This is what I currently do too (but mine's only 23"), but the problem here is that it's just too small: it's nicer to have a bigger screen, and mount it on the wall.
But yeah, I don't really want a "TV" either, I just want a big-ass monitor. I don't give two shits about watching cable TV programming, I just want to watch Netflix and other stuff from my computer. It would be nice to have a dedicated media computer plugged into it though, instead of messing around with the laptop. Future project...
and pursue charges against those who originally created the tool, also, they still commit a crime and can eventually be pursued, even if they are in Russia...
Sorry, that's total bullshit. Proof: Edward Snowden.
Yes, all this would greatly reduce the number of people using it though because most people aren't savvy enough to find software like this.
Netflix-style DRM would work, but it'd also make it so YT doesn't work on some browsers (namely Firefox and Chromium on Linux, not sure about other OSes). Not a great move for a free service.
But suing users would look really bad (can't wait to see the news headlines about that). It's possible, but also a great way to give their name a big black eye. "We'll sue you if you violate our terms of service!" is not a good way to treat your visitors.
Fine, they'll get a Russian domain name then. ThePirateBay's been operating for quite a while with silly LE goons trying to take it down with little effect.
I'm not that impressed with the small Vizio smart TV I got a couple of years ago.
Is that Vizio any worse at these things than the competition? I'm pretty sure the answer is "no". All those "smart TVs" suck in the ways you complain about.
What's important is how the Vizio compares to its competitors like Samsung: how much does it cost, and how good is the picture? That's it. (Maybe: how good are the built-in speakers) If you like the old PC for accessing the internet, then plug that into the TV instead. If you don't like the PC's user interface while you're on the couch, then please show me a better alternative; if there isn't one on the market, then your complaints don't make sense, unless you're just complaining about smart TVs in general. It's not fair to pick on one brand when they're all bad in the same way.
It is also trivial for Google to seriously hamper this utility and others like it.
No, it's not. They can't tell the difference between a legitimate browser and a download tool, if the download tool is written specifically to emulate a browser.
YouTube, can simply, throttle its transfer speeds. Instead of allowing me to download an MP4 at max-bandwidth speeds, just serve up the bits slightly faster than real-time speed.
Yeah, so? WhoTF cares? You really think that's going to make people stop downloading them? People have no trouble letting slow-ass BitTorrent downloads run for hours or days, *much* slower than real-time speed. Downloading stuff off YouTube is much easier than finding torrents; if it takes a little longer, so what? Let it run in the background. They already have JDownloader which downloads from YouTube and will queue up downloads; people will just use that.
Breaking the current version of the tool isn't a problem. They already do this. youtube-dl is easily updated to the latest version with "youtube-dl -U".
However, as for the contributory infringement stuff, that's not a big problem either. That's US law, so if something called "youtube-dl-fork.org" pops up in Russia, there's exactly zero that YouTube or the US authorities can do about it.
Simple: you have to install satellite internet so the TV can phone home and download ads to show you, or your TV won't work.
Don't like it? Don't buy it.
But if 95% of consumers all buy into this crap, then no one's going to make TVs that aren't like this, so at that point unless you're willing to subscribe to expensive satellite internet service just so you can see ads, then your choices will be either go without TV, or buy a used TV that predates this stuff.
You have the freedom (for now) of not buying such a device, and buying one which doesn't treat you this way. But if almost everyone is dumb enough to buy into this crap, then the free-er devices won't be sold any more and you'll have a choice between buying the spying TV, not buying a TV at all, or trying to find a used one that doesn't spy on you and show you ads.
Yeah, exactly. I guess I should just make "service" a category by itself, because if you need your bike or your car fixed and you don't want to do it yourself, or can't, an internet shop isn't going to be of much help. Toy stores, furniture stores, and to an extent, bookstores, all fall into the "want to personally inspect it before buying", and also to the "low value density" factors.
Looks like Samsung is now another that just won't get connected to a network. There is no point in connecting these anyway.
Wrong. There's already TVs that you have to connect to the internet or they won't work at all. Surely Samsung will just do this (if they haven't already).
Personally, I think this stuff is great. It's fun to see how much crap consumers will put up with.
Yep, 1984 wasn't that bad that way. In the near future, not only will they make sure our telescreens spy on us, they'll require us to have them, and we'll be required to buy them, since ObamaCare already established the precedent that the government can force you to pay for something, from a private party, that it thinks you need.
(And just to be clear, I do believe people should have health care and coverage for it, but not from private insurance companies; if the government thinks we need it, it should provide it directly in the form of universal healthcare, just like it already does with Medicare.)
