These are motion pictures, not software. “Open source” is about the latter.

You're also presumably not a $400m+ company, which makes it more intestesting.

Clearly engineers at Netflix have more important work to do.

The reason for the intermediary is because the clickthrough sends the previous URL as a referer to the next server.

The only real way to avoid leaking specific urls from the source page to the arbitrary other server is to have an intermediary redirect like this.

All the big products put an intermediary for that reason, though many of them make it a user visible page of that says "you are leaving our product" versus Google mostly does it as an immediate redirect.

The copy/paste behavior is mostly an unfortunate side effect and not a deliberate feature of it.

Not if you use the ClearURLs addon ;)

But they said it sends them to Netfçix? That seems incorrect

I absolutely torrent as a way to discover new content, but I want favorites on a shelf on very long shelf life media where it does not require internet access and is never going to get altered or deleted as streaming services often do, or end up unavailable in the future with no seeders.

You're on a site called Hacker News, and don't know how to burn a video file to DVD?

> I find it funny that casual observers on the outside are so morally opposed. ... It's really going to help mid market and below, for films that don't have Disney budgets.

Agreed. I also have a few decades of experience in film and television production, mostly in creating and deploying new digital tooling paradigms from 'desktop video' in the 90s to virtual sets to real-time 3D environments. New digital production tools have almost always had the biggest impact enabling low-end and mid-tier creatives, not big budget studio productions. In the early 90s the Amiga-based Video Toaster enabled upstart productions like Mystery Science Theater 3000 and Babylon 5. The Toaster also enabled about 95% more cable-access crap and bad porn but the other 5% was fantastically creative new stuff which couldn't have existed on indy budgets. Dramatic new production paradigms tend to unleash both democratization and disruption. Most people welcome the democratization yet reflexively fear the disruption. Today, few recall the early 90s predictions from the professional production industry of desktop video causing economic and creative doom, despite being widespread and echoed across mainstream media.

While machine learning-based production tools aren't flexible or granular enough yet for more than limited experiments, there's no reason they won't become increasingly useful for real work. IMHO they'll likely have the same kind of democratizing impact as desktop video and the Toaster - 95% more regrettable crap, some of which we're already starting to see but, eventually, also 5% more wonderfully creative stuff which wouldn't have existed without it. The crap will quickly fade away but the bold new stuff will remain pushing creative frontiers and shaping tomorrow's classics.

If this (tragic, dystopian, abominable) future comes to pass, why would we store movies at all?

Just distribute the prompt and I'll generate my own movie on the fly, with my own tweaks of course.

The thing about the ludds is that as a rule, they don't understand that their perceived enemies are threatening to make their lives better.

They can be safely ignored... at least here, and at least for now.

For a long time putting them in low power mode killed HDR, but it seems they patched that bug (feature)

I didn't even know Netflix had a bit torrent client!

so, isn’t this using the s3 static website hosting feature - (im assuming due to the dir listing) which i dont believe does support https

It's telling that VFX subcontractors are putting out their own BTS content on YouTube now as promotional material, since the primary production companies for shows and films (with a few exceptions) have completely stopped doing this.

I miss director commentary, I loved re-watching movies with that audio track.

Is there just too much content now? Or has streaming become such a "content mill" that the creators aren't inspired enough about their own work to sit down and talk about it after it's complete?

We’ve started watching Pluribus on Apple TV and it seems like when they’re making the show Apple contractually obligates them to make a podcast about each episode. Some of them are very interesting (like costume design) and some are less so.

It was funny how the sound engineers remoted in for the podcast and had extremely low quality mics, despite it being a show with fantastic sound (really it’s an excellent show in general, just really good).

DVD extras existed as an incentive for users to re-buy films they already had on VHS.

No such incentive is necessary with streaming, the format competes so well on convenience it doesn't have to invest in extra content.

Depends on the DVD. Some of them do look terrible, but some aren't too bad. Probably depends on how it was transferred and mastered and what bitrate they used on the disc.

Remember those DVD releases that had plastic edges and cardboard fronts/backs? That's an era for you. They're always max 480p, sometimes even 480i, and often single layer, dual sided. Those came out when the Sony was still making Trinitron CRTs that could barely do 720p.

Probably because there are over 9000 different TVs with their own proprietary apps on each one. So the easiest thing to do is just go with the lowest common denominator which is just giving you a menu to play a simple video.

It is not blocked by DRM but different codec. Even if you have two MP4 files, but if they were encoded differently ffmpeg will still need to do some computation to join them.