Seriously for the 1000th time I have a plex pass.
Comment on That's all folks, Plex is starting to charge for sharing
LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
[deleted]
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 1 month ago
catloaf@lemm.ee 1 month ago
I didn’t know why anyone who has Plex would pay for a pass. The whole time I used it, I never felt any need for additional features.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 month ago
if you like software you should support it.
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Absolutely true for FOSS. For freeware? My opinion is that it’s money wasted because, unlike FOSS:
- I have no way of auditing what I’m putting money toward.
- There’s no way for the community to keep it going if it stops or goes to shit.
- Money given toward proprietary software is money that would be better spent to FOSS whose developers actually give a shit about bettering the world.
- Proprietary software isn’t worthy of your respect or support. At best, use it if there are no FOSS alternatives, but don’t give money to something that could rapidly enshittify at any moment with no recourse and no way or recouperating your money.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I have no way of auditing what I’m putting money toward.
same can be said of FOSS. back channel deals, betrayals, hostile takeovers. all of these things can(and have) happen to FOSS projects. all under a false pretense of “openness”.
There’s no way for the community to keep it going if it stops or goes to shit.
previous point. it’s stupid easy to change licenses and lock out contributors. it’s happened several times. although you can technically argue anything before the license change could be forked, the event usually puts a bad taste in the public mouth and contributions dry up anyway. nobody wants to support a project with uncertainty.
Money given toward proprietary software is money that would be better donated to FOSS whose developers actually give a shit about bettering the world.
I’ve known plenty of FOSS founders that were huge pieces of shit. racist bigoted sexist shitheads. At least with proprietary vendors I can trust they will do anything to continue being fluid/viable.
just want to add, not all FOSS founders are pieces of shit. same can be said for vendors as well.
Proprietary software isn’t worthy of your respect or support. At best, use it if there are no FOSS alternatives, but don’t give money to something that could rapidly enshittify at any moment with no recourse and no way or recouperating your money.o keep it going if it stops or goes to shit.
why isn’t it? if it’s a generally better solution don’t you owe it to yourself and your “customers” to use the best solution? yes, use FOSS. yes, work with FOSS devs. What do you do when the project refuses to incorporate features you would like, even if you’re willing to pay for them? then there’s no difference between proprietary and FOSS, right?
enshitification doesn’t just affect vendors, it happens to FOSS projects all-the-time. I’ve personally experienced it when a bookkeeping app removed support for USD. when asked the founder refused to address it and simply stated that they couldn’t continue supporting a currency that fuels so much corruption in the world. now tell me, how does that garner my respect or support?
Money given toward proprietary software is money that would be better donated to FOSS whose developers actually give a shit about bettering the world.
see point above. you hold FOSS too highly as if the people who create these projects are impervious to corruption or greed. these are regular people like you or me. they have goals and dreams they want to achieve too, and sometimes the projects they started become vessels for them to achieve those dreams.
Proprietary software isn’t worthy of your respect or support. At best, use it if there are no FOSS alternatives, but don’t give money to something that could rapidly enshittify at any moment with no recourse and no way or recouperating your money.
You’re just repeating yourself now.
my point is, there cannot be light without darkness. FOSS and proprietary software are two halves of the same coin. to be so blinded by principles or to fool yourself with some moral superiority complex is only going to make things worse.
use what you need to solve the problems you have. sometimes that includes using vendor locked solutions. it’s not wrong, it’s just life.
blitzen@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
The skip intro/credits feature is nifty, and sonic analysis if you run a music library is worth the purchase price alone.
jumjummy@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Besides supporting them, the offline download feature on mobile is amazing for travel.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve tried to watch some downloaded Netflix content, only to realize it had “expired” and no longer worked.
merthyr1831@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
They doubled the price lol. And why pay $80 for something that they have the right to gut at any time?
LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
[deleted]TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Why pay for anything ever if it’s going to potentially get taken away?
Because it’s called “lifetime”? As in the entire point of the product is that it will not ever be taken away with the exception that the company goes out of business? “Why pay for anything if there’s nothing enforcing the core premise of the product?” The gardener advertised a “whole-yard mow” for $100, but I’ve already gotten the area around the driveway, and honestly would it really be that bad if they just stopped right now?
You can talk about odds all you want (although I think around $100 million in VC funding puts those odds squarely in favor of “lifetime” users getting the floor sawed out from under them Looney Tunes-style), but the fact it’s even possible is what’s deeply disturbing, because it’s deliberate. Lifetime’s meaning should be unambiguously stipulated in a contract, not inferred. Know why? Because companies out there advertising “lifetime” subscriptions right now have little disclaimers like “approximately like five years or so but honestly we don’t really know or care lol this license disappears whenever we want it to”).
People are assuming it’s for the lifetime of your Plex account, but my response is: based on fucking what? Plex on their website doesn’t seem to specify this anywhere, even in their terms of service. People asking on their official forums receive responses saying things like “probably for the lifetime of your Plex account” with no sources to anything. I’m not trying to sealion here; I literally can’t find a single instance of Plex stating officially in writing or verbally what “lifetime” actually means to the end user. If Plex isn’t going to rugpull, why can’t they add a single sentence to their TOS saying something like: “The purchase of a lifetime pass grants the user a non-transferable license for [blah blah] starting from the date of purchase. This license will not be revoked unless 1) the associated account is terminated by the account holder or 2) the aasociated account is terminated by Plex for one or more of the reasons outlined in section [blah]”?
They could, they should, they don’t, and you have no good explanation, otherwise you would’ve offered one by now. They have enough money to afford a legal team that wouldn’t overlook that. The answer is that they want to reserve the right to destroy the “lifetime” pass whenever they want. If you can find official documentation from Plex Inc. saying that if I buy a lifetime pass today for $250, the license will only end with the termination of the account, then I’ll have no idea why they make this too hard to find, but I’ll take back everything else I said in this comment and stop using “lifetime” in scare quotes. I genuinely want to know if they say anything about this anywhere.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
Until they revoke it
LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
[deleted]possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
It is a matter of when
Nothing lasts forever
HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 1 month ago
How mamy months of server costs do you think those lifetime passes cover? If everyone just paid once for a lifetime then plex as a service can no longer function.
pory@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Server costs? Plex’s serverside only handles auth and verification. Once the client connects to the server, any media is sent peer to peer. There’s no stage where the video goes “to plex” or “from plex”. Saying plex needs to charge a sub fee to make up for bandwidth is like saying qbittorrent should do the same.
Unless you’re talking about the content Plex serves, the ones you have to walk every user of your Plex server through deleting from their apps’ homepage.
HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Im talking about all of plexs infrastructure, the hosting for the app, providing tunnels for users without port fwding, maintaining user accounts and usage data, emails… A lot goes into running a service like plex besides just “auth and verification”…and thats not even including the staff required to maintain it and developers to keep all the apps updated.
LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
[deleted]ripcord@lemmy.world 1 month ago
It’s your problem now. This is the kind of thing that happens.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 month ago
yes, but actually no.
Plex pass members can continue sharing.
this isn’t directed just at you, but the whole jellyfin community in general.
not sure why, but the jellyfin community seems to be becoming toxic as fuck. I’m getting hard “best friend” vibes from it. if the Plex community leaves for jellyfin it’ll be on their own terms. just be welcoming to us and your numbers will grow.
if y’all keep acting like a jealous “guy” friend we’re likely to go somewhere else.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 month ago
It’s not though, because as someone that has a Plex Pass nothing changes for them or anyone who streams from their server.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I don’t get why you’re being downvoted for spitting facts.
1000001490