We are contacting you regarding a past Prime Video purchase(s). The below content is no longer playable on Prime Video.
In an effort to compensate you for the inconvenience, we have applied a £5.99 Amazon Gift Card to your account. The Gift Card amount is equal to the amount you paid for the Prime Video purchase(s). To apologize for the inconvenience, we’ve also added an Amazon Gift Certificate of £5 to your account. Your Gift Card balance will be automatically applied to your next eligible order. You can view your balance and usage history in Your Account here:
Companies issuing refunds in the form of gift cards is just straight-up insulting
And it may be illegal in some states to not offer the customer an actual refund.
£5.99 refund. Quite clearly not in the US.
Sssh… Everyone lives in default country
Default country is best country.
Take me down to %DEFAULT_CITY where the grass is %DEFAULT_COLOR and the girls are %DESCRIPTIVE_ADJECTIVE
I know they probably actually meant the States of the US, but…
They did say states with a lowercase s. ‘States’ = regions within a country, ‘states’ = can mean countries. Technically they aren’t defaulting to the US.
£ is from a country that does not have states
But it IS a state. Sorry if you’re not a native English speaker but just because your vocabulary is lacking doesn’t mean they are wrong.
Remember, streaming only has a business model as long as it has a better user experience than piracy. That’s why iTunes took off in the era of Napster. When a streaming service’s user experience drops below that of digging up pirate treasure off a shitty ad-ridden torrent site, that service is not long for the world.
I cancelled Netflix and prime and went back to piracy a few months ago, it’s been a nice blast from the past
In addition to piracy, I’ve also been checking out DVDs from my local library. It’s kinda fun.
Surprised myself because I half expected I’d miss the convenience of Netflix, but I haven’t missed it even a little.
“Was I a good streaming platform?”
“No.”
The benefit of the library DVD is it takes away the “What will we watch tonight?” conversation. You’re going to watch the DVD.
It just switches the question to the library: “What will we borrow tonight?”
Source: experience from my Blockbuster days.
If you can’t save it, its not yours. Sail the seas.
Or buy it on physical media. More and more studios are pulling their disks and it is getting harder to find. If you have a disk, it can never be recalled.
Ever since Disney announced they are also going to ban account sharing, I’ve been going to thrift stores and grabbing any DVDs my children like or might like. I’ve gotten quite a few classics so far for less than the cost of one month of Disney+. I almost bought a VCR because the VHS collection at thrift stores here is huge and they are so cheap, but rewinding sucks.
I don’t think you realize how unwatchably blurry VHS is. I can’t believe we ever watched those things now.
DVD is still a bit of a nuisance because of aspect ratios and they’re a little blurry because SD, but VHS is just garbage.
VHS can look as good as DVD (or better in cases where the DVD was poorly mastered), but there aren’t many good VCRs out there anymore. A well maintained VHS tape and VCR can give you a great capture. https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-restore/1567-vcr-buying-guide.html
It’s easy to scoff at this whole “You will own nothing, and you will be happy” phrase, but it’s really gone too far already.
I’m really tired of hearing “you don’t own it you own a license to it” like it’s some revelation for people complaining. We’re aware that the system has been constructed to benefit media companies at the expense of consumers.
To be honest; I never really bought the argument anyway. From a legal standpoint I don’t give half a shit. From a layman’s standpoint it’s bullshit. Nowhere do they use terms like “rent” or “lease”. They explicitly use terms like “buy” and it’s not until the fine print that the term license even comes up.
They know they’re pissing on you and telling you it’s raining and the goobers doing their legwork by repeating the sentence like they just came up with it annoy me to no end.
You don’t own the video file. You own access to their video file, which they also don’t own, they only own the right to distribute it. If their distribution contract ends and doesn’t gets renewed, then they can’t let you access the file. At least they refunded you. This system is one of the issues with the ongoing writers and actors strikes. Amazon can decide to stop making a video available, which cuts all dividends revenues to actors and writers. So having a video available for you to watch costs money to Amazon (or Netflix or Max…) but not enough content makes users unsubscribe, so they ride that thin line for maximized revenue. This means that older movies that aren’t blockbusters get dropped in favor of new content. Now new content doesn’t means good content, remember, it needs to be as cheap as possible. Aaand this is why steaming companies are spiraling down and everything is going to shit. Filmmaking is an art form turned into an industry. But art isn’t about maximized profit, it’s about art first. But you can’t make that art without millions of dollars and that requires the art to take a step back to maximize profit, but not too far back. It’s a really big issue in the film and entertainment industry.
