The linked 'retailer service' is the one that has the actual content, and that service runs its own content-decrypting keyservers.
With UV shutting down, the ongoing library interop between the UV partners will go away and further gains to any of those libraries will not be propagated to others.
The concerns about DRM keyservers going away is a real one, but that's not what's happening (this time).
The whole point of UV was to de-risk committing to a specific streaming service because your purchases were portable, like being able to put a DVD you own in a different brand of DVD player.
Since the news about UV is fresh, it remains to be seen whether the remaining studios migrate too, and whether the negotiations between the competing rights databases, the studios, and content sellers can result in a user-fair migration. As for non-US users -- shame on all players in this game -- they're always an afterthought to where piracy offers a superior UX, but other video platforms are proving this need not be the case.
The DVD comparison is illustrative, and proves that decent UX with DRM can be achieved despite a dizzying array of rights, but the permissions are materialized into hardware and frozen in time. Online, the industry has been using malleable rights for both 'rent' and 'own' semantics, but for the latter case it's user-hostile. This is why more and more content platforms are missing the 'own' option entirely: you can stream whatever is available, but the selection may change at any time.
For now, Vudu and FandangoNOW are two services that supports both UV and Movies Anywhere. If one pairs one these to both of UV and MA, the maximum amount of entitlements will sync across.
Vudu does $5 sales all the time, and the way I see it, that's less than a movie ticket. So if I see it once, it was like going to see a movie, but with the theoretical hope of long-term persistence. The fact that MA insulates the risk of losing your titles across every major tech company adds to the comfort level now too, and as noted, nobody is losing their UV library when UV shuts down.
Second, my Vudu library contains over 600 movies and significantly more television shows than that. And before you calculate the cost of the storage, bear in mind there's another, secondary cost: The much higher cost I'd have spent to have built that library solely on ripped discs. I never paid full price for a digital purchase. (And specifically, never more than it would've cost to acquire it via disc.)
Third, time. I'm also significantly backlogged in organizing my ebooks, which I do store on drives. Blu-ray ripping time just isn't something I want to dedicate a big chunk of my life to.
I ended up replacing my NetApp StorVault (6TB (4TB usable), RAID6) with a FreeNAS box from iXSystems (24TB (20TB usable), RAID6) which cost me a bit more than $2500. (it is also much quieter than the StorVault was :-)). And on that 20TB I've stored a bit more than 200 book volumes that I had digitized at 1DollarScan, probably close to 1000 magazines (scanned generally manually with my ScanSnap 1500), and perhaps as many PDF documents that were never printed to begin with (like data sheets). I also have my music collection, and I have recently looked at putting movies on there as well since the streaming services are letting me down here as well.
At the end of the day it is the 21st century version of one's personal library.
The other thing I'm interested in, and wonder if you have thoughts on: When you pass, your personal library is inherited. Will people know what to do with your digital library? Will it be useful? Will people want it?
The tools for processing PDFs into searchable text have a lot of warts. For a while IBM was offering a free Watson service to do this (now its part of Watson Discovery) which has some warts. I did manage a set of perl scripts that would post process the statements that I downloaded from the bank into CSV files, but I would still like to pull tabular data out of PDF book scans to make the data they provide more useful.
I have a simple frontend based on the perl Mojolicious module which Blekko had developed as part of another project but my indexing tools are still quite primitive. Simple bi-gram and tri-grams, and a growing synonym index. I don't give it enough queries to use my own traffic for ranking feedback. So basically everything is nearly equal rank. Basically I am about to the AltaVista level of search capability :-).
The vision is it just runs as a server and anyone on the same network can access it like a web service an pull up documents (and in the future media) of interest.
I'm just hoping the movie/TV industry gets the picture soon and goes the way the music industry has with streaming.
Sad state for the industry, really.
You don’t have to throw away the disk after you rip it. The disk itself is a great backup.
