Tell HN: I probably spend more on piracy than if I just paid for content

302 points by pirate-Loo6uoDu ↗ HN
I have a confession, I pirate a lot of content. Mostly TV/Movies. That being said, piracy is pretty expensive.

I built a computer with ~30TB of hard drive space. That, conservatively, cost me $1200. It's an older computer, with a lot of hard drives and it's probably costing me around $45 per month in power. I'm going to want to add more storage space soon, and have about $500 slated for that. I pay a usenet subscription, and subscription to indexers, for let's say $10 per month...

So if I stopped pirating I'd have saved $1200 and still have a budget of $55 per month for streaming services.

So why do I still pirate? Well one thing is show availability. There are some must-have shows that simply aren't available in my region (not the US), so I already have to have the piracy infrastructure in place if I want to watch them.

I also very much appreciate having a local copy. It's not like steam where I can just download whatever I want and play it offline (I do mostly buy steam content, if it's on steam I probably don't bother to pirate).

Streaming services still have significant service problems that need to be addressed.

414 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 304 ms ] thread
If you deleted the movies after you watched like you do in streaming services them then you wouldn't need all that storage.
I also appreciate local copies and created a seedbox recently. Torrents still seems better for TV. But I delete shows after I watch them so no need to have such a large amount of space for media.
What do you mean by TOR for TV? Watching foreign TV thorugh Tor network?
I haven't paid for 90-95% of the content I consumed in the past 12 years. I've never spent a cent on it.(and I used to spend many hours watching new movies/shows every single day+Music+AAA games)

Maybe try not hoarding all the half-decent movies on earth in 4K bluray version? at this point you have more data than a small piracy site...

Do you ever feel guilty that if everyone did what you did none of the content would exist? That you are stealing from all the hard working artists and tradespeople that made the content you love?
Do you ever feel guilty the money you give them for entertainment could be going to a hungry mother?

I don't lose sleep over the blockbuster superhero movie that is geared towards the Chinese market changing because something I did. If I had that power I would shut it down and not spend 100 million.

(comment deleted)
If I lift food out of the bin at a michelin star restaurant am I stealing from all the hard working chefs and waiters that made the food? nope.

If every one I know joined me in eating from the bin would the michelin star restaurant go out of business? nope.

No.

For multiple reasons.

First of all when you have a negative net worth you don't care about the royalties of some hollywood rockstars.

2nd of all, I'm not ready to pay 10 different monthly subscriptions while not even being able to watch 100% of what I want.

3rd of all, even though I appreciate the content, I don't necessarily approve the actions of the artist/producer/developer. I don't want to give a cent to a company that ask its underpaid workers for 100 hour work week during crunch time. I don't want to fund a rapist/abuser producer, I don't to fund anyone's yacht or Ferrari.

Even though I absolutely love his movies, I don't want to fund a guy like tarantino who willingly endangered someones life for one scene.

I mostly consume mainstream stuff so most of the money I'd spent would go to people who already are 1000x richer than me.

I don't really enjoy indie games/movies/music, if I were, maybe I'd act differently.

Piracy: you're doing it wrong
Swedish author Wilderäng made a good move. First book of a Trilogy was on Pirate Bay. And then goddämn, I had to buy rest of those books with my own precious money, because it was important to know what happens to Sweden under zombie apocalypse.
In Japan, they also use this tactic to sell other media with anime. There's a certain IP in manga, light novel, or video game form, and it gets a season of anime which presents just a sliver of the full story.
Are you also subscribed to private torrent trackers by chance?
Sounds like they are using usenet+nzb indexer. Probably an nzbget+sonarr+radarr setup.
Seems unlikely, given how heavily they are relying on Usenet.
Piracy and data-hoarding are two different hobbies. One cost next to nothing, the cost of the other one you are quite familiar with..

Jokes aside, would you consider deleting your entire collection and then also cancel subscriptions and possibly give away or sell any tech equipment you do not use for work? And then find something else to do with the newly-freed time? Can you do it for 6 or 12 months? If not, why not? Try to figure out why you are doing it to begin with.

Piracy and such hoarding are inextricably intertwined. If you want a particularly uncommon variant of some pirate content (like an obscure movie in any quality, or a somewhat popular movie in original BD format), you better grab it when it's available, as further down the line getting the exact same such content may be more and more difficult.

Streaming services have a similar issue (re-encoding, bad rereleases due to licensing issues, delistings, crappy format choices in the first place) but generally a bit better SLA-like and a longer timeframe to watch certain content.

> If you want a particularly uncommon variant of some pirate content (like an obscure movie in any quality, or a somewhat popular movie in original BD format), you better grab it when it's available, as further down the line getting the exact same such content may be more and more difficult.

The constant availability of the pirated content is a big driver of the cost here. For some of the obscure stuff, this could be on a backup, or even on something like Amazon Glacier (I.e. no one is watching 30tb of video content regularly), and the resulting computer needed for pirating could be significantly less expensive, both to build/buy and for monthly electricity costs (like a laptop).

