Not against the idea, but I hope it leads more towards investment in EU production, rather than restricting the non-EU catalogue. Hopefully there's some carrot to go with the stick.
Because Hollywood is trying to export media to the Far East and the affluent Middle East they have been producing puritanical (but hyper-violent) media (like endless comic book serialization).
I for one embrace our new (nude) European Media Overlords...bring it on.
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
I have heard Steve Jobs worked for the gov-t’s office for innovations in mobile technology, glass screen division, if memory serves well. Oh wait, he didnt. Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, they didnt. Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
internet, GPS, touchscreen, battery, voice recognition, unix, the C language ( which Objective C is based on) and lots more. Hard to think of anything in the original iPhone that didn't have some beginnings in government work. In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,.
That is not how it works. The fact that the gov-t started some work on something, does not mean, the gov-t created the market or a product good enough to be bought by you. It is like to say that thanks to the knowledge of electricity, we now have the iPhone. Yes, but with that knowledge alone, you will never be able to create the iPhone. Period. You need a lot more than that! There is a big difference between creating a material (at the cost of x20-200 times of what the commercial industry would be able to) and creating something that you can sell, employ people, have a working business that pays taxes (along with people who work for that business). The gov-t is only good at the former, while businesses are good at the latter.
And here JUST one example of where the reality collides with your bubble and destroys it: 1. C was originally developed by Dennis Ritchie between 1969 and 1973 at Bell Labs,[6] and used to re-implement the Unix operating system (wiki) - (no gov-t here, just D. Ritchie working on C). 2. Nokia Bell Labs (formerly named AT&T Bell Laboratories andBell Telephone Laboratories) is an industrial research and scientific development company, owned by Finnish company Nokia. (wiki) - again (no gov-t here either). So, why did you claim the gov-t jump started the work? Are you insane or just plain delusional?
GPS was never developed as a commercial tech, instead it was a military tech (very expensive, again). For private enterprise, Irridium system is an example of how it would be done if not for the gov-t.
"In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science
in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,. " You don't need to imagine. A lot of companies do their own research which they do not publish. The fact that a lot of universities consume a lot of tax payer's money is no proof that this spending is producing any value, primarily because the gov-t does not care about the quality of the results....unlike a commercial enterprise.
In fact, I dare you to publish statistics on how much it costs to sponsor uni-research and how much good of an outcome came out of that, that outshines the private industry! Good thing, Ford Company was created by the gov-t so poor people can afford a car...oh wait!
99.999% of the products you use today, were not created by the gov-t, nor they were made cheaply and with enough quality so you could buy them happily.
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
I have heard Steve Jobs worked for the gov-t’s office for innovations in mobile technology, glass screen division, if memory serves well. Oh wait, he didnt. Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, they didnt. Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
internet, GPS, touchscreen, battery, voice recognition, unix, the C language ( which Objective C is based on) and lots more. Hard to think of anything in the original iPhone that didn't have some beginnings in government work. In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,.
That is not how it works. The fact that the gov-t started some work on something, does not mean, the gov-t created the market or a product good enough to be bought by you. It is like to say that thanks to the knowledge of electricity, we now have the iPhone. Yes, but with that knowledge alone, you will never be able to create the iPhone. Period. You need a lot more than that! There is a big difference between creating a material (at the cost of x20-200 times of what the commercial industry would be able to) and creating something that you can sell, employ people, have a working business that pays taxes (along with people who work for that business). The gov-t is only good at the former, while businesses are good at the latter.
And here JUST one example of where the reality collides with your bubble and destroys it: 1. C was originally developed by Dennis Ritchie between 1969 and 1973 at Bell Labs,[6] and used to re-implement the Unix operating system (wiki) - (no gov-t here, just D. Ritchie working on C). 2. Nokia Bell Labs (formerly named AT&T Bell Laboratories andBell Telephone Laboratories) is an industrial research and scientific development company, owned by Finnish company Nokia. (wiki) - again (no gov-t here either). So, why did you claim the gov-t jump started the work? Are you insane or just plain delusional?
GPS was never developed as a commercial tech, instead it was a military tech (very expensive, again). For private enterprise, Irridium system is an example of how it would be done if not for the gov-t.