Personally, I prefer everything to be in my Plex server, but I’m in no rush and just rip as I go. I’ll probably never actually rip every one. By the sounds of it, I don’t even have anywhere close to the number of disks to rip as you, so I get it no being appealing.
It's rather easy to get TOS'ed even if you match filenames of common pirate name signatures.
Do you have any examples where someone's Backblaze account was terminated for backing up pirated media?
I still suggest it for friends and family because it's cheap and damn sure that encryption is better than nothing, but if you have a lot of sensitive data I wouldn't recommend it. If you demand privacy, use Restic and Backblaze's B2 service, you're paying per GB then though.
First, though, find out if your friends or family have an Office365 subscription. A lot of people get one because they want the Office apps, and don't make heavy use of the 1 TB of OneDrive storage that it includes. Restic vis rclone should be able to use that for backups.
Backblaze is cheap, but using something you have already paid for is even cheaper. :-)
Several other cloud backup programs do have OneDrive support built in, including Arq, duplicity, duplicati, duplicacy, and GoodSync. There are probably others.
This adds up to a few hundred dollars that you wouldn't need to spend if the DRMs implemented were sane and reasonable with legal owners. And I don't even factor in the cost of the time, electrical power, or computing power involved to make it happen.
5TB to 8TB hard drives are cost-efficient in my experience. 6x 8TB Hard Drives for 24TB of storage (RAID1 like redundancy. Use ZFS btw) is $1200 (~$200 per 8TB hard drive).
> invest in a paid off-site backup service for failures
What's your recovery plan? If you want to recover 5TB of data off of a 100 MBit connection, that's 140 Hours. Local is the only thing that makes sense if you're at the point of filling up hard drives.
Having 1Gbps or even 10Gbps (local "fiber" with Direct Attached Copper) connections locally is relatively cheap. And it seems like 10Gbps is getting cheaper.
Accessing a hard drive, even a sped-up RAID set of drives, over 10Gbps is going to have the same bandwidth as a local SATA connection. (SATA is only 6Gbps). Your NAS is practically a "local drive" at that point.
It's a media archive. As long as you can recover specific files on demand, it doesn't really matter if it takes two months to download the entire thing.
Which means $100 buys you enough disk space for two redundant copies of 200 movies assuming you vobcopy them; about twice or thrice if you convert to h264 or h265 or av1; and half again if you have BD quality rips.
That’s about 50cents/movie for two copies, half if you only keep one. Is this really prohibitive?
For me the problem was ripping my dvds just took so long, and wasn’t automatable (weirdly my bottom of the line Mac mini struggles with re-encoding ;) )
Rips can achieve comparable quality with lower bitrate than used on the original disk. Blu-ray dates to 2006 and (typically) uses inefficient high bit-rate H.262 ("MPEG 2", which DVDs used), H.264 (AVC), or VC-1.
Rips can use high-efficiency H.265 ("HEVC"). Typical for a 1080p H.265 encoding is 9-15 GB. (Lower for animated films.)
UHD Blu-rays do use the more efficient H.265 already, but are much higher resolution as well. I'm not sure how prevalent they are.
One big downside of reencoding in HEVC is that for a moderate gain in compression (0-50% depending on the film), you considerably increase your playback requirements. I use a Raspberry Pi 3 with Kodi as a playback device, and it's not capable of playing 1080p HEVC videos.
UHD Blurays are getting more common. They usually come on 66 GiB disks, and it's becoming more common to let the video take up most of that, and bundling a second disk of special features if necessary. So even backing up the main feature of a UHD can easily run you 50+ GiB.
Right; still quite a bit less efficient than H.265, though.
> One big downside of reencoding in HEVC is that for a moderate gain in compression (0-50% depending on the film), you considerably increase your playback requirements.
Yes, although this is becoming less true as more hardware offload support becomes available.
For example, Nvidia 750, 950-960, and 1030 are all capable of HEVC offload. The latter can be had new for ~$85; the others are probably a bit harder to find but given they're older midrange cards at this point maybe they're a little cheaper.
