

Again I'm not judging - I don't care in the least - I just find the dynamic interesting.

 

[noeynox]

You are confusing the middleman with the producer.

Being mad at Comcast or Dtv isn't really a reason to say it's not stealing to illegally download GOT.

Again I'm not judging - I don't care in the least - I just find the dynamic interesting.

They're all stealing from me. They charge too goshdarn much for channels I don't watch or want. Judd much rather prefer a true ala carte model.

 

[whaler11]

In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.

 

[whaler11]

They're all stealing from me. They charge too goshdarn much for channels I don't watch or want. Judd much rather prefer a true ala carte model.

Sure but you deciding to buy something is pretty much the opposite of them stealing from you.

Since you like sports you've actually done a lot better in the deal for a few decades.

You'll look back on these days like you look back on the Sports Center of 1993 some day.

 

[noeynox]

Sure but you deciding to buy something is pretty much the opposite of them stealing from you.

Since you like sports you've actually done a lot better in the deal for a few decades.

You'll look back on these days like you look back on the Sports Center of 1993 some day.

No way I think I've done better. The price of "cable" was something that escalated kind of quickly. Best part of PS Vue is truly the no contract part. I'm waiting to see what the YouTube and Verizon versions of OTT services look like.

 

[pepband99]

In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.

Even worse, they're totally useless for UConn fans living in and around CT, which is most of us.

Great - your ESPN3 from Pondunkville, whereeveryoulive gets you UCONN. Awesome. It won't for most of us, and is what keeps most of us tethered to a cable/satellite provider.

 

[JMick]

Tell that to the people who produce what you steal.

But what if it's not offered to you and you couldn't buy it if you wanted to? I definitely think it's a grey area

 

[huskysupporter]

No grey area, it's stealing.

Believe me I am so tempted to jailbreak my firestick and install Kodi, but it's stealing.

 

[huskysupporter]

I also bought a really long hdmi cable and hook my laptop to my tv. NFL.com was streaming draft live so was able to watch it on the big screen.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

In short these threads are people bragging about how and what they steal.

If someone started a thread about what he stole from Target - I suspect we wouldn't get a few dozen responses that brag about stealing from Target and give additional advice on how to steal from Target.

This sort of thinking explains a lot around here I guess.

Do you use an ad blocker extension? That's very similar but seems to be perfectly acceptable for most people. You're utilizing the content or website without taking part in how that site makes money.

 

[J187Money]

But what if it's not offered to you and you couldn't buy it if you wanted to? I definitely think it's a grey area

That is probably the only time something is morally defensible, even if still technically illegal.

BUT - that is rarely actually true. Most people use that as the argument when they can't buy what they want at the PRICE or in the MANNER they want to buy it.

As an example, if a song was not available on iTunes, people would feel ok ripping it from somewhere. But they could have gone out and bought the CD, even used, from Amazon or wherever and then loaded it into their library. The argument would go - "I just want the song - I don't want to have to pay $10 for the whole album to get the song so I'm justified in stealing the song because I can't buy it anywhere." That is b*** - you can buy it, you just can't buy it a la carte. Just like you can't go into a Costco and buy 1 can of soda at Costco level pricing. You can buy one at the convenience store, but it is going to cost you $2.

 

[J187Money]

Do you use an ad blocker extension? That's very similar but seems to be perfectly acceptable for most people. You're utilizing the content or website without taking part in how that site makes money.

That's not at all the same thing.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

That's not at all the same thing.

Why not? That is how the sites make money and by disabling it, you're enjoying the content without supporting he content provider that has specifically set up a way to do that.

 

[J187Money]

I also bought a really long hdmi cable and hook my laptop to my tv. NFL.com was streaming draft live so was able to watch it on the big screen.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

 

[J187Money]

Why not? That is how the sites make money and by disabling it, you're enjoying the content without supporting he content provider that has specifically set up a way to do that.

Ad blockers are not illegal. Theft of content is.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Ad blockers are not illegal. Theft of content is.

I'm talking about ethically which is what this whole thread has been about.

Edit: And if you want to go down that road. Me viewing a sports stream is not illegal. If I downloaded that content or was the person streaming it to the masses, it would be, but as a viewer, it is not illegal so the ethical side of it is the real question.

 

[JMick]

That is probably the only time something is morally defensible, even if still technically illegal.

BUT - that is rarely actually true. Most people use that as the argument when they can't buy what they want at the PRICE or in the MANNER they want to buy it.

As an example, if a song was not available on iTunes, people would feel ok ripping it from somewhere. But they could have gone out and bought the CD, even used, from Amazon or wherever and then loaded it into their library. The argument would go - "I just want the song - I don't want to have to pay $10 for the whole album to get the song so I'm justified in stealing the song because I can't buy it anywhere." That is b******* - you can buy it, you just can't buy it a la carte. Just like you can't go into a Costco and buy 1 can of soda at Costco level pricing. You can buy one at the convenience store, but it is going to cost you $2.

For live events, is streaming that much different than watching at a bar? And what if you own a physical copy of a movie but want a digital copy, too?

 

[J187Money]

I'm talking about ethically which is what this whole thread has been about.

https://www.quora.com/Is-using-an-ad-blocker-in-your-browser-unethical

Some thoughts on the subject. It is a matter of opinion.

But to me, I don't believe it is unethical. TBH - I also don't get the hysteria about internet advertising. It has never occurred to me to use an ad blocker.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

https://www.quora.com/Is-using-an-ad-blocker-in-your-browser-unethical

Some thoughts on the subject. It is a matter of opinion.

But to me, I don't believe it is unethical. TBH - I also don't get the hysteria about internet advertising. It has never occurred to me to use an ad blocker.

I'm just saying, both are legal as the end viewer and the difference between using an ad blocker and viewing streamed sports is about the same as viewing streamed sports and walking into a store and stealing a physical product. In fact probably significantly less so as the latter is actually illegal and in all circumstances leads to financial harm to the producer/store.

 

[J187Money]

For live events, is streaming that much different than watching at a bar? And what if you own a physical copy of a movie but want a digital copy, too?

Two different things:

1) If you own a physical copy of a movie, and rip it to your laptop for personal use, you would never get in trouble for that. Fair use covers that sort of thing.
2) For live events, if you are watching in a bar, you are watching over a feed which someone paid rights fees for the content and is advertising against it. If you are streaming over a legitimate source (NFL.com) or whatever - no issue. If you are streaming on a bootleg link - where someone is probably putting their own ad units against content they don't own, that isn't kosher. Because you are an eyeball that is getting access to something but the rights owner cannot monetize.

 

[JMick]

Two different things:

1) If you own a physical copy of a movie, and rip it to your laptop for personal use, you would never get in trouble for that. Fair use covers that sort of thing.
2) For live events, if you are watching in a bar, you are watching over a feed which someone paid rights fees for the content and is advertising against it. If you are streaming over a legitimate source (NFL.com) or whatever - no issue. If you are streaming on a bootleg link - where someone is probably putting their own ad units against content they don't own, that isn't kosher. Because you are an eyeball that is getting access to something but the rights owner cannot monetize.

Well you typically can't rip a DVD without software that will break the encryption.

And most streams don't have injected ads from what I've seen. They're usually the same. And if your point goes back to advertising then it's no different than adblock

My overall point, though, is it's not the same as stealing a hostess cake from 7-11. It's much more complicated than that.