I think the biggest threat to Netflix would be a buyout. If a major media company (e.g. Disney) bought Netflix outright, they could ruin the service and drive people away from it. (Either on purpose to "drive more people to DVD sales" or just from execs who "totally know what the hip kids nowadays want from their streaming service" and thus need to get their two cents in.) Apart from that or the ISPs ganging up on Netflix post-Net Neutrality, you're right that Netflix's position is near-unassailable.
What I find interesting is that traditional media execs. didn't try and stop it or massively slow the pace of aforementioned services as their industry will die off in the long run
They did try to sabotage it. On the content owner side, they attacked Netflix by trying to hold back their best titles so that they could turn Netflix into "the service that only has stuff nobody cares about." This is one reason why Netflix has invested in their Original Series.
On the cable TV side, they slowed down Netflix (one of the drivers behind Network Neutrality). They also implemented caps/overages to make streaming videos more expensive and some cable providers are making Internet+TV bundles less expensive than Internet alone. (So even if you sign up for Internet+TV and stick the cable box in a closet without hooking it up, you'll be counted as a cable TV subscriber and not a cord cutter.)
These tactics didn't bring Netflix down, but it's certainly slowed their ascent. However, with Network Neutrality looking like it might be done away with, the cable companies might be able to stop Netflix and force everyone to buy cable TV again.
I bought music from Google once. They required that I use their app to play it online. I could download it in MP3 format, but I was only allowed to do so a certain number of times. (Four, IIRC.) Contrast this with Amazon which will sell me the digital music, let me play it online or download it as many times as I like in non-DRMed MP3 format. That's why all of my music purchases (except that one described above) are from Amazon and not Google.
Many libraries will also lend out Kindle versions of books. (They automatically expire and then can't be opened when due.) As an author, I love the Kindle platform. I make more money on the sale of a Kindle book than I do on the sale of a paperback. If Microsoft wants to even put a dent in Amazon's eBook empire, they're going to need cross-compatibility and a ton of titles to attract users and good royalty payment structures for authors. If their eBook store doesn't offer authors enough of a cut of sales, we'll all stick with Amazon. If not enough books are available, users won't use the service. If there aren't enough users, authors/publishing companies won't bother releasing their books on Microsoft's platform.
Side note: I liked that Amazon gave me the choice of whether to include DRM or not. (I didn't include it.) Somehow, I can't see Microsoft's eBook story NOT forcing DRM on all of the eBooks.
We rarely buy DVDs or Blu-Rays anymore simply because streaming satisfies most of our viewing needs. When we want to watch something that's not on streaming, we'll request it from our local library and get it on DVD (because that's the format they have the most of). In rare instances when we actually buy a title, we might get it on DVD to save money if we don't care about it THAT much, but most times we'll buy the Blu-Ray version that comes with a DVD copy as well.
You might not care, but the studios would. If they think they can increase DVD sales by not letting Netflix stream the movie, they'll do so. Netflix's library can already be a bit thin at times and this could worsen it. (Win win in the mind of the studios except that piracy would increase without Netflix.)
It's good to hear of someone else that doesn't swear. I don't either. My wife, on the other hand, grew up around hockey players. Apparently, they say things that would make sailors blush. She has no qualms about letting the curse words fly. I don't mind her cursing and she doesn't mind my lack of it.
I never swear. I'm not sure why, but I've never felt the need to swear. I'll admit to swearing once - to shock a close friend of mine. I said "the C word" out of nowhere to go for maximum effect. Probably shouldn't have done it while he was driving, we almost went off the road. As far as the honesty scale goes, I'm honest to a fault. I have a lot of trouble lying. It stresses me out considerably and the truth will often burst out of my mouth before I can stop it.
Everyone is not creative. Everyone can't write, and most can't well enough that anyone would want to read it.
And even if you can, it's hard to be heard above all the other people who are writing/creating. In October, I published my first novel. Now, I have no delusions that it'd be a New York Times Bestseller, but I think it's pretty good. As I'm working on the sequel, I started trying to "sell" it. The only problem is that I'm much better at writing a book than at selling it. There are hundreds of other books out there and getting people to actually buy and read yours is an uphill battle.
In the end, I have a full-time job and wrote this book for enjoyment rather than income. If I had to rely on it for my income, though, I'd be in huge trouble.