— I’m an IATSE local 600 camera operator.
Digital goods are just not physical goods, you don’t really own them - which also mean you can’t really steal them.
The only thing that surprises me is that anyone is surprised by this. If you buy a physical book from anywhere, you own it. If you “buy” the rigth to play a movie (or read a book) from amazon, you own nothing. Usually they don’t show that so clearly but that’s the reality.
If you buy a physical book from anywhere, you own it.
Even that isn’t strictly true, as IP laws metasticize and mutate over time. But its far more expensive to try and reclaim a book than to revoke a digital license on a 3rd party repository.
If you kept your digital copy of a digital book on an e-reader in airplane mode, you’d have as much access to that as any trade paperback. And backing up my collection of PDFs to a drive is significantly easier than shouldering a shelf’s worth of books.
The fundamental issue with digital media is that its ultimately convenient to access a central digital archive than to keep your own personal collections on hand and catalogued. But then you have to ask the question “Who controls that central digital archive?” And if its a bad actor, there’s your problem. Its the same problem physical libraries have, too. Don’t let the guy who burned down the Library of Alexandria run your neighborhood branch. Don’t let Ron DeSantis near it, either.
Being a pirate is alright to be
steam scares me
if one day they go mental i will lose so many games.
i have a pc with a large ass harddisk just to download and save all single player games and never update them.
always play offline.
but they already changed it so you cant play offline really idk maybe it was just that game
I think the fear mongering on Steam is excessive. The games stay offline on your disk, and most of them don’t have a DRM. Gabe Newell has also said that, in case Steam ever shutters, an exit plan will be provided. As for the Steam native DRM, there are already open source implementations that can be used to bypass it and Valve hasn’t done anything against it in years - so the only problematic DRMs are Denuvo and similar, which Steam does not control.
GOG used to be a valid alternative, but it isn’t anymore. With CDPR themselves publishing games with DRM on GOG, on top of starting to be lenient on DRMs, they are literally having something similar to a DRM that is required for some games, a GOG Galaxy API that is completely closed source. And it doesn’t support Linux, the FOSS operating system.
The fact that after years GOG still doesn’t seem to care about Linux, CDPR releases their games for Windows only (and more often than not with DRM), and Cyberpunk 2077 only runs on Linux thanks to Valve’s efforts is also worrying from a game conservation and ownership standpoint: Windows is a Proprietary operating system completely controlled by Microsoft, who can perform modifications remotely and is allegedly planning to popularize a model where people are sold very low spec PCs that only need to stream a Windows computer from the cloud with more powerful specs… not the platform I want to entrust the future of gaming to.
All in all, Steam is still the mainstream gaming platform I dislike the least and trust the most. If I’m going to buy a game and hope it’s going to be playable decades into the future, it used to be GOG, but now it’s Steam from me.
Well said.
actually that seems fair. they gave you an extra 5
if steam refunded all my games i would be so happy
If I take something from your home and then leave you what I’ve decided unilaterally is fair compensation for it, and you know nothing of the transaction until after it has happened, would that seem fair to you? Asking because I’m pretty confident you have a refrigerator and I know for sure that I’ve got a crisp, fresh one dollar bill.
leave you what I’ve decided unilaterally is fair compensation for it,
I don’t think that’s a fair assumption.
In your hypothetical I believe you would get refunded the price you purchased for each game.
Though really what I think would happen would be just the Steam DRM would be removed from all games and you’d have an opportunity to download the ones you own.
It’s that they didn’t ask. That’s the important part here. Amazon negotiated both sides of this “agreement”, decided that they were treating themselves fairly, agreed with themselves and then executed the transaction.
It’s that they didn’t ask. That’s the important part here. Amazon negotiated both sides of this “agreement”
Yeah but we were talking about Steam, not Amazon.