Amazon Glacier assumes that you only retrieve a fraction of the data.
That's the same for non-pirates in this rent economy where you don't own the things you buy anymore. And anyone I know who's seriously into movies, meaning they watch stuff far beyond the Follywood mainstream, is part of some online club/"pirate group" if you want to call them that, because there isn't another way to get a lot of the rare stuff. Even though someone may legally hold the rights, but they simply don't make it available to the public.
> "And anyone I know who's seriously into movies, meaning they watch stuff far beyond the Follywood mainstream..."

This sounds pretty dreadful - "Follywood" is hardly clever I'm afraid to say. Especially when linking it to an elite snobbery of being "seriously into movies" .

But please hear me out - I don't mean to just rip on you for a turn of phrase. But there are a couple of things you are maybe overlooking that are sort of implied by tying these concepts together as you have.

Hollywood is a truly magnificent human achievement, but sometimes it's hard to see that when bobbing around in the waves of its deluge. Step back a bit and consider that in the past century it has produced a steady stream of narrative masterpieces that are shared by the whole world. That the stagecraft and special effects have given palpable form to impossible dreams, etc.

In less glowy-flowy terms, it is an overwhelming machine designed to produce and transmit pure culture. A major force in what they call "Cultural Imperialism". To a not insignificant degree it turned the tide in the Cold War, for example. You can see the struggle every time there is a news story about China demanding modification, or rejecting Hollywood output. Eventually Hollywood will win that struggle, even if it takes a few generations.

There are many countries with their own film industries, least of which is China, but including India, Japan, Korea, Italy France, and on and on. But none of them have had remotely the success, popularity or power of Hollywood. The place, the machine is an absolute Triumph.

But to get back to your unfortunate turn of phrase... imagining that you or they have some elite status due to watching films out of the mainstream - A major component of the Hollywood machine is using the mainstream films' revenue to subsidize genre films, student films and often picking up truly independent films. These are the elitist films you seem to be referring to, that or the film output of the other countries. This range of films have always been a part of the machine, since the early days a century ago. Much of it is mediocre or clumsy. Sometimes they are shocking or disruptive. Sometimes they are genuinely brilliant or visionary.

But all of this obscure stuff that movie buffs are glorying in, ultimately this is just the output of the training ground for the Hollywood Mainstream. Consider Sam Raimi or Peter Jackson's filmography to see what I mean. Both started out making quirky indy horror films and once graduated began putting out $Billion dollar joints.

I think it is more intertwined with your movie-watching habit. Akin to that in the DVD age most people probably only had maybe a couple of dozens, few with entire walls in their home dedicated to movie storage.

Almost all of the movies/series I watch are somewhat obscure (from a Hollywood perspective) so I like to keep them around. But I don't watch nearly enough movies or care enough about their longevity, that a single, non backed up external drive wouldn't be good enough.

I guess there are many people who pirate for the sake of pirating trying to collect as much content as they can without actually consuming it all. But don't know what proportion this is.

I remember getting together with a high school friend in the 90s and him talking about a similar setup (modulo 90s technology including dial-up internet access) for downloading pirated software. He never actually used the software, he just collected it. The plus side of digital hoarding is that the hoarder is less likely to die alone after being trapped by a falling pile of stuff.
I bet in we'll see a hoarder who dies alone under a pile of high density 8TB sandisk magnetic tapes. Full of something important like pirated twitch streams.
The multimillionaire, locally known for his completely isolated & reclusive lifestyle, was found to have been financially destitute after his untimely passing from a freak accident.

Crushed to death under a stack of computer equipment, they leave behind only 1 Petabyte worth of Seagate 8TB hard disks. Upon investigating, it was found that each drive was completely filled with “boutique furry porn.”

Those who knew the deceased in passing say they cannot imagine where his millions had gone.

Suspiciously rich furries are the backbone of online art comissions ...
Hoarding does seem to be the issue. We aren’t on dial up connections anymore. I can grab a movie torrent and it will download within a minute or so.
Much of what we grab via torrent often takes a long time - generally slightly obscure stuff, so we 'hoard' a bit. No more than maybe high single digit terabytes, but... we can't always get some of this (older shows/movies, foreign stuff, etc).

The upside is that we have a lot to share with folks (mostly family) who've not necessarily seen this stuff (and can't typically find it on services in our area).

> Jokes aside, would you consider deleting your entire collection and then also cancel subscriptions and possibly give away or sell any tech equipment you do not use for work? And then find something else to do with the newly-freed time? Can you do it for 6 or 12 months? If not, why not? Try to figure out why you are doing it to begin with.

Anecdotally, I have a mild data hoarding hobby and no streaming subscriptions, and had my tech setup offline for about 6 months after moving to a new house. Spent most of the free time running ethernet, replacing dozens of recessed lights, replacing all the lights switches, assembling furniture, painting, picking up nails and rocks that reno guys left all over the lawn, and various other house things.

I bought a TV for black friday, wall-mounted it, and haven't even gotten around to plugging it in. (Or finding a piece of furniture from which to use it.) I'm looking forward to that; watching TV and playing video games is really more fun than patching drywall.

