gpayan

I wonder why Durov traveled to France, knowing that he would be arrested there. Could there be more to the story?

The cash required to develop and train the models makes the open-source approach challenging, if not impossible, for companies who don't have another business to support it. You need to be Meta - with a huge cash cow - to have the option to give away your work for free. After all OpenAI tried and came to the conclusion that it couldn't succeed as a pure open-source non-profit company no?

I agree. It reminds me of the second screen apps (designed for iPads/tablets) Disney launched in the 2010s to get people to buy Blu-rays. Never passed the novelty stage.

> "Customers often seem to be more willing to accept the surcharges than outright price increases, he said. One restaurant operator recently tried raising the price of a signature sandwich, which resulted in a 6% decline in sales of that particular item, he said."

Maybe because they don't know about the additional fees until the check comes. The true cost of a dish (price of the dish + all other unavoidable and foreseeable cost/fees, tipping being optional) should be easily accessible to customers while ordering, and without requiring the use of a calculator. Does it call for more regulation? Similar to the one that required more transparency on fares in the airline industry?

Interesting how we don't hear much about "big data" which - we were told back in 2013 starting with House of Cards [1] - was key to Netflix's success in picking new shows to produce.

This part of the article is telling:

>It’s why five or so years ago, anybody with a hint of success in TV (or movies) started getting a call from their rep saying, basically, “Netflix would like to write you a big check.”

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/25/business/media/for-house-...

I never feel confortable showing or sharing "my" Youtube main page/recommendations with anyone. It's providing details on my personal interests that I don't necessarily want everyone to know about. This especially true in a work context, when the content of my screen is projected/shared with an audience (boy those endscreen video suggestions can be embarrassing).

2 ex-Goldman Sachs employees attempting to defraud Goldman Sachs, who in return takes no actions. "Good try guys, honestly everyone on the team here at GS would have done the same thing. But you know that, you worked here."

Actually, as mentioned multiple times in the past couple of days by former French Ambassador to the US Gerard Araud, diesel was an Australia demand, which required France to modify its subs (all nuclear powered) and added complexity to the project. According to the former Ambassador, it would have been much easier and cheaper for France to supply Australia with nuclear subs.

How did he only find out about it 10 years after? And how do you find out about something like that so long after?

> The Netflix catalogue, and the movie rental/streaming ecosystem in general, was completely different when the AI challenge was going on.

With Netflix producing its own content now, and with the cost of acquiring content rights much higher than it used to be (all major streaming platforms want to offer great content), I'm wondering how much the business imperative impacts the recommendations we get -> eg. Netflix giving priority to its own content over licensed shows/movies.

> French officers tend to be more sceptical than British or American ones that technology will transform the battlefield. “Technology is never 100% effective,” warns General Burkhard. “Soldiers must always be able to fight in a degraded way…when the technology does not work any more.”

I would be interested to hear more on that from General Burkhard. Because right now - and based on my very limited understanding of the topic - this feels like the kind of statement that could look rather misinformed when looked back at in the future. This actually reminds me of the French army and French generals preparing for WW2; stuck with their existing organizational structures and mental models (that led them to victory in WW1), they discounted new warfare theories/technologies and strategies (such as: combining planes and tanks, blitzkrieg) that led them to a quick and complete defeat.

Interesting read, but I tend to disagree with the author on many levels.

I do believe we are still in a golden age for content producers and audiences. The amount of money going into content production, the number of shows being produced and the number of streaming services being launched offer a variety of options for people to finance, distribute and consume video content.

Content creators are looking essentially for 3 things: telling great stories, reaching large audiences and making money. They make an informed decision based on those 3 factors when choosing to work with Netflix, Amazon or other studios/streaming services. If it becomes obvious that Netflix will cancel their show after 2 seasons or will not expose their content to large audiences, content creators will stop pitching their shows to Netflix and turn to other distribution providers such as Amazon, Warner Media, Disney, NBC, Facebook, CBS, YouTube etc. And if audiences like their content, they will follow it and subscribe/spend time on other platforms.

I’m also unsure about Netflix’s “lock-in” power. Netflix is not Spotify where I spend time creating and organizing playlists. I see it only working if Netflix’s recommendation engine is so well trained with my data that moving to another streaming service will force me to spend much more time looking for relevant content to watch. Otherwise, I watch Friends on Netflix. I can easily switch next year to watch it on HBO Max.

