- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://poptalk.scrubbles.tech/post/2333639
I was just forwarded this someone in my household who watches our server. Thatās it folks. Iāve been a hold out for a long time, but this is honestly it.
They want me to pay to stream content that I bought from my hardware transcoded also on my hardware.
Iāll say it. As of today, I say Plex is dead. Luckily Iāve been setting up Jellyfin, I guess itās time to make it production ready.
Edit: I have a Plex Pass. More comments saying āJust buy a plex passā are seriously not getting it. I have a Plex Pass and my users are still getting this.
And for the thousandth person who wants to say the same things to me:
- YES I know Iām unaffected as a Plex Pass owner.
- My users were immediately angry at it, which made me angry. Our users donāt understand what plex pass is, and they shouldnāt have to, thatās why I had it. The fact that they were pinged even though it should have kept working is horribly sloppy
- Plex is still removing functionality. I donāt care that āPeople should pay their fair shareā. If Plex wants to put every new feature behind a paywall, thatās completely okay. They are removing functionality.
- āBut they have cloud costsā. Remote streaming is negligible to them. Itās a dynamic DNS service. Plex client logs in, asks where server is, plex cloud responds with the IP and port of where server is located. Thatās it.
- āGood luck finding another remote streamingā - Again, Plex just opens up an IP and port. Jellyfin also just opens up an IP and port (Hold on jellyfin folks I know, security, thatās a separate conversation). All āremote streamingā is is their dynamic dns. Literal pennies to them. Know what actually is costing them money? Hosting all of that ad-supported āfreeā content that theyāre probably losing money on.
In short, I donāt care how you justify it. Plex is doing something shitty. Theyāre removing functionality that has been free for years. Iām not responding to any more of your comments repeating the same arguments over and over.
if you like software you should support it.
Absolutely true for FOSS. For freeware? My opinion is that itās money wasted because, unlike FOSS:
Hereās Jellyfinās āHow to Contributeā page, incidentally, for no particular reason. Let Plex eat up their $90+ million in venture capital instead of taking money from the little guy and then fall off a cliff into an abyss of enshittification.
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 āopennessā.
previous point. itās stupid easy to change licenses and lock out contributors. itās 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.
Iāve 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.
why isnāt it? if itās a generally better solution donāt you owe it to yourself and your ācustomersā 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 youāre willing to pay for them? then thereās no difference between proprietary and FOSS, right?
enshitification doesnāt just affect vendors, it happens to FOSS projects all-the-time. Iāve personally experienced it when a bookkeeping app removed support for USD. when asked the founder refused to address it and simply stated that they couldnāt continue supporting a currency that fuels so much corruption in the world. now tell me, how does that garner my respect or support?
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.
Youāre 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. itās not wrong, itās just life.
āyou could technically argueā??? Thatās literally, unambiguously the law. Thatās how the licensing works. This isnāt a technicality; itās a fundamental, widely understood feature of the license. Thatās how the license was designed to work. On top of that, licenses like the GPL have extremely stringent requirements for changing the license. (Here, Jellyfin uses GPLv2, so weāll go with that.)
Everyone with work in the current codebase has copyright over that work under the GPLv2. Nobody relinquishes that to some centralized entity. Thus, you have two options for every single individual person whose contributions are still extant in your project (no matter how large): 1) get their consent not just to relicense but to the specific license you want, or 2) remove their work from the project either because you can no longer contact them or because theyāve said no.
The fact that you called this process āstupid easyā for anything but the smallest, most insular project is the dumbest fucking thing Iāve heard today, and Iām not even wasting my time reading the rest of your comment given how shockingly willing you are to not just speak about things you have zero understanding of but to somehow arrive at the most false statement possible about them.
cool. go be angry somewhere else.