While I appreciate the concern, I've got a fair bit of free time, and to be clear I'm not actually worried about the financial cost. I'm living well within my means. Tomorrow I'm going to build a chicken coop.

The setup I've got doesn't require very much active maintenance, aside from yelling at my father to tag things better. I'm sure I could just go to sketchy pirate streaming sites (putlocker and the like) if I was concerned about the money. The point of this isn't so much that I'm spending too much on this hobby, but that piracy really is a service problem.

> Tomorrow I'm going to build a chicken coop. The setup I've got doesn't require very much active maintenance, aside from yelling at my father to tag things better.

Think you might have to feed the chickens along side your tagging scheme.

It is mystifying to me that people cannot understand the simple meaning of the article: Paid programming provides bad service for the money, enough so that you get a better experience via back channels. If the publishers want your business, they will need to provide service better than you can cobble up yourself.

I object to the term "pirating" here. Piracy involves depriving people of life and property. You are not doing anything like that. Bootlegging might be a tolerably apt term. Bootlegging is just bypassing onerous restrictions and taxes, with an admixture of freeloading.

My wife pays for various channels, but I torrent the same content because the experience is radically better. Am I pirating? I don't think I am even bootlegging.

The main thing keeping me from doing it more (I hardly ever do anymore) is that I just don't have time to watch things. I have taken to running what little I do grab at 1.5x to 2x so I can spare the time. Now, not running that fast seems intolerably glacial.

All that said, hoarding is a common symptom of depression. Treating depression is a very, very good idea.

Dump the movies on a backup service, why do you need a full copy locally

Golden rule of data: "90% of it is not accessed after 3 months"

What's a cheap backup plan here?
If you don't want to store online: Tape, blu-ray, usb harddisk, nas that only gets electricity when backup is runnning. Preferably a combination of those. Don't use sd/ssd/nvram.

Do test your backups though.

Why not just pay $5/mo for a Plex share with tens of thousands of the most popular movies and TV shows?

I haven't torrented or paid for content in years. If I want to watch something and it's not on the server, I message the admin in Bangalore and he adds it.

Sure I don't "have" the content in the sense it's not sitting on spinning disks, but I don't care. Life is too short to try to collect widely available digital media.

One of the advantages of local storage is that internet outages don't necessarily affect your ability to watch some shows. One of the main advantages that streaming has for me over live TV is the ability to watch things when I want to, without restrictions.

Don't even get me started about commercials. Amazon Prime has been putting up movies without commercials, and then adding commercials later. This has bit our movie group a few times lately. Very frustrating.

> One of the advantages of local storage is that internet outages don't necessarily affect your ability to watch some shows.

This came to a head for me not too long ago when my internet went out for a little while. I told my wife we could just watch the antenna TV, and she simply couldn't grok the idea that TV signals were coming to the house without the internet working.

Collecting the media can be almost 100% automated with sonarr and radarr. Getting content can be even easier than messaging an admin.
Never heard of this. Where would one find such a service?
/r/PlexShares! Lots of options, they all have largely the same stuff. There are also more specialized ones if you want anime, Bollywood, K-dramas, etc.

Just shop around and find one with a free trial. It's not very automated, so you'll have to chat with them over Discord, but once it's set up it's completely hands-off. Good luck!

Reddit [0], for one. I'm beyond sure that Discord has at least one community for this as well, but somehow piracy feels morally okay compared to Discord silo-ing off areas of the internet - ergo, I have no link, sorry.

[0] https://old.reddit.com/r/plexshares/

what is this plex share?
I answered above - but the tl;dr is to check out /r/PlexShares.
Plot twist, OP is the admin in Bangalore.
How long do you think that's going to last?
IPTV boxes still exist so these will last forever since they are still quite obscure .

What these Plex share owners do is advertise first . Reach the number of users they need then go private and it becomes invite only . This what happened to the one I joined and it's perfect for 2 years now .

What I find odd about these Plex shares is the insane catalog they have which includes Vhs rips of obscure 1980s slasher films

Some servers allow you to sync the content on your devices as it's possible with Plex you often just need to ask them.

Very helpful when flying for 30h

For more of this/more people like OP, see /r/datahoarder
Yep, I'm subscribed.

I also do some digital archiving work (I don't want to get into specifics for anonymity sake), but since that's text it only takes up about 12TB right now. If I run out of space I delete some video.

Why do you need 30TB? You can always download again if you need to watch again.
Many countries outside of the US don't have unlimited[0] bandwidth ISPs. So downloading again and again is not feasible everywhere.

0. US ISPs are capped but in the TB range so most people never reach the cap.

and you don't need bandwidth for netflix?
Citation for [0]?

I've even read the fine print for my current ISP here in the US. Unless you mean cap as in it's not possible to download more than that per month because your download speed is too low.

(comment deleted)
Clearly you've never found a torrent that has exactly what you want, but zero seeders.
On the rare occasion? Sure. Certainly not near 30TB of them.
Then I guess you only watch extremely popular stuff? It's easy to get stuck trying to find moderately successful shows or games from the 90s. Kenan & Kel was a gigantic pain to find. I'm never going to delete that.
There is watching unpopular stuff and there is watching 30 TB of unpopular stuff.
UK internet is kinda pants, you can stream 4k on netflix no issues but try streaming from a pirate site or service like popcorntime and you will be kicked back to standard definition and have a lot of buffering to deal with.