> So even backing up the main feature of a UHD can easily run you 50+ GiB.
Sure, I don't think there's any economical way to reduce storage requirements of UHD significantly without defeating the point. On the other hand, I don't think the extra pixels really matter as much as higher color depth (10 or 12 bit) and fewer artifacts at lower resolution, unless you've got a home IMAX or something.
Re-encoding them is a PITA as well. Even on a HEDT gaming desktop with a brand new CPU, the process only proceeds at 8-10fps, if that, so at least 2x movie runtime. Maybe there are some ways to involve the video card which can speed it up, but I haven't tried it.
And even if you want to and can keep the originals, you'll want to re-encode it and keep both; most Plex clients (think: Apple TV, shitty laptop, etc) simply can't handle raw 4K bluray playback.
Obviously your mileage may vary as to what's a reasonable cost.
The storage costs as well as streaming transmission costs are not only borne by but also provide profit to the provider. If they can profit off them, you can hopefully at least break even!
I'm in the same boat. Disks it is, though they are such a pain.
Why can I buy music without DRM but video hasn't followed that path?
The movie industry has always been more paranoid about piracy, compared to the music folks. And that's actually quite reasonable for newly-released content - the stuff that gets shown in theaters or on premium streaming services, and that pirates compete to "rip" ASAP. But there's no sensible reason why their long tail content couldn't be made available in DRM-free form, long after it has stopped being "current" and heavily sought-after. It's only market concentration and lack of competition that keeps this from happening-- and this is why DRM is evil and must be shut down. It's the opposite of a free market.
By the time it became easier to pirate video, streaming was further along and the video industry went straight there because it's more friendly to them than the download option.
 E.g. Marvels.The.Punisher.S02.1080p.NF.WEBRip.x265.10bit.HDR.DDP5.1.Atmos-DEFLATE[rartv] (30GB) (1 hour 38 minutes after release time)
Plex is proprietary and can shut down any time. Although it runs locally, it contacts the plex servers for quite a lot of stuff. Granted, you won't lose your media and can replace plex easily.
If you just want a way to stream music and movies from your own server or home computer, with on-the-fly re-encoding to adjust to available bandwidth, I would recommend airsonic. https://github.com/airsonic/airsonic
Since you're just running it and not developing it, what difference does the language make (beyond making sure you have mem/cpu to meet application requirements)?
1) insufficient knowledge of the source code behind the tools you use, or
2) a really dull and limited computing experience
I maintain my own Lisp implementation that has a decent object system, exceptions, delimited continuations, compiler and virtual machine, and a whole-document pattern matching language for easy text transformation.
I've worked on early versions of the POSIX threading library for Glibc, Linux device drivers, all sorts of middleware stacks in wireless, VoIP and such.
Code of mine is in e2fsprogs: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/ext2/e2fsprogs.git/tree/li...
In Wireshark: https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=b...
I started working with 8 bit microcomputers in the early 1980's, writing games and utilities, and dial-up BBS's, using assembly language and BASIC. I had dabbled in 3D graphics and the "demo" scene. I used to code in Pascal and Modula-2 before C. I've worked as a C++ dev for many years.
Java simply isn't something that would interest me. Java programs look verbose and blubby. To be fair, a lot of what I use and have used is blubby, like the C language, Unix shell and whatnot. But I don't need more blubby. I have my fill of blub calories already. The Java platform bloated, and the ecosystem is self-absorbed. To its credit, it has a reputation for supposedly having good garbage collection and concurrency in its VM, that's about it.
But considering airsonic runs on Java, and you aren't developing for it, the only relevant issues with respect to the source language are performance and program size in terms of both memory and storage.
Considering you're storing videos on this server, storing a tiny Java app is a non-issue. And the memory the program itself takes up is meager compared to the memory usage from streaming and encoding/decoding media. If I had to guess, based on the lean interface, it has a lower memory profile than Plex. Performance, again on par with Plex.