"In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science
in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,. " You don't need to imagine. A lot of companies do their own research which they do not publish. The fact that a lot of universities consume a lot of tax payer's money is no proof that this spending is producing any value, primarily because the gov-t does not care about the quality of the results....unlike a commercial enterprise.
In fact, I dare you to publish statistics on how much it costs to sponsor uni-research and how much good of an outcome came out of that, that outshines the private industry! Good thing, Ford Company was created by the gov-t so poor people can afford a car...oh wait!
99.999% of the products you use today, were not created by the gov-t, nor they were made cheaply and with enough quality so you could buy them happily.
That’s a long winded non refutation. You are probably right about C and unix, the bsd variant used by Apple is however from Berkeley. And the next kernel was developed at Carnegie Mellon. All of the internet and it’s building blocks and protocols were originally government or military. Computer science as a disciple was invented in universities. GPS is clearly military. The satellites and the technology. Html is from CERN.
Bell labs are an actual outlier. Most of the winners of the Turing prize did not work in industry.
Of course capitalism then takes that primary research and makes products. Computer engineering rather than science. And that mixed economy works. Only libertarians think that it’s all the private sector.
A very important item in this discussion is language. English has a very dominant position for audiovisual content, due to the enormous world wide market of English speaking spectators/listeners. The cost of English content per consumer is by definition much lower than Dutch, Danish, Polish, ... content
The EU has 24 official languages. After the Brexit only a small portion (the Irish) will be native English speaking. The EU commission does want to support non English culture without disturbing the competitive market. This can only be done by imposing that at least some percentage is created locally.
This does not mean that people are forced to look at non English content, only that local non English content has at least a chance to compete on quality.
Useless government intrusion. Stop interfering with tech, losers.
Losers don't dictate terms. Winners do.
And we don't want some idiots in Silicon Valley to monopolize our content with their BS.
Just like we don't let our cops shoot us randomly just because they felt like it.
Here we're the home of the actually free.
Silicon valley produces zero entertainment. Hollywood does.
Our cops don't shoot anyone randomly. But they do shoot a very few people that are resisting arrest and threatening the cop's lives.
You just think that you are actually free. And in reality most Americans live a higher standard of living than most Europeans! It's true the Europeans do have more vacation days per year and a few more Europeans have health care benefits, but that's pretty much the extent of the advantages Europeans have over the US.
The EU can't compete with Netflix and Amazon so now they're interfering. Netflix and Amazon can see with perfect clarity who is watching what and when. If there's a huge demand for EU content, Netflix and Amazon will bust their butts to satisfy that demand. No need for the bureaucrats to meddle. What could happen is: Netflix and Amazon fill their silly quotas with a lot of cheap stupid junk (I hope they slap the EU logo all over it) because it sounds like it's just based on volume of content, no concern for quality or whether anyone cares.) People will see that EU logo and learn to avoid it like the plague. Or Netflix/Amazon eliminates a lot of non-EU content from EU subscribers' libraries and hits the quota that way. So, more geoblocking. You guys have fun with that. Pro tip: despite their efforts, Netflix hasn't been able to thwart all VPNs. Just VPN up American Netflix and forget the bureaucrats and their nonsense.
Where did they come up with that figure? I can't imagine that 30% of their viewership or revenue would come from the EU. And what's the alternative? No content from non-EU companies? And how do you get smaller streaming services to do that?
Smaller streaming services aren't going to survive the competition with the behemoths. It gets interesting when Disney hits the EU. Do they expect an EU version of Star Wars?
It is nonsense after nonsense from EU!! If anybody does not like hollywood BS content, simply do not watch it! Why we need EU government to tell us what to watch on TV? I am from small EU country and have strong impression about incompetent people there in Bruxelles, who probably have never visited my country and do not know anything about what ordinary people want...
Netflix and Amazon know far more about what people in the EU actually want to watch than any useless EU bureaucrat ever will. They can see exactly who watches what at all times. if EU citizens want to see EU content, Netflix and Amazon will be the first to know, and will bust their butts satisfying the demand. If the bureaucrats have to force them to make more, that is a sure sign that there isn't actually a demand for that content.
This is just protectionism aimed at salvaging the EU film and TV industry with corporate welfare for companies that can't compete. I'm no Trump supporter, but seeing crap like this makes me wonder if he isn't right to start protecting American industries with rough tactics.