In the UK sites like the pirate bay get censored, there are mirrors but they too get censored. Once you find a site you can easily get US content like the US version of the office but the UK version of the office will be harder to find.

You can buy 30TB of spinning disk for ~£600 which is a fair chunk of money but for comparison my 100mbit internet costs £300 a year. To get all your content instantly in one place in hd with no buffering I would say its worth it.

When Netflix first launched, it was great - they had a massive catalogue of older/pre-existing content, and were making a bunch of their own new, original content that likely wouldn't have been made elsewhere. Their UX was also pretty great - and made finding interesting content easy.

They made it dead-easy to sign up, there was no pushy retention teams or hoops to jump through if you wanted to cancel. That's why I paid them.

Amazon Video launched here, and they had some content that I was interested in, but their UX from day one has been awful. They insist on adding pre-roll ads, despite that I'm paying them. The video quality was pretty awful and was quite regularly at something like 480p quality on my (4k) TV. Yes their X-Ray tech is neat, but the ads just drive me up the wall.

There was a time that I would've happily paid for HBO - they had/have some really great content (at least in the US), but they are or were not available in AU outside of a $120+/month PayTV device that I really didn't want.

Now there are dozens of streaming services, with their own $15-30/month fees, which will have (or not) selections of some of the content I want, each with their own uniquely awful and annoying interfaces or quirks of whether they will or won't play on my TV or device.

I can't imagine anyone at 'Amazon Video' actually uses the service, else they'd realise that the UI is horrific...and whole service is terrible. I only have it as its "free" with my delivery options.
It works well enough if you’re just playing content you already have and not searching.
IMO, Amazon is awful at UI design across the board--including the core shopping experience.
It's a feature not a bug, familiarity is the feature. It never massively changes on purpose.
I watch some shows on Amazon Prime Video despite the shitty UI because they are great but it does mean that I do no discovery through the app.
I don't think its a revenue generator for them, I think its we have to have X. Music, video, etc. Look at Audiable, still exists kind of outside of Amazon.com

If they really want to make it into a thing, it cannot be within amazon.com. Call it something else, rip out and make it into a service not an addon to prime.

I kinda get that. But why not just tidy that UI up, and make it a good viewing experience and who knows maybe more of us will watch the seasons they have available and rent/purchase the ones that aren't. Instead of the car wreck of a UI experience
And if they have the content you're looking for today, it'll be gone next week...
I have a decent rip of The Expanse and an amazon prime account!
if they did it right, its a great reason to go legit. But I agree entirely with everything you just said
"When Netflix first launched, it was great - they had a massive catalogue of older/pre-existing content, and were making a bunch of their own new, original content that likely wouldn't have been made elsewhere."

The movie selection on NetFlix's DVD service[1] is still fantastic.

The movie selection on their streaming service[2] is absolutely atrocious.

Not sure what accounts for the discrepancy.

[1] - https://dvd.netflix.com/

[2] - https://www.netflix.com/

They used to be the only bidder now they are bidding against dozens of streaming services competing in different niches. Their DVD business has no competition.
You'd think that with all that competition, NetFlix's streaming service would be much better in order to compete with other companies (which have a far better selection). But somehow they get away with having a crappy selection, despite having lots of competitors.

Conversely, since NetFlix's DVD service doesn't have any competitors they could get away with having a crappy selection, but they have a great selection, and it's been great for at least a decade.

So it still doesn't make sense.

Cost of adding a niche title to NF DVD service is probably less than $1000, since they won't need many copies. I doubt they can get streaming rights for any feature length film still in copyright for under $1000.
Amazon Prime Video does it, as does Youtube.

Both of these have way, way, way better selections than NetFlix streaming.

You also get director commentary, more foreign language audio and DVD specials that you don’t get with streaming.
The DVD service wasn't available outside the US, as far as I understand.

The reason they can rent-out DVD titles from anyone, is because of the First-Sale doctrine[1] in the US. Basically, once they buy the DVD, they can do with it what they want. It's the same law that lets libraries operate.

With streaming, they need permission of the copyright holders. Who, at first, were all "Who gives a shit about streaming, it doesn't make any money and the quality is shit". Once Netflix proved out how to do it right - then all the studios realised there was money to be made by doing their own platform (even if you do a shitty job of it)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

I have a subscription to Disney+ here in Thailand...

1. I could not download the right Disney+ app on my Android TV because my Google account is French

2. I could download the right app on my iPhone (after temporarily switching stores which is a PITA) so I bought a cable to stream from my iPhone to my TV but the app doesn’t allow me to

3. I bought a Raspberry Pi and installed Plex and al. I can now watch the Disney movies easily on my TV.

I have a subscription to Netflix…

1. I went off-internet for a week, so I synced a couple of movies to be available offline.

2. I started watching one on the first day and 48h hours later it expired…

3. Next time I will use my Plex setup!

I must be very dumb to keep paying for these two subscriptions!