It is true that the old days of “Friends” and “Seinfeld”, where a hit show would generate billions of dollars for its creators, are gone. Netflix and other streaming platforms are now acquiring global content rights for shows and production companies are becoming more like “work for hire” studios – where ownership is transferred to the streaming platform and no future residual revenues can be expected from re-runs (syndication deals).

That being said, the median wage of writers dropping seems to be more the result of talent agencies’ “packaging practices” than Netflix.

And by the way, “Where are the great comedies?” the author asks. Blockbuster movies – because of their high production costs – look for global appeal. Car crashes (aka “action movies”) are understood across the world. It’s not necessarily the case for jokes (aka “comedies”) that might not cross oceans as easily.

If only YouTube would offer background play and/or audio-streaming only for all their videos... So much of my data plan is being wasted on videos that I am just listening to and not watching when I am on the go (debates, interviews).

It seems that Netflix will finance the movies and not interfere in the creative process. I recall Kevin Spacey saying that their main decision in working with Netflix on House of Cards was the ability to have complete creative freedom in the production and execution of the show (while other networks were interested in the project).

Netflix is also talking a lot about international expansion, but Sandler’s humor is IMO appealing primarily to the US audience. As a European I find myself surprised by the amount of laughter Adam Sandler’s movies receive in U.S. theatres.

I am happy to see that Time Warner Cable knows what people want. Other people that knew what people wanted:

- Sir William Preece, chief engineer of the British Post Office (1876): “The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys.”

- H.M. Warner, Warner Bros. (1927): “Who the hell wants to hear actors talk”

- Ken Olson, President & Founder of Digital Equipment Corp (1977): “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home”

- Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft (2012): “Surface is the tablet people want”

Source: http://www.rinkworks.com/said/predictions.shtml

The focus here is not on the actual list but on Cody Wilson who appears in it (ranked #14). Should have made it more clear in the title.

What it comes down to is money and how much Netflix is willing to pay for exclusif access to Disney content. Disney tries to maximize the amount of money it can get from its content & distribution partners. If the money made from providing exclusive content on Netflix > Money made from the same content available on Amazon + Hulu Plus + Netflix + Xfinity => then Disney goes with the option of exclusive content on Netflix.

I don’t see Star Wars coming to Netflix anytime soon unfortunately. Disney paid $4 billion for LucasFilm to acquire essentially the rights for the Starwars franchise. And, IMO LucasFilm still makes a lot of money from Star Wars DVD & Blu-ray’s sales (for instance: http://io9.com/5843342/star-wars-blu+rays-break-sales-record...).

Overall, Lucas has made close to $3.8 billion with DVD sales (http://www.statisticbrain.com/star-wars-total-franchise-reve...). This is one of the reasons why Star Wars movies are not available on iTunes and other VOD platforms.

Putting those titles on Netflix would decrease their value. Netflix would have to pay big money for that…

IMO, “closer to the money” means “closer to the purchasing decision”. At the cashier’s desk, the purchasing decision is already made – cashiers are here to process the transaction.

You can build the best product ever, if nobody wants to buy it you are not going to make anything out of it. That’s why companies try to influence people’s behaviors by spending (investing?) money in advertising and hire sales teams.

IMO, this is not an issue for Amazon as Amazon Instant Video is still a support business for Amazon. It is used to sell more Prime subscriptions (and more Kindles as well). It seems that now Amazon is testing if it could be a viable standalone business but it’s not guaranteed.

It seems like SVOD services are generally “support businesses” that aim to promote a company’s main product/service that is sold at a higher margin. For instance, DISH Network offers access to Blockbuster SVOD platform as an add-on to its pay-TV subscription (the idea here is to get more pay-TV subscribers). Comcast XFINITY SVOD service is provided on top of other Comcast services and aims to attract more pay-TV and broadband subscribers. We could even argue that Netflix Instant Streaming was first used to support Netflix “DVD by Mail” business (even if it might not be completely the case here).

The margins on those SVOD services are low compare to the “pay-TV or “DVD by Mail” business. In Q3 2012, Netflix contribution margin for its domestic streaming business was 16.4% vs 48% for its domestic “DVD by Mail” business. As pointed out earlier, for SVOD to work, you need volume. Thus, Netflix strong push for its international expansion. Amazon might pull it off, but it will require significant investment outside the US to work out.