While I personally agree with you, the court system does not. EULAs (including "click-wrap" licenses) have been upheld in court. And good luck financing a legal case against one of these companies.
Plasma TVs suck: they consume a huge amount of power, and they're prone to burn-in and fading, so if for example you watch narrow-width programs on a wide-screen plasma TV, this will show up on the screen over time. Also, plasmas have a limited lifespan; the screen gets dimmer as it ages.
It'd be better for you to pick up a good LED-backlit LCD "dumb TV" while you still can, because these avoid these problems. Pretty soon, you'll only be able to buy a "smart TV" which not only shows you ads, but actually requires an internet connection to work at all.
Yeah, I'm sure I missed a bunch of points. Really, the whole thing could probably be condensed into a more concise and generalized list of things which make B&M stores more attractive than online ones, because your tomato point is almost exactly like the one about trying on clothes.
Some ideas for general pro-B&M points: 1) ability to see/feel/try on in-person rather than through photos 2) low "value density" (cheap but bulky stuff: you wouldn't want to buy mulch or hay online and ship it by FedEx. And anything over 70 lbs or so can only be shipped by freight, which is expensive.) 3) lots of people in the local area buying this same thing, improving economies of scale for a retailer
Some combination of the above 3 points seems to make a B&M retailer hard to compete with for online sellers.
Oh please, almost no one's going to stop buying Samsung TVs because of this. People just aren't that smart. Samsung's TV revenues have fallen because there's cheaper competition that looks just as good. So they're going to make more money on their remaining loyal customers by showing them ads. Many people are going to continue to buy Samsung just because the price is higher and they're seen as more prestigious, so just like lots of people happily buy BMWs and then pay small fortunes to repair them, lots of people will continue to buy Samsungs and then happily watch the ads because they'll convince themselves that after paying all that money for something that's no better than a cheaper alternative, that the ads are part of the wonderful experience.
Exactly: people laughed and mocked Stallman for his principles and advocacy of Free software, and now look at how things are turning out: he's been proven right. But people made their choice, and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Part of me is laughing my ass off about a lot of stuff going on these days like this, or like Windows 10 and all the stuff people complain about there, because people have done it to themselves. I think the future is likely to turn out like a hellish cross between 1984 and Minority Report, and I have a weird feeling I'm going to be gleefully watching my fellow humans suffer in misery in my old age, and I won't have any sympathy whatsoever.
There's plenty of brick-and-mortar stores that still work well, for various reasons. I'll name a few:
1) grocery stores (which you mentioned): groceries tend to be high-volume, and low dollar-density, that is, they take up a bunch of space but aren't very valuable. Think of a loaf of bread: it costs a dollar or two, but it's pretty sizeable, and would cost more to ship by UPS than the bread itself is worth. Also, lots and lots of people within a 10-mile radius want to buy it, and on a very regular basis too. This is even more true of frozen goods: shipping is very expensive for cold stuff in small quantities, but when you do it in a giant refrigerated truck from the source to a single grocery store, it's cheap because of economies of scale. Finally, grocery stores let you browse around and buy lots and lots of these small, cheap things all in one visit, just grabbing them off the shelf as you walk by. Doing all that online would be cumbersome and the shipping would be too expensive. Online grocers have been around for a while, but it's never caught on well. Amazon's had some success with dry goods, but not huge.
2) hardware store (Lowe's, Home Depot): very similar to grocery stores. The stuff they sell is either small, cheap stuff (like electrical sockets) or otherwise stuff that lots of locals want to buy, so the economies of scale afforded by having a big store with big trucks delivering to them works out. A lot of the stuff they sell is big and heavy, and not very valuable (low dollar-density as I put it above), and they deal in big enough volumes that they can afford to keep prices low. I can stop by HD and buy a new wall switch for less than $0.50, for instance; good luck getting one online for that price. Or what if I need an 8-foot copper pipe or a 12-foot-long piece of lumber? The UPS shipping charges would be insane for that, but I can run by my local HD and pick up the lumber for less than $2.
3) convenience stores (Wawa, etc.). If you're driving and want to stop for a cold drink, an online store isn't much help. Also, gas stations for obvious reasons. And restaurants too for obvious reasons.
4) clothing stores. You can't try on clothes from online shops easily, and shipping stuff back and forth so you can try out three different sizes or 15 different styles is not economical. There are plenty of clothing stores online, but they're mostly online versions of the B&M stores, which haven't gone anywhere yet.