Where are you paying 45$/month for power on a single computer. The moon?
If we assume the computer consumes 200 Watt in average, the electricity price would be something like 0,32 USD per kWh. So probably Germany, Denmark or Belgium.
That's a very pessimistic estimate for idling PC-based storage box.

The story looks faked all over the place. 30 TB? I have as much, and the storage price was maybe $600 last year.

The rest of the computer costs money too. They maybe overpaid a bit, but it's not totally unreasonable.
If one want cost savings, why do they need a separate computer? And if the need is somehow there, you could always buy a used one.
I have no idea what HDD prices were like the past few years. I recently bought an 18TB HDD for 280 Euros. Much of it is for pirated stuff. Thing is ... there are benefits to having the content locally that aren't priced into paying for streaming sites. There are things I can't watch on Netflix/Amazon, for example, and I have a consistent level of quality. I would need the storage one way or another, so I don't really count it towards pirating. Electricity? I pay for that either way, whether I'm pirating or not. I'll pay for a seedbox or usenet, but that's still only 50-80 Euros total. If I paid for everything I pirate, that would be hundreds every month on top of electricity and storage.
(comment deleted)
The way I read it he is including the computer in that $1200 cost. Seems realistic, that's about what my computer (surplus Supermicro server) with a similar amount of storage came out to.
I got a pretty nice case too. The computer was my old desktop when I upgraded, so I'm only sort of counting it. It wasn't a budget build.
It depends how much redundancy they have. They could have 30TB mirrored, which means 60TB worth of physical drives.
Hard drive prices fluctuate a lot. I put this together in early 2018.

In early 2018 an 8TB seagate drive cost ~$200 according to https://jcmit.net/diskprice.htm .

I'm also counting usable storage, not snapraid or anything like that. The reality is it's 39.12 TiB not counting SSD cache.

> The story looks faked all over the place.

I also bought a pretty nice case that can store 10+ hard drives, and a PCIe sata adapter. I probably could have done it for cheaper, but that's not really a reason to call me a liar is it? Why would anyone fake this?

Don't take it personally. I am just being skeptical because you created a new account. Does the country where you are actively prosecute piracy, or are you a public person, who does not want their relationship with copyright disclosed for the sake of keeping public image?
My regular account is pretty closely related to me professionally. My current country does not activity prosecute piracy but there's no telling what the future will bring career wise. It's not only prosecution that I'd be worried about, it's also persecution.
200w idle is kind of insane though.
In what world is a server that presumably sits most of the day doing nothing averaging 200W 24/7?
If that content is sourced from torrents you'll have a lot of disks spinning all the time just to seed tiny chunks so that's not unreasonable.
OP probably only has 5-6 drives at most (more likely 3x 10TB), which should draw 15W-20W each _at most_, and that's at 100% utilization not reading a small file.

Also, OP included a Usenet subscription in their costs so they might not be torrenting at all.

Sounds like Germany right now.
making 30TB out of 5T drives would need 12 disks with mirroring. That's a bunch of power. It might also be a dual-socket Xeon, for that ECC
Who's going to mirror some low bitrate files they can download again off the internet.

If anything, assume something more reasonable like, 4x8 2x parity drives. 6 of those, that'd be $1200.

I too tried to get into usenet for downloading shows I wanted to watch, but I couldn't justify the cost (in time) that it would take to build/maintain a system that automatically downloads the latest episodes of select shows.

I deal w/ software all day at work. As I've gotten older, the less I want to also deal w/ software at home.

Aside from the initial fiddling I have not needed to do much of anything to my setup. It's all containerized and unraid's manager keeps them up to date for me.
Sounds like a great setup, do you have any references to guides so I can set up my own?
(comment deleted)
When I see stuff like this, I wonder where those people find all that time to watch tv shows.
Welcome to Hacker News where everyone makes $500k/year and nobody pays for content. Or at least it feels that way sometimes. I don't make that much money but I also don't pay for content.
Sometimes you can't even buy (or rent) the content because of georestrictions. At least I often encounter TV shows and movies that are available in some US streaming service, but are not available in our version of the same service, or the entire service is not available.
I mean, you can justify it any way you like - there's no referee, no judge, no one to stop you. I just don't bother with the justifications myself; it is what it is.
There's an easy solution if you want the clear conscience of paying creators but the freedom of actually controlling the content you paid for. Buy, then pirate. Don't even bother with ever accessing your crippled purchase.
I usually get the DVDs in that case, if possible. Some of the newest content isn’t available on DVD but most of the older stuff is.
If you're buying secondhand DVD's, and I don't see how you aren't because who's still producing DVD's (or even, who's producing Blurays for older content), then you're on the same level as people who pirate from the eyes of publishers and media conglomerates. You might feel better about yourself, but it's a quirk of history that they haven't been able to make secondhand sales illegal.
You'd be surprised, lots of content is still available as new on places like Amazon, especially if you broaden to outside the US.
Actually, you're entirely right. I don't know why I thought they stopped printing DVDs for new releases.
You can purchase abroad and ship to your country. Amazon for example has country local stuff. Use the .xy for whichever country you want to search in (.com for US, .de for Germany, etc) and see if they have what you want.

