Just 20 years ago, cd/dvd-burners were standard in every desktop PC. You could buy music and movies, and make backups in full high quality. Every year, you hear about another company in the businesses of producing hard media shutting down. Nowadays it turns out if you buy your media on Apple, Amazon, other services, and your account gets terminated for some ToS violation, you don't actually own your media and you're just renting it because it's in the cloud (someone elses servers).Will the practice of collecting and preserving media last well into the future as the technology to preserve it becomes less and less available and we lose privacy and ownership of our own computers?
Yes, hoarders will always exist.
>own a thing you didn't makeretard
>>100185188Copyright is a retarded concept. Of course the author owns the original, but if it is published, placing limits on copying is bizarre. What if someone has a photographic memory? Does that imply that the author somehow now owns their brain?
>>100185188>owning anythingIf you think that you can't own a movie that you pirated then you can't really own the shirt off your back. Ownership itself is a farce and is truly only what you can defend with might.
>>100184524Don’t stream. Download. Are you retarded? Actually just kill yourself
>>100184524>People Be Able To Own Their Own MediaMost people don't give a fuck.
>>100185188>implying you can make anything without trespassing on the concepts and ideas of those that came before you.Green is not an original color, now pay me a monthly subscription of $9.99 for the use of the color green or I'll see you in court!
You were never able to "own" copyrighted content to begin with, you just owned the physical media it came on. The cuckery of digital distribution is just the logical result of applying antiquated IP law to modern tech.
>>100185813Yes you were, who says everybody ships stuff with restrictive licenses? Some softwares, like XZ or Xee are public domain. Burn them on DVD, there you go, it's yours.
>>100184524this is a bot thread, and no. you do not need to own anything, including private property.
>>100185188I understand how copyright law works, I just choose to ignore it LOL
>>100185841yes, and there are movies under public domain that no one gives two shits about. whoop de doo. apples and oranges.
>>100185921>"uhmm ackshully no, I won't let this one count"ok retard
>>100185596>>100185631>>100185769>>100185898This isnt about copyright, data cannot be owned, when you buy a music disk, you pay for the plastic and not the information it contains.
>>100184524I have external HDDs, SSDs and DVDs. All my phones have microsd cards too.Cloudfags are not human. These corpo dickriders need to disappear.
>>100187164storing isn't even a problem, even downloading and deleting immediately after watching is superior because streamfags literally don't get better quality on netflix than 720p unless they use Windows 11 + TPM + Nvidia card + secure boot
>>100184524i'm never going to stop pirating everything
You can buy games DRM-free on GOGYou can buy music DRM-free on QobuzDVD/Blu-ray has DRM that needs to be crackedYou can buy movies (tho in shitty quality) on iTunes and crack the DRM (or at least it used to be possible before) just like DVD and keep it.We just need a digital distributor of BD quality movies without DRM, and obviously for retards to actually use these services so they arent constantly on the brink of bankruptcy like GOG, just found out about Qobuz like a month ago myself.
>>100188716this but I will wait for someone else to buy it and then I will leech and will not seed back.
>>100187091You are paying for the dataIf you're just buying a piece of plastic I can get that for pennies.The music CD is only worth as much as it is precisely because of the data that is on it.
>>100184524> muh physical mediaFuck off. All you need is a 120Tb+ RAID and you can forget those inferior versions.
>>100189370>you are paying for the datawhen your disk breaks, you're forced to buy a new one, you literally pay for the disk>b-b-but you can copy the dataand how muh does it cost to do that? Dumbfuck.
>>100184524No.If you want to own anything that exists now, you better buy physical copies of it and back it up.
>>100187091the data physically exists you moron; if you own the physical disk you own the physical data
>>100189513>the data physically existsfunny little man
>>100185188owning what you make is a communist concept, it doesn't apply to our world
>>100189532> CD data is represented as tiny indentations known as pits, encoded in a spiral track molded into the top of the polycarbonate layer. The areas between pits are known as lands. Each pit is approximately 100 nm deep by 500 nm wide, and varies from 850 nm to 3.5 µm in length.now you can apologize
>>100189564that's physical disk, show me the data
>>100189578look at the picture
>>100189588remove the data from the disk and show it to me in physical form
>>100189621remove the words from a book and show me the information
>>100189621>remove the physical form and show it to me in physical form
>>100189643>>100189647If you cannot do that, maybe data isn't real.