Tapes had portability going for them back in the day. You could take a lot more cassette tapes with you than you could vinyl records. Plus, a cassette player fit into your car easier than a record player would. They weren't a great solution, but they were the best we had with the technology of the day. However, their portability edge was surpassed by CDs and then shattered by MP3s.
The last time I touched a cassette tape was when I found one in my old room at my parents' house and decided to show my kids how I listened to music. They were fascinated with it but quickly grew frustrated by being unable to fast forward or rewind to the exact spot where a song began.
The remedies are already in place. Suppose someone posts on Slashdot advertising a human trafficking operation. If Slashdot were liable for user comments, Slashdot would immediately be guilty of abetting said operation. Of course, the site isn't liable so they're not immediately at risk of a lawsuit over the situation. The proper response is to report the comment and Slashdot either takes it down (and thus shields themselves from liability) or decides to leave it up (in which case, they might expose themselves to liability). Alternatively, the authorities could subpoena Slashdot (through proper legal channels) to get information on the person who made the post.
With this system in place, sites can host user-generated content without hiring armies of human (as opposed to automated) moderators. (Imagine how many moderators YouTube, Twitter, or Facebook would need to hire just to keep up with the flood of content!) Meanwhile, it also allows for illegal comments to be removed - something that any site worth its salt wants to ensure anyway if only to keep the spam out.
Publishing basic facts like: "Mark Hamill was born 25 September 1951 in Oakland, California, USA" shouldn't fall under anti-discrimination laws. In fact, while looking up Mark's birthday for this comment, I noticed that IMDB doesn't actually post the actor's age. Sure, you can subtract 1951 from 2016 to get his age, but IMDB only gives you his date of birth. This is a fact, not a judgement call.
Now, if IMDB was regularly posting incorrect birth dates, there might be some issue, but posting the date that celebrities were born isn't discrimination.
For me and my wife, I'm sure that Autism plays something of a role. My son was diagnosed as autistic a few years back (Asperger's Syndrome) and while reading up on the subject everything clicked. I've always known I was different from "normal people," but never knew why. Growing up and loving Star Trek, I always associated with Data - always trying to figure out social situations and feeling utterly baffled by things that most people got so easily. Over the years, I've gotten pretty good. I can have actual conversations and deal with most social situations that I encounter.
Still, nonverbal cues are lost on me. My wife is neurotypical and it always amazes me when we go into meetings with people. I'll come out thinking the meeting went well, but she'll point out that this person was rolling their eyes and that person was doing that, etc. She'll have an entirely different view of the meeting because she catches all these nonverbal cues that I miss. It's one reason I love online conversations. The closest you come to nonverbal cues is emoticons or emoji and those are simple to understand.
Never that bad, but recently someone I've known for years bought my book and wanted me to sign it for them. My mind picked that exact moment to misplace their name. I asked if she wanted it personalized (thinking maybe I could get away with just signing my name) and she said "Of course, after all, we're friends." I was trapped. My mind offered up "Susan" so I asked if I should make it out to Sue or Susan. Needless to say, that wasn't even close to her name.
On the bright side, with all my embarrassment over the situation, I don't think I'll ever forget that person's name again.
Ironically, seeing people as objects can be a great help in crowds. My wife hates crowds. I don't love them, but don't mind venturing into them as much. My theory is that she sees all these people, interprets attitudes about us based on what they do or say near us, and sees their actions and judges how rude these people are being. I, on the other hand, view the crowds of people as a series of mobile objects. I'm not so rude as to just barrel through them, knocking them over, but I also don't care if one of the "objects" thinks I'm rude because I've led my boys ahead of them when they're walking slowly.
A few years back where Google Glasses were gaining in popularity (and controversy), I was looking forward to them. I wanted them to come with a facial recognition application that would put little floating name tags over people's heads along with some pertinent information.
"Name: Murray Douglas. Known Via: Work. Association: Developed department X website for him in June 2007. Last sighting: Two years ago in the mall while clothes shopping."
I'd completely buy a pair of computerized glasses if I never had to worry about not recognizing people's faces or forgetting people's names (or even worse, misremembering and calling someone I've known for years by the wrong name) ever again.
I can remember random movie lines from films and TV shows I saw decades ago, but faces and names drop through my brain like water through a sieve. I've gotten very good at faking knowing who a person is, but I still have trip-up moments where I need to ask my wife who a person was.
"That was Jenny. Don't you remember? We saw her, her husband Tom, and their kids Jane and Billy on June 3rd three years ago while shopping for clothes. We talked for 30 minutes about how our children were doing in school. Remember now?"