They may also ship to you internationally.

If Amazon.differentcc sells something that Amazon.yourcc doesn't why wouldn't Amazon the global org set you up with an international sale. Surely that would make them lots of €¥$£ more?
The problem with Amazon is that my nearest Amazon, and the one that actually reliably ships to me, is Amazon.de. And the media on Amazon.de is usually German media, if there is even any media available. And I'm not German.

Just looking at a couple of shows that I watched a year ago, I couldn't actually find any of them on Amazon.de. And actually, only found one on Amazon.com, where it was unavailable. Also, the Chinese version for some reason?

In college I pirated things when I was living off a few hundred bucks a month. But nowadays when I'm making good money I pay for everything. Its frankly absurd to steal content when you're that well paid.
Paying for things you don't have to pay for is a quick way to lose money, no matter how much you make.
But that excuse justifies much more than digital piracy. You don't "have to pay for" a car if you can steal one.
We need a public library for cars!
But imagine if you could ride a single lamborgini for free anywhere you want, or:

Pay $10,000 for a KIA that can only goto McDonalds and Burger King, then buy a $15,000 chevy that's the only car that works on the road to to work, then pay $5,000 for a ford that is the only vehicle that will take you to Burger King and the Apple store, but it stops every 5 minutes to show you the same ad repeated 3 times, and the only car that will take you to grandms's house is $30,000 and for some reason it requires 12 cars worth of parking spots. Taco Bell will only be accepting Mazdas starting in August, so you've got to decide what you want to do about that. Also there's no cars you can buy at any price that can go anywhere you want. Nobody sells the lamborgini you can drive anywhere for free.

Anyways, that's why pirating is good.

Before this devolves into an argument about piracy, let me begin by saying the reason I pirate is because I feel fine doing so. I don't care about any arguments for why others might think I shouldn't. I'm simply not bothered by it.

Back to discussion, I agree that saving money could apply to almost anything. However my first point is that, in my opinion, there's a material difference between digital piracy and stealing a car. If I possess a car, nobody else can own it. However with digital media, I'm making a copy of something that has zero impact on anybody else's ability to own their own copy of that data. The only thing that's lost is my physical storage space that could've stored something else, but that's my call to make.

A second point is that I mainly pirate things I wouldn't have bought otherwise. I still watch movies in theaters because I can't pirate a theater experience (AMC A-list is great if you enjoy watching in the theaters IMO), I still buy modern games because I'm extremely cautious when it comes to running executables.

A third point is that ethically, I consider supporting a mega-corporation like Amazon worse than committing piracy. Mega-corporations commit much more morally heinous actions, and at an enormously greater scale, than an average pirate would ever commit. In my opinion, the moral sin is not that pirates commit piracy, it's that mega-corporations have been given almost free rein to shape and exploit our society as they see fit

You'd be denying someone else use of the car. Stealing, especially of physical things, is a far greater moral wrong than copyright infringement.
I understand, but that was not the argument I was replying to. The original comment was far broader.
Nobody lets me pay for content. They're all tying themselves in contractual knots trying to find the most lucrative deal, and meanwhile it's impossible to just buy a movie or a TV show without shipping a physical disc.

I go to e.g. the South Park website, and I'm greeted by an error message saying they're "working hard to resolve [their] pre-existing contractual obligations," which is the same message they've shown for years. Thanks for trying, I guess, but if I pirated it then I'd just...watch the show, from start to finish, with all seasons and all episodes, no wasteful physical media, no subscription, no data collection, and no ads. That sounds good. I want to be able to pay money, maybe even quite a lot of money, and do that.

Is it really so hard to watch something else?
When I see all the justifications I wonder who are they for? If you feel the need to justify it to semi-anonymous people on the internet, then you're probably trying to justify it to yourself which means you think what you're doing is wrong.
It's not a justification, just an explanation of what needs to change if people want me to pay for that content. Like I say I pretty much never pirate things if they're on steam, I've probably paid tens of thousands out to steam over the years.

(That being said, I do have access to cable television, netflix, and amazon prime streaming as well as the piracy setup, so people are getting paid. I'm not going to go buy a bunch of old red-dwarf and dilbert DVDs though, they just take up too much space)

You started the post with "I have a confession". I felt that guilt was implied.
Ahh, fair enough. I meant it more as just a turn of phrase, implying that it's a sordid affair. A little bit implying that I was going again church heterodoxy, that there were pressures to feel guilty. More "gay in the 70's" than "burn down an orphanage".
Man-- I don't steal content, because I've made a lot of money from IP and I think other people deserve for their work to be rewarded.

But I'm so jealous of the user experience for people who buy into a $5/mo plex and get better service than I'm paying for. IMO, that's broken.

So much time wasted, figuring out what service to watch something on, dealing with content ads, bad user interfaces... having content vanish and become unavailable, etc.

I don't even watch much video, but it's still way too much of a sink on my time.

I don't have to justify myself to you and do not intend to. I don't actually pirate anything, regardless.