So, if you don't have an ideological opposition to Java due to its proprietary nature, then I don't understand why you give a shit if the best media server for your needs runs on it.
We can hardly avoid using Java stuff in daily lives. If you use Android at all, you're using Java programs. Lots of web applications have Java back ends.
If someone else has done that (on the other side of an HTTP wall, for instance), I don't care.
> Which is basically everything.
Sorry to burst your Java bubble, but no, it isn't.
2. I hate Java as a language but it is used in embedded systems everywhere. Oh look, another hyperbole.
Ha! I use precisely this setup for my media needs: Kodi runs on an Odroid-XU4 SBC hooked up to a wired gigabit Ethernet LAN and my Big Display Device (the one with the ATSC tuner) and my server is my laptop. I even created some hinky shell scripts to play arbitrary video files:
I have the YouTube plugin so I can do things like
kodi-play -y $YOUTUBE_VIDEO_ID
Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with Jellyfin's team, I just contributed one patch to the codebase.
mpd and icecast for in the go streaming.
MoviesAnywhere is far more restrictive. Only five major studios are participating, and smaller studios have actually so far been shut out. (STX has tried to get onto MA with no luck.) And obviously it doesn't yet support TV either. Their view on sharing is that you should use the sharing features of a retailer, but all of the retailers have the same, heavy-handed requirement for sharing: Apple, Google, and Amazon video library sharing requires sharing a single credit card for purchasing across linked accounts, which prevents their sharing methods from being used for casual/friend use.
That being said, with studios gradually pulling out of UV anyways, the number of titles you could get new UV rights on was really diminishing anyways, and if each linked Vudu account is going to get permanent copies of our shared UV library when UV shuts down, it'll be good to have confidence that we aren't going to lose those titles.
From there faq:
UltraViolet is a free, cloud-based digital rights library for the movies and TV shows that you purchase or redeem at participating retailers. When you buy a movie or TV show that comes with an UltraViolet right from a retailer that you have linked to your UltraViolet Library, it's automatically added to your UltraViolet Library and you have options to stream it over the Internet and/or download it for offline viewing to a variety of devices.
"Your UltraViolet Library will automatically close and, in the majority of cases, your movies and TV shows will remain accessible at previously-linked retailers."
I wonder what is a minority case?
i usually rent from a local library and use DVDFab & Handbrake/x264 to encode from scratch with excellent settings. Most of the stuff on torrent is lousy quality that's optimized for size first. The way I see it, i already pay huge property taxes that more than covers the few select movies i rip. sometimes i already own the DVD (720p) version but not the blu ray (1080p).
I can't comprehend how one would arrive at that reasoning.
definitely some mental gymnastics are required. the difference between owning and renting is largely inconsequential. i rarely watch the stuff i own, and since i can rent it for free from a library, i would never buy it. i just save myself a library trip the one time in 2 years that i want to watch it.
i guess i have little sympathy for ever-expanding media conglomerates, like Comcast-NBCUniversal, given how they've treated me as their loyal customer/prisoner for the past decade. i do pay for content from smaller studios, and as i said, most of the stuff i rip is older and i already own in crappier resolution on dvd.
That is, other people may have fair use claims to the access. So why should I be on the hook for uploading.
—yes, I know the position that RIAA takes on this. I just found it interesting seeing this from a different perspective.
If you can circumvent copyright just by not caring whether you have a right to copy, that's essentially the same thing as copyright not existing at all.
Impending monopoly abuse lawsuit?
VidAngel is currently in court fighting Disney over their version of a system I invented to solve these problems.
That said, while the impact of DRM is a huge reduction in personal freedom, I don't think it's accurate or fair to say:
> DRM schemes are designed to take away your fair and lawful rights as a participant in the media ecosystem.
They are designed to protect the copyright holder from infringement in the form of illegal sharing. They just don't care enough about the impact on users to counteract their desire to fight "piracy."
Users rights are a subset of "piracy".
Edit: I wish the Hacker in HN was real.