I never remember it. I have no clue how my wife retains all that "social information." My brain just doesn't seem to be built for that.
If Apple falls into the no innovation trap, they could eventually join Blackberry in market oblivion. Blackberry was on the top once. If you wanted a mobile phone with all the latest features, you got a Blackberry. Their fans were just as rabid as Apple fans are (for better or worse - not saying that being a rabid fan is always a bad thing). But as other companies (notably, Apple) innovated into their space, Blackberry insisted that they didn't need to keep up. They were on top which (to them) meant that they were doing what the users wanted which meant they didn't need to change. Even as they slid down, they still insisted that they didn't need to change. By the time they realized change was needed, they were too far gone.
If Apple's not careful, they can wind up as another Blackberry. Short term profits are nice, but can blind you to long term trends.
As a writer, it's also annoying when automatic curly quotes put the wrong quote in. For example (using curly braces instead of quotes since curly quotes wouldn't appear):
{He walked to the store, { she said.
There's two opening quotes there and the only way to spot it is to look closely. Not hard with one sentence, but try doing that in an entire 60,000+ word novel. (I have. It's not fun.)
I crunched the numbers (before the Carrie Fisher news hit) using http://fiftiesweb.com/dead/dead-people-2016/ as my guide. 2016 has killed the most celebrities (140 when you add in Ricky Harris, Carrie Fisher, and Richard Adams) than any year since 2000 (the earliest year that site had listings for). It was 40% more than the next closest year, 2005.
As Leia, she was a blaster-toting Rebel leader. Off screen, she battled with mental illness and came forward about it - enabling many other people to feel like they were not alone. She was the toughest Princess ever. RIP Carrie.
Being able to download a human mind into a robotic body would definitely have some major societal impacts. Would you still be married to your spouse if their mind was downloaded into a robotic body before they died? Or does "till death do us part" kick in and you're not married anymore? What happens if someone is kidnapped, has their mind downloaded into a robotic body, and then both human and robot escape? Are both the human and robot the same person? Could a person have a hundred copies of himself/herself running around? If a crime is committed by one of these robot duplicates, is the original human responsible?
There's a bunch of really good science fiction stories here.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the biggest threat to Netflix would be a buyout. If a major media company (e.g. Disney) bought Netflix outright, they could ruin the service and drive people away from it. (Either on purpose to "drive more people to DVD sales" or just from execs who "totally know what the hip kids nowadays want from their streaming service" and thus need to get their two cents in.) Apart from that or the ISPs ganging up on Netflix post-Net Neutrality, you're right that Netflix's position is near-unassailable.
They did try to sabotage it. On the content owner side, they attacked Netflix by trying to hold back their best titles so that they could turn Netflix into "the service that only has stuff nobody cares about." This is one reason why Netflix has invested in their Original Series.
On the cable TV side, they slowed down Netflix (one of the drivers behind Network Neutrality). They also implemented caps/overages to make streaming videos more expensive and some cable providers are making Internet+TV bundles less expensive than Internet alone. (So even if you sign up for Internet+TV and stick the cable box in a closet without hooking it up, you'll be counted as a cable TV subscriber and not a cord cutter.)
These tactics didn't bring Netflix down, but it's certainly slowed their ascent. However, with Network Neutrality looking like it might be done away with, the cable companies might be able to stop Netflix and force everyone to buy cable TV again.
I bought music from Google once. They required that I use their app to play it online. I could download it in MP3 format, but I was only allowed to do so a certain number of times. (Four, IIRC.) Contrast this with Amazon which will sell me the digital music, let me play it online or download it as many times as I like in non-DRMed MP3 format. That's why all of my music purchases (except that one described above) are from Amazon and not Google.
The first Kindle was actually released in 2007. (Source)
Microsoft is almost 10 years late to the party.
s/eBook story/eBook store/g
I wish there was an edit function to correct these minor typos.
Many libraries will also lend out Kindle versions of books. (They automatically expire and then can't be opened when due.) As an author, I love the Kindle platform. I make more money on the sale of a Kindle book than I do on the sale of a paperback. If Microsoft wants to even put a dent in Amazon's eBook empire, they're going to need cross-compatibility and a ton of titles to attract users and good royalty payment structures for authors. If their eBook store doesn't offer authors enough of a cut of sales, we'll all stick with Amazon. If not enough books are available, users won't use the service. If there aren't enough users, authors/publishing companies won't bother releasing their books on Microsoft's platform.