>>100189621its already in physical form, like picrel the data is physically encoded as indents in the mediaperhaps you think picrel has no data?
>>100189677that's a block of marble engraved with letters that do not exist if there's no block of marble
>>100184524>Will the practice of collecting and preserving media last well into the futureIt will last in the sense that you will have enthusiasts or particular hobbyists doing it, it will not last in the sense of the normalfag hordes owning collections of media like in the days of the past when getting media required you to simply buy it as a recording on some physical medium.
>>100189663you're asking to remove the physical form of something to prove it has physical form, it's nonsensical
>>100184524Not just own their own shit but be able to use it after the internet is roasted by high altitude nukes and country hacking each others equipment, thus bricking all commercial and home routers. Those without normalcy bias know to what I am referring.
>>100189692you're coping with the fact that we have high performance storage devices that can take and destroy form thousands of times a second for cost so low in electricity bills that it will be 0$ + tip to make a million copies of anything
>>100189684the letters do physically exist thoughever - as indents in the mediayou're correct that data cant exist without media (e.g., stone, ink, atoms, ...), but that's irrelevant and not profound?at least you agree its a block of stone physically engraved with letters, such that they physically existthanks for your time
>>100189748no they do not, material has form that makes you see letters but letters do not actually exist, in fact the only reason you see the letters in rock is because a part of rock where you see letters is empty, what you see is void and the void will soon stare back at you, schizo
>>100189766>no they do not, ink has a form that makes you see letters but letters do not actually exist, in fact the only reason you see the letters in ink is because the canvas surrounding the ink is empty, ...perhaps you don't understand what information is, start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory
>>100189748not him and i'm not sure if this is even his point, but to be fair, /information/ is conceptual in nature, you can record information in a predetermined format suited for writing/engraving/etc physically, which can then be read back one way or another to turn it back into its' useful conceptual form, but information itself is not a physical thinglike if i write "hello" on a piece of paper, you understand how to read it and what it means conceptually, but physically, it's just some lines. someone who doesn't understand the encoding (language) of said lines won't know what it means or maybe even that it's potential information at allas for data on a cd or whatever, it is usually the case that you only own the physical media, but the information encoded onto it is only licensed for specific uses, like you can't say, rip a music cd and share it with others, because you don't have the right to do that as per the license you paid for, even though you do own the media it came on
>>100189813>information theory>theorybecause it doesn't exist in real world lmao
>>100185769you think it's a joke until you hear about purple being a trademarked color in the sweets/candy industry
>>100190001try wearing a royal blue suit as a nobody in public
>>100189827i think what you're missing is that information encoded in your brain is still physically encodedthe "hello" physically exists, and your ability to read english also physically exists, and so does your population(s) of neurons that code for "hello" and semantically similar conceptse.g. one-time pads require both key and ciphertext; if one is lost then the hidden message is lost, but while they both exist - so does the useful information>>100185769>>100190001https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag
I miss physical media
Not likely, not legally anyway. Digital only downloads, and subscription based services have proven to be far too profitable. Companies like the extra control it gives them over their owned IP too. Now that they know they can get away with taking your money and not actually having to give you ownership of anything, theres almost no chance they're going to let go of that ability willingly. They actually want older media to become inaccessable because it means it won't be competing with their new stuff for peoples attention. They're willing to let all of the artistic works of the past, the product of countless hours work done by a countless number of people, die for the sake of their own short term profits.
>>100190091it's always encoded physically one way or another, since we live in a physical world, yes, but the information is not tied to any particular physical form, because it is not a physical thingclaiming that everything is physical, even concepts, because said concepts are at some level the result of particular physical brain matter/activity is just a subversion of the language usedi'm sure you'd agree that when i think of an apple, that apple is not a physical apple, it's an imagined apple. the difference between an apple and information is that an apple is only an actual apple when it meets particular physical characteristics (it's made of apple), while information, not being a physical thing, has no such requirement, it can be recorded in any form and not lose any fidelity
>>100184524>less and less available and we lose privacy and ownership of our own computersyes because normgroids either don't care or don't know what to do about iti for one will always hoard
It's just bits or, worse, degraded Fourier transforms which experienced several degrees of generation loss from the master copy. Stop idealizing totems and take better care of your data. You own everything you stream on your computer until you let it die.