At least that’s what I was replying to, and when you replied to my reply, I thought you too were talking about Steam.
actually that seems fair. they gave you an extra 5
was the part I was responding to in the OP, and when you engaged about the unilateral compensation decision I assumed that’s what you were talking about.
if steam refunded all my games i would be so happy
What I was responding back about.
It’s just a long term licence to watch it
Strictly speaking, so is a DVD or other physical media, per the EULA they flash across the screen for half a second before starting the show and therefore makes it legally binding.
The big difference is that nobody’s running around trying to claw back DVDs. Whereas, with Amazon, its trivially easy to just click “Remove License” from the repository and snatch back an arbitrary number of licenses. Purely a question of convenience.
Of course, if you have a… uh… backup copy stored conveniently on a PLEX server, then they can’t claw that back either.
blu-rays are often as cheap or cheaper than “digital copies”, and ripping them to my NAS is pretty trivial these days thanks to makemkv.
the best part is, uncle jeff cannot legally break into your house and take back the disc just because of some petty rights issue.
I recently bought a 4k Blu-ray player. My brother asked me if I also bought a fax machine because streaming is “where it’s at” . Nah My 4k player cleans up DVDs really nice where streaming has artifacts and banding. Not only is it true ownership but a better quality.
4k streaming is also way lower quality than a 4k blu-ray
That is misinformation. The quality disparity you’re both pointing out is from streaming services compressing their media to much lower bitrates to ease bandwidth stress on their servers/clients and has nothing to do with a physical or digital medium.
lower bitrate == lower quality when using the same compression algorithms.
most streaming services are using h.265, same as 4k blu ray, but at substantially lower bitrates
streaming dolby vision profiles are also gimped considerably compared to blu-ray dolby vision
Doubling down on the misinformation, I see. H.265 is a high-efficiency codec, or in other words a better compression standard. Not a static compression level. This is why when you convert media there’s an input for quality, even when using HEVC. And you can absolutely stream the same Dolby Vision profile as a Blu-ray with single track double layer.
You’re still conflating digital medium with streaming services.
i am more than well aware of all of this. nothing i said is misinformation. same algorithm, different settings. the primary means by which you reduce bitrate with h.265 is by reducing the quality setting. there is no magical way to cut your bitrate by 75% using the same compression algorithm without sacrificing quality. no commercial streaming service is offering video at the same quality level as a 4k blu-ray.
few streaming boxes even support dolby vision profile 7, and no commercial streaming service offers it. so saying you can get it through a streaming service is actual misinformation.
i have literally been doing this shit for 20 years
i am more than well aware of all of this. nothing i said is misinformation
Your entire presupposition that Blu-ray quality is better than streaming quality by default is misinformation, and I’ve already explained why.
no commercial streaming service is offering video at the same quality level as a 4k blu-ray.
What does that have to do with digital media?
This is also demonstrably untrue if you take 5 seconds to research self-hosted streaming services.
few streaming boxes even support dolby vision profile 7, and no commercial streaming service offers it
Plex on Nvidia Shield. EZPZ.
there is no magical way to cut your bitrate by 75% using the same compression algorithm without sacrificing quality
I never said anything in contradiction to this. I don’t know who you’re shadow-boxing.
You know where Amazon (and any other company for that matter) can’t pull content from? My Jellyfin instance. Yo-ho-ho!
True. But your jellyfish instance only really works for you and a few trusted friends/neighbors. I would still like a comprehensive library that I can browse and select from at a moment’s notice.
The infuriating nature of Amazon / Hollywood / IP law / etc, is that these two combined goals are inimicable to the profit motive. I can’t have access to a big public library of continent, because that means someone else won’t be able to collect the real-time maximal market-rate from me to access it.
Shit happens. Tech breaks. You forget where you leave things. People outside your social circle (people you’ll never know existed) will want access to that same media at some future date. And Jellyfin doesn’t get them that.
But your jellyfish instance only really works for you
Yes, and that’s the whole point of it. It works even if my internet access goes down, and kids are screaming for their cartoons. Peace of mind.
🏴☠️