Where did they come up with that figure? I can't imagine that 30% of their viewership or revenue would come from the EU. And what's the alternative? No content from non-EU companies? And how do you get smaller streaming services to do that?
Smaller streaming services aren't going to survive the competition with the behemoths. It gets interesting when Disney hits the EU. Do they expect an EU version of Star Wars?
I seem to recall reading that a large portion of the last Star Wars movie was filmed outside London. That wouldn't work (directly) for this EU requirement, but they do film in Europe and let's remember that a huge amount of this requires staff and materials from other countries. For all we know Disney is already doing it. I know Tatooine had sets made in the Sahara dessert in Tunisia.
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
I have heard Steve Jobs worked for the gov-t’s office for innovations in mobile technology, glass screen division, if memory serves well. Oh wait, he didnt. Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, they didnt. Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
internet, GPS, touchscreen, battery, voice recognition, unix, the C language ( which Objective C is based on) and lots more. Hard to think of anything in the original iPhone that didn't have some beginnings in government work. In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,.
That is not how it works. The fact that the gov-t started some work on something, does not mean, the gov-t created the market or a product good enough to be bought by you. It is like to say that thanks to the knowledge of electricity, we now have the iPhone. Yes, but with that knowledge alone, you will never be able to create the iPhone. Period. You need a lot more than that! There is a big difference between creating a material (at the cost of x20-200 times of what the commercial industry would be able to) and creating something that you can sell, employ people, have a working business that pays taxes (along with people who work for that business). The gov-t is only good at the former, while businesses are good at the latter.
And here JUST one example of where the reality collides with your bubble and destroys it: 1. C was originally developed by Dennis Ritchie between 1969 and 1973 at Bell Labs,[6] and used to re-implement the Unix operating system (wiki) - (no gov-t here, just D. Ritchie working on C). 2. Nokia Bell Labs (formerly named AT&T Bell Laboratories andBell Telephone Laboratories) is an industrial research and scientific development company, owned by Finnish company Nokia. (wiki) - again (no gov-t here either). So, why did you claim the gov-t jump started the work? Are you insane or just plain delusional?
GPS was never developed as a commercial tech, instead it was a military tech (very expensive, again). For private enterprise, Irridium system is an example of how it would be done if not for the gov-t.
"In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science
in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,. " You don't need to imagine. A lot of companies do their own research which they do not publish. The fact that a lot of universities consume a lot of tax payer's money is no proof that this spending is producing any value, primarily because the gov-t does not care about the quality of the results....unlike a commercial enterprise.
In fact, I dare you to publish statistics on how much it costs to sponsor uni-research and how much good of an outcome came out of that, that outshines the private industry! Good thing, Ford Company was created by the gov-t so poor people can afford a car...oh wait!
99.999% of the products you use today, were not created by the gov-t, nor they were made cheaply and with enough quality so you could buy them happily.
That’s a long winded non refutation. You are probably right about C and unix, the bsd variant used by Apple is however from Berkeley. And the next kernel was developed at Carnegie Mellon. All of the internet and it’s building blocks and protocols were originally government or military. Computer science as a disciple was invented in universities. GPS is clearly military. The satellites and the technology. Html is from CERN.
Bell labs are an actual outlier. Most of the winners of the Turing prize did not work in industry.
Of course capitalism then takes that primary research and makes products. Computer engineering rather than science. And that mixed economy works. Only libertarians think that it’s all the private sector.
"That’s a long winded non refutation. You are probably right about C and unix, the bsd variant used" I am PROBABLY (!) right. Of course, you coudln't admit it straight, could you? lol Refutation of what? You did not provide any link/study suggesting the importance of the gov-t in the task of creating of new tech. And no, Bell Labs is not an outlier. It is a norm. There is a lot of free enterprise that did a far better job utilizing resources in proving something new and useful to the public.
The private sector is gonna make profit (aka create value (services and products) regardless whether there was an "investment" made by a gov-t or not. On the other hand, if the private sector does not care (or can't make profits), it will not bring you any innovation even if the gov-t spent whole bunch of money (meaning = NO VALUE - that is your scenario, by the way). My point is - the gov-t Even GPS does not work without the receivers, which are privately manufactured units, that cost tens of dollars and not thousands of bucks, as would be if the gov-t was to control its manufacturing. Heck, even best US public schools SUCK, comparing to the private enterprise in terms of quality AND price (look up stats on the average grades and how much it costs to educate a person). Sorry, these are just facts.
