• Metal Zealot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Oh, no harm done then, lets keep allowing every online resource to implement shitty money grabbing tactics

        • Metal Zealot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          53
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          THEN ASK PEOPLE TO DONATE, how tone-deaf can you be about your own community?? What the fuck do they think Wikipedia is doing?
          I’ve found pirates & FOSS enthusiasts are FAR more likely to donate into something they use regularly and appreciate, this is a blatant slap in the face to those people.

        • Metal Zealot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          This unfortunately helps sets a precedent for what the internet is going to look like in the future. Even the most basic things will be behind a paywall.
          You cant even read a fucking news article from New York Times, who made 173.91 million dollars last year

          • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            A lot of things are already like that. IIUC this is restrictions on the API not the subs themselves. If you’d like you can still go to the site to download specific subs. What you can’t do is use bazarr to bulk download subs. Personally I bought vip since I found the free tier API limit pretty bad and I didn’t think the price was so bad for what you get back. Feel free to disagree tho. Before I automated my setup I was just manually searching for subs for movies I wanted and that worked pretty well and will continue to do so if you’d prefer that.

                • Metal Zealot@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  You mean the world renowned, universally known news agency in America owned by billionaires?

                • Jerkface@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I don’t know what is so controversial about this statement. Investigative reporting is fucking expensive. The people who do it need to eat. If you’re not paying for it, who is?

            • Spazsquatch@lemmy.studio
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              True, but just look at how much better it has gotten in the last couple decades. Putting the news behind the paywall runs the risk of ending the battle for impressions and might force nuance into well researched stories.

        • kbal@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          But it’s been free for a really long time

          Of course it has. You need to offer the world a useful service for some length of time before you have dominated the market to such an extent that you can cut the quality and jack up the prices without there being any meaningful competition to worry about.

            • kbal@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              So who exactly does own OpenSubtitles Group Limited, and what are their motivations? If you’re claiming to know, I assume you must be some kind of insider? Because they don’t seem to be all that open about it. Otherwise we can only judge by their actions.