>>100190312>i'm sure you'd agree that when i think of an apple, that apple is not a physical applesince it's 4chan it would be funny to say no, but i agreethe apple is implementation dependent - the same way simulated water is not wet and a simulated brain is not conscious (controversial, i know)the apple is also a category but i hate philosophy (and philosophers)anyway if i buy a CD, and it has information physically encoded on it, i also bought the information
>>100190312>>i'm sure you'd agree that when i think of an apple, that apple is not a physical apple, it's an imagined applewtf are you talking about
>>100191037i'm not talking about the fidelity of the imagined apple, anybody who knows what an apple is can "think of" an apple, how they imagine it is inconsequential to this topic>anyway if i buy a CD, and it has information physically encoded on it, i also bought the informationthe difference here isn't even regarding the nature of information, it's a legal one, and with it the difference between possession and ownershipnobody argues you aren't in possession of an encoding of said information, but having a copy of the information and owning the information are two different things legally, otherwise for example piracy wouldn't be possible, as there's be no difference between getting a movie from a torrent or from a dvd, as it's the same information, and you have a copy, right?
>>100191254>>100190926for the quoted part
>>100191254because the law is stupid, but i'm mainly arguing against the anon who said the data does not physically exist (>>100189532)i know its "intellectual property" and i dont have the legal right to "copy, modify, or redistribute, ..." because we literally live in 1849
>>100187091semanticsif I can do anything with the data then I own it
>>100189420>when your disk breaks, you're forced to buy a new one, you literally pay for the diskshiggy diggy>and how muh does it cost to do that? Dumbfuck.literally nothing? just the cost of a new cd or portion of a hard drive? what are you doing on this board
I wanna get more serious about hoarding shit but all those things like RAID, NAS, backups and such are overwhelming to think about. are there any good guides about that? or should I just buy random hard drives and start filling them?
>>100192111Synology and raid 1 will take you a long way.
>>100192111RAID makes redundancy more efficient (both by having the same redundancy with fewer drives and by having more redundancy to allow you to buy cheaper drives within reason), but if you just bought two drives and had the data on both of them, that's plenty to start with. building a hoard without redundancy is asking for problems
>>100184524You ask a good question. As I see P2P decline day by day, I often wonder where everyone is getting their media. Are they paying $10 a month for every service that interests them? Why would they when they have P2P? Has IPTV replaced P2P? I don't think so. The world has changed yet again in our lifetimes to such a degree that I honestly think they love being paypigs. They pay and pay for video game subscriptions and adobe subscriptions and use windows and apple just like battered women. I try to figure out what their problem is but the answer keeps printing back: they enjoy being paypigs who keep paying for things we used to pirate or get for free by using linux. The world has changed bro and I don't think that anything other than subscriptions for media are in the future because I don't see the spirit to be free that existed even 11 years ago anymore.
>>100193189when i was in my 20s growing up in the 00s i wanted to have every song i liked on my hard drive and every movie too. but now days after i see a movie i rarely want to see it again, same with the music. it just doesn't have the same value to me it did back then and i have no desire to store it.
>>100184524Both physically and digitally distributed goods grant you a license to access media, and a copy of the media for access. However physical goods come with ownership of said license, instead of a rental of that license. Much in the same way one can own a usage permit. With physical goods you have legal rights because you have ownership of that license, the most important of those rights is the first sales doctrine. This is why companies hate physical goods beyond the material and logistical costs.So no, companies will try anything to stop you from keeping physical goods. They want you to rebuy it over and over, want to make it so you can't sell your copy, want to make it so you can't transfer your copy to a different medium for backup, and want to be able to make "changes" to artistic works for modern audiences or hide works unsuitable for them to prevent PR issues.
You guys are thinking way too hard about this shit. There will always be piracy. There will always be a way to view media offline. The day you can't run your NAS offline or VPNs/Proxies are made illegal is the day HDCP and IME/PSP is so advanced you don't own your own PC anymore.
>>100185596Copyright is not about attributing ownership. Copyright is about protecting future sales.
>>100184524I mean couldn't you just use obs and isolate the audio source in the background? Same idea
>>100188716Some movies and tv shows have been distributed on blu-ray that wasn't encrypted. I don't think its that uncommon, just have to know what you're getting.There at least used to be a list, but none of the attempts actually effectively restrict access anymore.Hollywood should just give up on it. People who aren't going to buy media aren't going to buy media. Give people who are going to pay a better experience than the pirates.
I make vhs of my favorites using blurays as source! I make covers for em too (most of these in pic rel are existing covers) physical media will never die and will always be there for those who can appreciate it. I've made 60+ tapes in the last 2 months.
