Hacker News Reader

Comment by rocky1138 | Hacker News Reader

I agree. Netflix died the day they switched to thumbs-up and thumbs-down versus 5-star rating content. My recommended list was so solid for so long and all of that went down the drain.

View on HN

IIRC, they pushed pretty hard on the idea that the thumbs up/down system was objectively better.

I was never convinced. Partly because I wanted to see the actual number of stars when choosing a video, and partly because their motives at the time were highly suspect (one of their own produced videos was getting bombed with 1-star reviews, IIRC).

The proof was(n't) in the pudding. Movielens has given me superb recommendations and led me to watch content that became some of my all-time favorite content. Netflix has never offered a useful recommendation at all.

It would actually be slightly useful, if you could actually see the thumbs up/down ratio, but they pulled a Youtube.

Their death was presaged when their executives decided to "become HBO before HBO can become us" and when they spun out Roku for lack of appetite to be a proper tech company. Reed Hastings wasn't capable of running that business and so their vision shrank to match.

Netflix sold a lot of people a lie, their customers, their employees and their investors. We jumped on board thinking Netflix was serious about the living room experience in a wholistic way.

how was netflix ever going to continue being a "tech company." Video streaming is a commodity at this point, they are not longer doing anything technologically revolutionary.

Once every other media company could do what they were doing they realized they have to become an entertainment company. It was shrewd foresight on their end, otherwise they wouldnt exist anymore. Unless they tried to license out their infrastructure or something

Netflix's technology is incredibly advanced. The term 'revolutionary' is somewhat subjective, but what isn't subjective are achievements like streaming video at 400GB/s with a single server[1], no, make that 800GB/s[2], and writing a FUSE-based filesystem that runs at gigabit speeds despite storing data on AWS[3].

[1]: https://papers.freebsd.org/2021/eurobsdcon/gallatin-netflix-...

[2]: https://papers.freebsd.org/2022/eurobsdcon/gallatin-the_othe...

[3]: https://netflixtechblog.com/mezzfs-mounting-object-storage-i...

none of that is relevant when somehow magically every major media company spun up a netflix competitor in a couple years

You can say streaming is commodity and uninteresting now but back in 2012 when these decisions were being made, they had the ability to pivot into making proprietary, higher-end TVs and set top boxes that improved streaming significantly to where it is today or further. I understand they didn't want to become TiVO, but this is where Netflix had the ability to change things by publishing exclusive content directly to their customers without relying on cable/satellite providers. I can't say it would be easy -- and that is what I mean about Reed Hastings not being capable.

Strategically, Netflix is beholden to its manufacturing partners and never had a wholistic story for the living room the way they claimed to want because they never had control. They never had control because they didn't come up with a compelling prototype. This would necessarily include gaming and other content.

> wholistic

Holistic. It derives from the Greek Holos meaning whole, while ‘whole’ ironically derives from Germanic for ‘hail’ i.e. ‘well’ or healthy.

Wiktionary seems to suggest that wholistic is an acceptable alternative, and, futhermore, that both are neolgisms

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wholistic#English

Can you even vote now? I think they do a lot of it by inferring from what you watch.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com