5) auto parts stores. A lot of this has moved online, but Autozone hasn't shut down yet. There again, a lot of items are cheap but bulky, and a lot of times people don't want to wait for shipping because they need to fix their car quickly. If you can wait, though, you can frequently get better deals online. But if you need a new axle tonight so you can go to work tomorrow, you can't beat Autozone.
6) shipping stores. FedEx and UPS charge you extra to pick up a package you're sending.
So there's still a lot of places where B&M stores aren't in danger of dying, because what they do can't be easily done online, they allow the customer to inspect the merchandise before buying, they sell stuff that has a low "value density", or they offer a level of convenience and speed that online shops can't match.
But yeah, the idea of waiting around for some B&M store to order something for you is pretty stupid and archaic: you'll pay much more for the item, plus you'll have to schedule a trip to pick it up during store hours. It made sense in 1970, but not now.
I'm sorry, I don't see how they can easily go after youtube-dl. It's not a service, it's a downloadable program. youtube-dl (the organization who produces the program) doesn't access the Youtube website; only the people who download their program do. And finally, it'd be easy for youtube-dl to simply move its website to another country where Youtube can't touch it.
I wouldn't buy a Samsung TV anyway: they're all "smart TVs" now so naturally they're going to be prone to this kind of crap. Stick with the dumb TVs. I'm pretty sure Seiki still sells good-quality dumb TVs, maybe Vizio too.
Right, but if you're using GPL-licensed components, those do require you to follow the terms of the GPL. Now of course, if you're not distributing, then it really doesn't apply, but this simple fact doesn't seem to be understood at all within many companies. They just automatically discard it, much like Americans whenever they hear the word "socialism" (meanwhile, they scream if anyone touches their Social Security...).
Actually, while those people are morons for confusing cat and human fetuses, the cat fetuses are the ones which really shouldn't be aborted, because they're going to grow up to become cute, furry, and intelligent animals, and the human ones will mostly grow up to just be assholes like all these jerks here on Slashdot.
Of course, birds might disagree with this sentiment.
Slashdot Mirror
This is what I currently do too (but mine's only 23"), but the problem here is that it's just too small: it's nicer to have a bigger screen, and mount it on the wall.
But yeah, I don't really want a "TV" either, I just want a big-ass monitor. I don't give two shits about watching cable TV programming, I just want to watch Netflix and other stuff from my computer. It would be nice to have a dedicated media computer plugged into it though, instead of messing around with the laptop. Future project...
and pursue charges against those who originally created the tool, also, they still commit a crime and can eventually be pursued, even if they are in Russia...
Sorry, that's total bullshit. Proof: Edward Snowden.
Yes, all this would greatly reduce the number of people using it though because most people aren't savvy enough to find software like this.
Netflix-style DRM would work, but it'd also make it so YT doesn't work on some browsers (namely Firefox and Chromium on Linux, not sure about other OSes). Not a great move for a free service.
But suing users would look really bad (can't wait to see the news headlines about that). It's possible, but also a great way to give their name a big black eye. "We'll sue you if you violate our terms of service!" is not a good way to treat your visitors.
Fine, they'll get a Russian domain name then. ThePirateBay's been operating for quite a while with silly LE goons trying to take it down with little effect.
The advertisements probably made no mention of every single app or web service the TV was capable of either.
Besides, how much is it going to cost you to sue them for a $500 TV, and to give them proper service of process?
I'm not that impressed with the small Vizio smart TV I got a couple of years ago.
Is that Vizio any worse at these things than the competition? I'm pretty sure the answer is "no". All those "smart TVs" suck in the ways you complain about.
What's important is how the Vizio compares to its competitors like Samsung: how much does it cost, and how good is the picture? That's it. (Maybe: how good are the built-in speakers) If you like the old PC for accessing the internet, then plug that into the TV instead. If you don't like the PC's user interface while you're on the couch, then please show me a better alternative; if there isn't one on the market, then your complaints don't make sense, unless you're just complaining about smart TVs in general. It's not fair to pick on one brand when they're all bad in the same way.
It is also trivial for Google to seriously hamper this utility and others like it.
No, it's not. They can't tell the difference between a legitimate browser and a download tool, if the download tool is written specifically to emulate a browser.
YouTube, can simply, throttle its transfer speeds. Instead of allowing me to download an MP4 at max-bandwidth speeds, just serve up the bits slightly faster than real-time speed.