Side note: I liked that Amazon gave me the choice of whether to include DRM or not. (I didn't include it.) Somehow, I can't see Microsoft's eBook story NOT forcing DRM on all of the eBooks.
We rarely buy DVDs or Blu-Rays anymore simply because streaming satisfies most of our viewing needs. When we want to watch something that's not on streaming, we'll request it from our local library and get it on DVD (because that's the format they have the most of). In rare instances when we actually buy a title, we might get it on DVD to save money if we don't care about it THAT much, but most times we'll buy the Blu-Ray version that comes with a DVD copy as well.
You might not care, but the studios would. If they think they can increase DVD sales by not letting Netflix stream the movie, they'll do so. Netflix's library can already be a bit thin at times and this could worsen it. (Win win in the mind of the studios except that piracy would increase without Netflix.)
It's good to hear of someone else that doesn't swear. I don't either. My wife, on the other hand, grew up around hockey players. Apparently, they say things that would make sailors blush. She has no qualms about letting the curse words fly. I don't mind her cursing and she doesn't mind my lack of it.
I never swear. I'm not sure why, but I've never felt the need to swear. I'll admit to swearing once - to shock a close friend of mine. I said "the C word" out of nowhere to go for maximum effect. Probably shouldn't have done it while he was driving, we almost went off the road. As far as the honesty scale goes, I'm honest to a fault. I have a lot of trouble lying. It stresses me out considerably and the truth will often burst out of my mouth before I can stop it.
And even if you can, it's hard to be heard above all the other people who are writing/creating. In October, I published my first novel. Now, I have no delusions that it'd be a New York Times Bestseller, but I think it's pretty good. As I'm working on the sequel, I started trying to "sell" it. The only problem is that I'm much better at writing a book than at selling it. There are hundreds of other books out there and getting people to actually buy and read yours is an uphill battle.
In the end, I have a full-time job and wrote this book for enjoyment rather than income. If I had to rely on it for my income, though, I'd be in huge trouble.
Tapes had portability going for them back in the day. You could take a lot more cassette tapes with you than you could vinyl records. Plus, a cassette player fit into your car easier than a record player would. They weren't a great solution, but they were the best we had with the technology of the day. However, their portability edge was surpassed by CDs and then shattered by MP3s.
The last time I touched a cassette tape was when I found one in my old room at my parents' house and decided to show my kids how I listened to music. They were fascinated with it but quickly grew frustrated by being unable to fast forward or rewind to the exact spot where a song began.
The remedies are already in place. Suppose someone posts on Slashdot advertising a human trafficking operation. If Slashdot were liable for user comments, Slashdot would immediately be guilty of abetting said operation. Of course, the site isn't liable so they're not immediately at risk of a lawsuit over the situation. The proper response is to report the comment and Slashdot either takes it down (and thus shields themselves from liability) or decides to leave it up (in which case, they might expose themselves to liability). Alternatively, the authorities could subpoena Slashdot (through proper legal channels) to get information on the person who made the post.
With this system in place, sites can host user-generated content without hiring armies of human (as opposed to automated) moderators. (Imagine how many moderators YouTube, Twitter, or Facebook would need to hire just to keep up with the flood of content!) Meanwhile, it also allows for illegal comments to be removed - something that any site worth its salt wants to ensure anyway if only to keep the spam out.
Publishing basic facts like: "Mark Hamill was born 25 September 1951 in Oakland, California, USA" shouldn't fall under anti-discrimination laws. In fact, while looking up Mark's birthday for this comment, I noticed that IMDB doesn't actually post the actor's age. Sure, you can subtract 1951 from 2016 to get his age, but IMDB only gives you his date of birth. This is a fact, not a judgement call.
Now, if IMDB was regularly posting incorrect birth dates, there might be some issue, but posting the date that celebrities were born isn't discrimination.
For me and my wife, I'm sure that Autism plays something of a role. My son was diagnosed as autistic a few years back (Asperger's Syndrome) and while reading up on the subject everything clicked. I've always known I was different from "normal people," but never knew why. Growing up and loving Star Trek, I always associated with Data - always trying to figure out social situations and feeling utterly baffled by things that most people got so easily. Over the years, I've gotten pretty good. I can have actual conversations and deal with most social situations that I encounter.