My intent is that someone somewhere reads this and decides to let me buy their damn content. It's not a justification, it's an appeal. Put your album on bandcamp. Put your game on itch/gog/your own website/humble bundle, preferable without intrusive DRM. I have no idea where you'd put a movie or TV show, but there's probably some place.

Please.

Uh, you can actually buy south park from any number of providers. Amazon and iTunes both list Season 1 for $25. You don't need to only watch things on monthly streaming platforms.
Can you play the media without going through Amazon or Apple to do it? Is the quality guaranteed to be good when I choose to watch it? What kind of ads am I going to get when I click play? Even if there are no ads now, is that guaranteed to be the case forever?

Downloadable, ad free, and DRM free. Music has been selling that way for decades. I've spent thousands on that kind of media, I'd have spent 10 times as much if it had been made available that way. Some people purchase a controlled versions to atone for their pirating sins but that just rewards consumer-hostile business models, and most of the money goes to middle-men that only add negative value to the product they're selling.

It sounds like you have a lot of concerns about this that all kind of conveniently put you in a place to pirate whatever you want.

Most of the time I watch things once, so I rent it if it's not on a platform I subscribe to. Generally then I can watch it on my tv, ps4, phone, computer, whatever.

Consider that money spent on these products are an indication to studios about what people like. Movie studios, production companies, they make stuff they think they can sell for a profit. I suggest that you try renting movies or buying ones you like. If you run into a situation where one of your concerns comes to life, I think it would be very reasonable to pirate something you've made a good faith effort to pay for. This is kind of how I started and now for the most part I rent/buy with some exceptions. Still downloading some trash tv shows.

I don't need any excuses to download whatever I want. It doesn't cost anyone anything, and no suffering of any kind is introduced into the world for anyone.

Most, if not all, things I've downloaded, which isn't much, I've either rented before, seen on TV or in a theater, or have been on one of the streaming services I pay for at some point. Does that cover me ethically? Some people seem to think so. I personally don't care either way and not a single person on this planet is any worse off for my lack of concern.

Yeah sure, it doesn't really matter. But no need to pretend like it's a service issue at this point. My experience with renting/buying content has been that they're pretty convenient and there aren't many service issues I've run into.

Actually it's kind of easier than torrenting and copying files around to various devices I want to watch it on.

Can buy them or can you only "buy" them aka rent them for a fixed fee for an indefinite but inevitably finite periord with restrictions on how and where you can watch them?
Sure, unfortunately if you buy something on iTunes, it isn't available on amazon and vice versa. I guess you just have to look at your devices and pick a platform based on that. Most of the time I just rent a movie and watch and it expires so it's not really a problem I deal with a lot. I just rent the movie right before I watch it. It's pretty convenient.
Do both. Pay for it to give the creators their cut and send a market signal. Then go pirate it rather than fighting with DRM crippled interfaces.
I buy all my stuff on iTunes. But that alone won't allow me to put a 4K HDR movie on a USB stick to watch it offline on my TV.

In my opinion, the most practical solution is to buy things (for the ethics) and then crack the DRM anyway (for usability).

Rewarding consumer-hostile business models and middle-men that only add negative value to the products they're selling is, in my opinion, unethical.
While I agree with you, these middlemen at least pay some money to the original content creators. With pure pirating, there's no feedback to the movie company that I liked their offering.
(comment deleted)
There's so much free (as in beer) content on the web that you don't even need to pirate stuff, either.
I used to not have any $, so I'd pirate. Then I had $, so I paid for stuff -- and, without fail, everything I paid for ended up giving me bullshit problems because of DRM restrictions. So now I don't pay for anything with DRM, which ends up meaning I mostly pirate.

I don't mind throwing down some cash, but I'm not going to throw down cash just to get fucked over.

Interested in how much content you have on those drives. Are you storing full bluray backups (40-100gb each), or are you doing like 10-15gb movies or the 2-6gb versions?
Depends on the content. For popular crap that I'm probably going to delete later I generally go for the 10-15GB option as finding a decent rip at a lower file size can be annoying (Latest marvel movies, etc). If something is sufficiently obscure or visually stunning I'll normally keep it at 10-15GB rips depending on the source material (Obscure horror movies, Dune). For regular stuff that I still want to have a copy of but that is popular enough I'm not worried it's going to disappear I go for the smaller versions (The expanse, adventure time).

Right now one of the biggest things on disk are a bunch of Boston Legal episodes. I have family that enjoy it, and I'm too lazy to find a good small release so it's taking up more space than it needs to.

I try to get HEVC encoded video where possible, and when I know there's a particular release group that produces high-quality I'll set up tags to prefer them.

Plex is trying to solve the `we've reached peak streaming` problem. From their blogpost[0]

> Today, we’re proud to be launching an entirely new section of Plex, focused on discovering, searching, and personalizing movies and TV shows across virtually any streaming service—whether it’s Plex’s own free movies and TV, or your other subscriptions like Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max

[0] https://www.plex.tv/blog/end-the-streaming-struggle-with-ple...

Worth giving it a shot. I haven't tried it, but it looks promising.