Yeah, so? WhoTF cares? You really think that's going to make people stop downloading them? People have no trouble letting slow-ass BitTorrent downloads run for hours or days, *much* slower than real-time speed. Downloading stuff off YouTube is much easier than finding torrents; if it takes a little longer, so what? Let it run in the background. They already have JDownloader which downloads from YouTube and will queue up downloads; people will just use that.
Breaking the current version of the tool isn't a problem. They already do this. youtube-dl is easily updated to the latest version with "youtube-dl -U".
However, as for the contributory infringement stuff, that's not a big problem either. That's US law, so if something called "youtube-dl-fork.org" pops up in Russia, there's exactly zero that YouTube or the US authorities can do about it.
Simple: you have to install satellite internet so the TV can phone home and download ads to show you, or your TV won't work.
Don't like it? Don't buy it.
But if 95% of consumers all buy into this crap, then no one's going to make TVs that aren't like this, so at that point unless you're willing to subscribe to expensive satellite internet service just so you can see ads, then your choices will be either go without TV, or buy a used TV that predates this stuff.
You have the freedom (for now) of not buying such a device, and buying one which doesn't treat you this way. But if almost everyone is dumb enough to buy into this crap, then the free-er devices won't be sold any more and you'll have a choice between buying the spying TV, not buying a TV at all, or trying to find a used one that doesn't spy on you and show you ads.
Yeah, exactly. I guess I should just make "service" a category by itself, because if you need your bike or your car fixed and you don't want to do it yourself, or can't, an internet shop isn't going to be of much help. Toy stores, furniture stores, and to an extent, bookstores, all fall into the "want to personally inspect it before buying", and also to the "low value density" factors.
Looks like Samsung is now another that just won't get connected to a network. There is no point in connecting these anyway.
Wrong. There's already TVs that you have to connect to the internet or they won't work at all. Surely Samsung will just do this (if they haven't already).
Personally, I think this stuff is great. It's fun to see how much crap consumers will put up with.
Yep, 1984 wasn't that bad that way. In the near future, not only will they make sure our telescreens spy on us, they'll require us to have them, and we'll be required to buy them, since ObamaCare already established the precedent that the government can force you to pay for something, from a private party, that it thinks you need.
(And just to be clear, I do believe people should have health care and coverage for it, but not from private insurance companies; if the government thinks we need it, it should provide it directly in the form of universal healthcare, just like it already does with Medicare.)
While I personally agree with you, the court system does not. EULAs (including "click-wrap" licenses) have been upheld in court. And good luck financing a legal case against one of these companies.
Plasma TVs suck: they consume a huge amount of power, and they're prone to burn-in and fading, so if for example you watch narrow-width programs on a wide-screen plasma TV, this will show up on the screen over time. Also, plasmas have a limited lifespan; the screen gets dimmer as it ages.
It'd be better for you to pick up a good LED-backlit LCD "dumb TV" while you still can, because these avoid these problems. Pretty soon, you'll only be able to buy a "smart TV" which not only shows you ads, but actually requires an internet connection to work at all.
Yeah, I'm sure I missed a bunch of points. Really, the whole thing could probably be condensed into a more concise and generalized list of things which make B&M stores more attractive than online ones, because your tomato point is almost exactly like the one about trying on clothes.
Some ideas for general pro-B&M points:
1) ability to see/feel/try on in-person rather than through photos
2) low "value density" (cheap but bulky stuff: you wouldn't want to buy mulch or hay online and ship it by FedEx. And anything over 70 lbs or so can only be shipped by freight, which is expensive.)
3) lots of people in the local area buying this same thing, improving economies of scale for a retailer
Some combination of the above 3 points seems to make a B&M retailer hard to compete with for online sellers.
Nope, you'll have to connect it to the internet for it to even work. There's already some TVs like this.
Oh please, almost no one's going to stop buying Samsung TVs because of this. People just aren't that smart. Samsung's TV revenues have fallen because there's cheaper competition that looks just as good. So they're going to make more money on their remaining loyal customers by showing them ads. Many people are going to continue to buy Samsung just because the price is higher and they're seen as more prestigious, so just like lots of people happily buy BMWs and then pay small fortunes to repair them, lots of people will continue to buy Samsungs and then happily watch the ads because they'll convince themselves that after paying all that money for something that's no better than a cheaper alternative, that the ads are part of the wonderful experience.
What are you going to sue for? You agree to this when you agreed to the EULA. Have fun with all your ads, suckers!
