Netflix cracks down on password sharing, but early efforts in Peru are a mess

same, it's way too expensive for just our household and the content available, but I'm ok paying that amount for a kind of "family plan", particularly for family in low-income countries. But removing that would actually take away the value proposition that currently makes it worth it.

If you never watch it yourself, then there's no problem -- they're the primary and only household. If you do watch it sometimes but not enough to justify the cost then the question becomes what is the dollar threshold? The options they describe involve paying slightly more, not a complete ban.

Same. I usually watch Netflix on my computer anyway so I can watch any big exclusives via ‘alternative’ means if I wish.

It’s my parents that get value out of the TV apps.

Only other useful feature is being able to save shows on my phone to watch when travelling when there’s limited WiFi/Data but even that isn’t much of a problem anymore.

Perhaps its not about "revenue"...

Perhaps its more about more granular tracking of human attention and relationship matrices.

Which can then be further analyzed.

Imagine that they have the ability to see who is sharing what general sentiments - based on the fact that they share a media library of cultivated cultural memes and awareness which is the programming of thought as is the basis of the SpellBinding aspects of the Holly Wood tree (need to know you druidics there)

Perhaps, if you tighten down the net - you get to see where thought on topics coalesces and where relationships in sentiment reside.

Perhaps... we are, even unbeknownst to the coporations who provide access to such entanglemts, are being measured, catalougued and listed amongst those who share a certain predilection toward resistences...

Resistences are to a much more esoteric idea.

while we fall to the mundanity of life of consumption, we only ever look down.

Like a dog, seeking the floor for scraps whilst the masters eat...

Media is the scraps. we are the dogs...

We fight over the scraps.

as the masters gorge on profit of our tribulations.

but those profits have flattened... even though every single scrap has been seasoned, and fired and glazed in a meticulous recipe of deceit, desire, and lust.. perfect for the dogs to lick, bite and fuck over.

A new way of netting from that attention. to phish it in, to harvast.

prophet.

We go now... on every level to the pre-verse. Before it was a sound thought.

Today, you. Tomorrow ME!

They'll surely lose some subscribers in the short run, but it's not clear to me that it'll be a net loser in the long run. There are people who share accounts because they are very price-sensitive, and they'd be more likely to bail and find other ways to get content (competitors that aren't cracking down, or pirating). But there are also people who share accounts for historical reasons, like grown children and their parents. Those folks may have more than enough disposable income to have their own accounts, or pay a surcharge for having a joint account.

The question is: what percent of NFLX's multi-household subscribers will (1) quit, (2) pay a surcharge, or (3) get a separate account? My guess is there aren't a lot in (1), most are in (2), and there are very few in (3). I imagine they're trying to learn from their experience with this pilot program so they can figure out an appropriate surcharge.

For my parets, our consumption of Netflix definitely peaked years ago and has been on the decline, but they never even thought about cancelling it b/c we've been subscribed since the DVD by mail days, it's such a long term expenditure it didn't even register as something that could be cancelled.

Sometimes though, the squeaky wheel doesn't get the grease, the squeaky wheel gets sold as scrap metal.

Why do you think they're delusional? If there is a significant portion of their users that will not pay for their service, what is the upside of letting them watch your content for free?