On the flip, I just $20 for a plexshare and can watch whatever I like in 4k remux. I recommend instead of having this beast server. Let someone else worry about hardware.
Funniest thing: I've got a home cinema projector and somehow when I stream from Netflix (which I pay), it looks like shit. So I paid for an enhanced subscription, supposedly with better quality. Fiber optic at home: problem is not on my side. Still looks like shit.

So I sail the high seas and pirate the very movie I was about to watch: 600 Mbit/s symmetric fiber, download using torrents takes a few minutes tops.

Now I don't get it: how do the pirates who "webrip" those have access to the quality stream, when I get a shitty version? I mean: I get it when it's a BRRip (Blu-Ray Rip) but how can they do quality webrips? Why are they getting the quality version streamed when I get bad quality? It may not be noticeable on a regular TV but on the huge diagonal my home cinema projector does, it's night and day.

I don't hoard. Pirating costs nothing as I pay for my fiber optic line and downloading a movie takes a few minutes, during which wife makes tea, kid puts pyjamas on and I pour myself some drink.

> Streaming services still have significant service problems that need to be addressed.

Yup. Pirates makes a better job at providing a quality media compared to the shitty streaming services.

Now we plan to drop Netflix and take Disney for a while: I wonder if I'll also need to pirate the very thing they'll be streaming me or not.

To watch 4k on a desktop you need either windows 10/11 and Edge or a Mac.

My guess is you're either not using that combination or otherwise blocking DRM / features that prevent desktop 4k.

Netflix won't play full quality stream except for on approved devices. If you have a projector that's running older version of Android it may literally be giving you a max 720p stream. Amazon prime video won't give 4k on a PC i believe.
> Now I don't get it: how do the pirates who "webrip" those have access to the quality stream

The front-end players (sometimes) have a UI element that allows you to explicitly set which bitrate is streamed. Otherwise, the player is beholden to what the connection speed deems appropriate. Regardless, if the original file was transcoded to include 1080p, 4k stream, they exist even if your player is downgrading based on a poor connection. This can feel like a loss of control, because it is. "But it's for our the user's own good."

When using tools like ffmpeg or similar, you can simply target the highest bitrate available.

If you ever try to download a ".m3u8" file you'll see it's more or less a manifest that lists all available bitrates.

I have seen similar thoughts amongst friends who may or may not pirate (I never ask where they get their content), and I think of how my music consumption has changed over the last 20 years. When I got my first iPod, I felt rewarded for having ripped all of the few dozen CDs I owned to my iBook. The idea of having instant access to any song I owned was a feeling I loved, and one I've chased since then. It wasn't until streaming services hit a critical mass and I got back to a reasonable (then unlimited) data plan that I finally took my iPod Classic out of my car. My tastes aren't the same ten albums over and over - sometimes I want rock, sometimes pop, sometimes rap. Who knows.

Paying for content is getting really close to that, but I don't think it's there yet, in that I can't just decide to watch Papa's Delicate Condition [0] on Netflix or Disney+ or whatever service I subscribe to. There are a handful of random movies that I love, own on physical media, but can't just immediately consume when the mood hits. When things get there, I think piracy is in trouble. For many people, it's already there. For you, it may be close.

Streaming's biggest problems, to me, are that there are still so many, and the content libraries are incomplete. Disney+ is a great, well-stocked service, but there's some content that Disney has decided doesn't exist anymore (Song of the South - problematic as hell, for sure, but it existed), and for things like that, I wouldn't ever assume them to be available. Same for the unaltered versions of Star Wars. And if Netflix and Peloton have taught me anything, it's that content can go away over time (see my earlier argument about wanting access to content at random times). And of course, offline support - I fly on planes sometimes, or go places without Internet, and I'd like to take a little bit of content with me to be occupied.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa%27s_Delicate_Condition

> I built a computer with ~30TB of hard drive space. That, conservatively, cost me $1200.

I think that's reasonable (unfortunately). Storage isn't cheap.

> it's probably costing me around $45 per month in power

You don't need your PC running 24/7, and you don't need all your hard drives in your PC. I have one 12TB in my PC and two 12TB external HDDs for backup.

Personally I think piracy is incredibly frugal, the main cost comes from storage. I've almost maxed out my current setup of 12TB backed up across 3 hard drives, so I have to wait until a good price for >=12TB external HDDs before I can upgrade. Other than that, the ~10 bucks a month I pay for a seedbox less than a movie ticket lol.

> and it's probably costing me around $45 per month in power

where do you live that I don't move there ? I rarely ever paid more than 20-25€ / month for electricity for my whole appartment, with multiple computers running 24/7 lol

In some North/West European countries paying above 0.30€/kWh has been the norm for years.

Anecdotally: In Germany I pay about 100€/month for an apartment (with normal homeoffice PC usage). 3500-4000 kWh/year.

wild... here it's hovering around .17€/kWh
All of this usually stem from lack of passion or goal in other areas of life.

Once you find right goal you won't have time for all this.

Speaking from personal experience

I wouldn't say that. I have a similar setup and just find it easier for my parents, friends, kids, ect. to just have everything they need available through 1 app in Plex.