Exactly: people laughed and mocked Stallman for his principles and advocacy of Free software, and now look at how things are turning out: he's been proven right. But people made their choice, and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Part of me is laughing my ass off about a lot of stuff going on these days like this, or like Windows 10 and all the stuff people complain about there, because people have done it to themselves. I think the future is likely to turn out like a hellish cross between 1984 and Minority Report, and I have a weird feeling I'm going to be gleefully watching my fellow humans suffer in misery in my old age, and I won't have any sympathy whatsoever.
There's plenty of brick-and-mortar stores that still work well, for various reasons. I'll name a few:
1) grocery stores (which you mentioned): groceries tend to be high-volume, and low dollar-density, that is, they take up a bunch of space but aren't very valuable. Think of a loaf of bread: it costs a dollar or two, but it's pretty sizeable, and would cost more to ship by UPS than the bread itself is worth. Also, lots and lots of people within a 10-mile radius want to buy it, and on a very regular basis too. This is even more true of frozen goods: shipping is very expensive for cold stuff in small quantities, but when you do it in a giant refrigerated truck from the source to a single grocery store, it's cheap because of economies of scale. Finally, grocery stores let you browse around and buy lots and lots of these small, cheap things all in one visit, just grabbing them off the shelf as you walk by. Doing all that online would be cumbersome and the shipping would be too expensive. Online grocers have been around for a while, but it's never caught on well. Amazon's had some success with dry goods, but not huge.
2) hardware store (Lowe's, Home Depot): very similar to grocery stores. The stuff they sell is either small, cheap stuff (like electrical sockets) or otherwise stuff that lots of locals want to buy, so the economies of scale afforded by having a big store with big trucks delivering to them works out. A lot of the stuff they sell is big and heavy, and not very valuable (low dollar-density as I put it above), and they deal in big enough volumes that they can afford to keep prices low. I can stop by HD and buy a new wall switch for less than $0.50, for instance; good luck getting one online for that price. Or what if I need an 8-foot copper pipe or a 12-foot-long piece of lumber? The UPS shipping charges would be insane for that, but I can run by my local HD and pick up the lumber for less than $2.
3) convenience stores (Wawa, etc.). If you're driving and want to stop for a cold drink, an online store isn't much help. Also, gas stations for obvious reasons. And restaurants too for obvious reasons.
4) clothing stores. You can't try on clothes from online shops easily, and shipping stuff back and forth so you can try out three different sizes or 15 different styles is not economical. There are plenty of clothing stores online, but they're mostly online versions of the B&M stores, which haven't gone anywhere yet.
5) auto parts stores. A lot of this has moved online, but Autozone hasn't shut down yet. There again, a lot of items are cheap but bulky, and a lot of times people don't want to wait for shipping because they need to fix their car quickly. If you can wait, though, you can frequently get better deals online. But if you need a new axle tonight so you can go to work tomorrow, you can't beat Autozone.
6) shipping stores. FedEx and UPS charge you extra to pick up a package you're sending.
So there's still a lot of places where B&M stores aren't in danger of dying, because what they do can't be easily done online, they allow the customer to inspect the merchandise before buying, they sell stuff that has a low "value density", or they offer a level of convenience and speed that online shops can't match.
But yeah, the idea of waiting around for some B&M store to order something for you is pretty stupid and archaic: you'll pay much more for the item, plus you'll have to schedule a trip to pick it up during store hours. It made sense in 1970, but not now.
I'm sorry, I don't see how they can easily go after youtube-dl. It's not a service, it's a downloadable program. youtube-dl (the organization who produces the program) doesn't access the Youtube website; only the people who download their program do. And finally, it'd be easy for youtube-dl to simply move its website to another country where Youtube can't touch it.
I wouldn't buy a Samsung TV anyway: they're all "smart TVs" now so naturally they're going to be prone to this kind of crap. Stick with the dumb TVs. I'm pretty sure Seiki still sells good-quality dumb TVs, maybe Vizio too.
No one forced you to bone her.
Right, but if you're using GPL-licensed components, those do require you to follow the terms of the GPL. Now of course, if you're not distributing, then it really doesn't apply, but this simple fact doesn't seem to be understood at all within many companies. They just automatically discard it, much like Americans whenever they hear the word "socialism" (meanwhile, they scream if anyone touches their Social Security...).
Actually, while those people are morons for confusing cat and human fetuses, the cat fetuses are the ones which really shouldn't be aborted, because they're going to grow up to become cute, furry, and intelligent animals, and the human ones will mostly grow up to just be assholes like all these jerks here on Slashdot.
Of course, birds might disagree with this sentiment.