Still, nonverbal cues are lost on me. My wife is neurotypical and it always amazes me when we go into meetings with people. I'll come out thinking the meeting went well, but she'll point out that this person was rolling their eyes and that person was doing that, etc. She'll have an entirely different view of the meeting because she catches all these nonverbal cues that I miss. It's one reason I love online conversations. The closest you come to nonverbal cues is emoticons or emoji and those are simple to understand.
Never that bad, but recently someone I've known for years bought my book and wanted me to sign it for them. My mind picked that exact moment to misplace their name. I asked if she wanted it personalized (thinking maybe I could get away with just signing my name) and she said "Of course, after all, we're friends." I was trapped. My mind offered up "Susan" so I asked if I should make it out to Sue or Susan. Needless to say, that wasn't even close to her name.
On the bright side, with all my embarrassment over the situation, I don't think I'll ever forget that person's name again.
Ironically, seeing people as objects can be a great help in crowds. My wife hates crowds. I don't love them, but don't mind venturing into them as much. My theory is that she sees all these people, interprets attitudes about us based on what they do or say near us, and sees their actions and judges how rude these people are being. I, on the other hand, view the crowds of people as a series of mobile objects. I'm not so rude as to just barrel through them, knocking them over, but I also don't care if one of the "objects" thinks I'm rude because I've led my boys ahead of them when they're walking slowly.
A few years back where Google Glasses were gaining in popularity (and controversy), I was looking forward to them. I wanted them to come with a facial recognition application that would put little floating name tags over people's heads along with some pertinent information.
"Name: Murray Douglas. Known Via: Work. Association: Developed department X website for him in June 2007. Last sighting: Two years ago in the mall while clothes shopping."
I'd completely buy a pair of computerized glasses if I never had to worry about not recognizing people's faces or forgetting people's names (or even worse, misremembering and calling someone I've known for years by the wrong name) ever again.
I can remember random movie lines from films and TV shows I saw decades ago, but faces and names drop through my brain like water through a sieve. I've gotten very good at faking knowing who a person is, but I still have trip-up moments where I need to ask my wife who a person was.
"That was Jenny. Don't you remember? We saw her, her husband Tom, and their kids Jane and Billy on June 3rd three years ago while shopping for clothes. We talked for 30 minutes about how our children were doing in school. Remember now?"
I never remember it. I have no clue how my wife retains all that "social information." My brain just doesn't seem to be built for that.
If Apple falls into the no innovation trap, they could eventually join Blackberry in market oblivion. Blackberry was on the top once. If you wanted a mobile phone with all the latest features, you got a Blackberry. Their fans were just as rabid as Apple fans are (for better or worse - not saying that being a rabid fan is always a bad thing). But as other companies (notably, Apple) innovated into their space, Blackberry insisted that they didn't need to keep up. They were on top which (to them) meant that they were doing what the users wanted which meant they didn't need to change. Even as they slid down, they still insisted that they didn't need to change. By the time they realized change was needed, they were too far gone.
If Apple's not careful, they can wind up as another Blackberry. Short term profits are nice, but can blind you to long term trends.
As a writer, it's also annoying when automatic curly quotes put the wrong quote in. For example (using curly braces instead of quotes since curly quotes wouldn't appear):
{He walked to the store, { she said.
There's two opening quotes there and the only way to spot it is to look closely. Not hard with one sentence, but try doing that in an entire 60,000+ word novel. (I have. It's not fun.)
But Stephen Hawking himself said it was ok. Who are we to argue with The Hawk?
I crunched the numbers (before the Carrie Fisher news hit) using http://fiftiesweb.com/dead/dead-people-2016/ as my guide. 2016 has killed the most celebrities (140 when you add in Ricky Harris, Carrie Fisher, and Richard Adams) than any year since 2000 (the earliest year that site had listings for). It was 40% more than the next closest year, 2005.
As Leia, she was a blaster-toting Rebel leader. Off screen, she battled with mental illness and came forward about it - enabling many other people to feel like they were not alone. She was the toughest Princess ever. RIP Carrie.
Being able to download a human mind into a robotic body would definitely have some major societal impacts. Would you still be married to your spouse if their mind was downloaded into a robotic body before they died? Or does "till death do us part" kick in and you're not married anymore? What happens if someone is kidnapped, has their mind downloaded into a robotic body, and then both human and robot escape? Are both the human and robot the same person? Could a person have a hundred copies of himself/herself running around? If a crime is committed by one of these robot duplicates, is the original human responsible?
There's a bunch of really good science fiction stories here.