>>100195539Overwhelming majority of them are encrypted, just because its ridiculously easy to crack it that doesn't mean DRM isn't still there.There used be software that ripped iTunes movies to DRM-free just as easily as you'd rip a CSS DVD.>>10018969You are technically right but thats still a major downgrade in my opinion, like physical media is basically not available in my country because everyone else gladly streams and it ain't worth the cost to bring it in here just for the few weirdos like me.Also I'd argue most preservation happens indirectly, just the physical media existing is preservation.Like I can (and should) rip all the obscure local tapes and discs of my normalfag parents basically all of which are unavailable officially or unofficially online even tho they don't care one bit, didn't buy it back then expecting to watch or sell it way into the future but just because they were forced to get the physical media to access them now they have the chance to live on unlike the TV shows I watched as a kid which have no trace left past some vague memories.Actually I used to record music from the radio and I still have those files meanwhile the music I used to listen to for the years that I've used Deezer are forever lost with no chance of recovery without the account I forgot.1/2
>>100196393Going into the future without physical media or more specifically "physical" files stored on end user devices without DRM and usage restrictions be that in whatever form there is just soon going to be a huge gap in history between the last physical/download releases up until the very latest currently officially streaming offers.Like how much of the PS1 library is unplayable? Probably an extremely low amount, if you wanted to play through the entire library you could probably get extremely close, even if a disc isn't dumped yet it at least has the chance to be in the future.Meanwhile with newer generations huge portion of the library are already unplayable and it'll only get worse, like you can't get 100% achievements or even anywhere close on the PS3 library, obviously, but did you know unless you were grinding the PS5 from basically the first few months your chance for the complete platinum collection is already busted? I think theres just something really wrong about that.
>>100192111checked and I was here just a few years ago, it's easier than you think.>>100193001this is actually my initial setup, real easy to pull off. The basic idea is you want a server (basic computer) that manages a bunch of HDDs, that's the synology NAS part (network attached storage) but you could get away with a raspberry pi or some other cheapie SBC. Then you want a bunch of HDDs, now if you just fill them all up individually then you risk losing stuff when one eventually dies. The solution? Raid 1 ie mirror what's on one drive, onto the other so if one dies you still have everything on the other. Now install Kodi on whatever device you have attached to your tv to watch stuff (or just your pc/tablet etc) and have it see your NAS drives and now you have your own local netflix. Boom.
>>100188716>You can buy music DRM-free on Qobuzthis and on 7Digital. They let you redownload songs you bought as well.
>>100185188nooooo!!! you can't just store those bits on your hard drive without paying me!!!! you can't just download that file on that internet that you pay for without giving me money!!! you can't record the screen at the movie theater and sell it to mexicans on DVD for $5 each!!!
>>100191254>how they imagine it is inconsequential to this topicis the copy in the room with us right now?
>>100184524Most of the eight thousand long "Click Agree to Continue" boil plate terms and conditions aren't worth the toilet paper they aren't written on. I want to say even though they are still standard the supreme court once ruled since no one reads them, and everyone knows no one reads them, they are unenforceable.In other words, you already do own your own media. The only real danger is everything is in "the cloud" and they will turn off the server you are streaming it from.>blah blah blahAlmost all copyright law, that is actually enforced, revolves around selling things. Not having them without the publisher's permission. Sure, Sony or whoever may sue you for eight million dollars because you seeded a song. But if you actually survive long enough to have that see the inside of a court room Sony may be rewarded a pittance because you didn't pay for the album and ordered to pay your legal costs for wasting the court's time and attempting to weaponize lawyer fees. As common as it seems, the court doesn't like when people sue based on the idea they'd never win but you can't afford to fight them.
>>100185754Autistic retards love rewatching the same shit forever. Everybody else watches something once and is done. Having a "collection" of media is about as logical for as having a "collection" of loaves of bread.
>>100199292same, I don't even download music for that reason, streaming opus off youtube is enough
>>100199292Dumb dumb take. I've seen quite literally thousands of movies and occasionally, I'll rewatch a film I've enjoyed. Often times, I'll watch it again with a friend or my girlfriend depending on if it'd interest them also. If I didn't own these movies, I wouldn't be able to watch them at all, as several of them aren't on any streaming service. Fuck buying em on eBay for $30 either. I'll keep my vhs and dvds thank you anon.