I would rather choose a complete libertarian society, than a communist one (the one that has ultimate control over everything, including creating/manufacturing of goods), because the former gives you a free economy and a lot of goods, while the latter gives you a lot of useless "services" at exorbitant prices and no way for you to opt out of that. Why would you want to pay more for less, is beyond me. At least, I hope you do know why you want that.
Not against the idea, but I hope it leads more towards investment in EU production, rather than restricting the non-EU catalogue. Hopefully there's some carrot to go with the stick.
Personally, I think the proposed law is a bit ridiculous. There already is a lot of shows produced in the EU on Netflix. I bet Netflix will end up restricting the non-EU catalog.
It is nonsense after nonsense from EU!! If anybody does not like hollywood BS content, simply do not watch it! Why we need EU government to tell us what to watch on TV? I am from small EU country and have strong impression about incompetent people there in Bruxelles, who probably have never visited my country and do not know anything about what ordinary people want...
You apparently don’t understand both the story and the proposed law.
The EU is not telling us what we want to watch. They’re telling streaming services (lots of them being American companies) not to be lazy and reselling American content, but also to invest money in original local (European) content.
Before streaming services existed, local television stations were the main content distributors. So a large part was locally produced content. Now, with the rise of large streamers like Netflix, HBO and Amazon, we as European citizens are flooded with American content. Which is ok, but shouldn’t be the only choice; at least I don’t want to be ‘forced’ to watch that. Furtunately Netflix is already doing a great job in producing local content. HBO and Amazon not so much, yet.
So the proposed law is actually a good thing, giving Europeans more to choose from, and European actors a larger change of earning some money too. And eventually this will benefit the Americans too, because they’ll probably diversify their viewing habits with some more European content... (and there are A LOT of amazing European movies and series, really!).
Useless government intrusion. Stop interfering with tech, losers.
It’s Europe what do you expect. There is a great deal of foreign content if you live here in the States on Netflix already. Not sure about Amazon. Can someone enlighten me on the EU's game here and who it benefits?
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Not agreeing with the path you took to make your point, but I agree with the point. Butt out governments. We should all be wary about these kinds of moves by governments. It’s all about money when it’s all said and done. EU meh.
Useless government intrusion. Stop interfering with tech, losers.
Losers don't dictate terms. Winners do.
And we don't want some idiots in Silicon Valley to monopolize our content with their BS.
Just like we don't let our cops shoot us randomly just because they felt like it.
Here we're the home of the actually free.
Silicon valley produces zero entertainment. Hollywood does.
Our cops don't shoot anyone randomly. But they do shoot a very few people that are resisting arrest and threatening the cop's lives.
You just think that you are actually free. And in reality most Americans live a higher standard of living than most Europeans! It's true the Europeans do have more vacation days per year and a few more Europeans have health care benefits, but that's pretty much the extent of the advantages Europeans have over the US.
I remember quite some movies about cops shooting unarmed teens in the back. Or emptying their guns on them, while they were already laying harmlessly on the floor. Oh wait: they were resisting their arrest... right.
What is it you mean with ‘higher standards‘? Bigger tv’s? Bigger cars? Cheaper gasoline? Huge malls? A huge, almost exclusive, choice in fast food? Freedom to carry guns? School shootings? Trump?
Or do well maintained roads, nice architecture, cozy terraces, surprising neighbourhoods, tiny winding roads, and cops that do not shoot before asking questions, not count in your worldview of ‘higher standard‘?
I’m loving my (American invented, China made) iPhone, MacBook, etc. And the American made Netflix series “The Americans”, “Breaking Bad” and “House of Cards”. And I thanks you Americans for that. But please don’t embarrass me and your fellow Americans with your ignorance and lack of knowledge about other cultures. And start watching some Scandinavian, French, Italian, Spanish or other series, before spreading you ignorance. Free tip: Start with the Spanish Netflix original “La Casa de Papel” (in Spanish with English subtitles, of course)
Oh... and by the way: I’m from the Netherlands and my mother tongue is Dutch. And here are some lists with countries with ‘high living standards’ (whatever that may be):
So it seems like the EU is going to screw up Crunchyroll for me. There was one French anime I’ve watched and it was called Wakfu. It was nice but Netflix ended up making the second season a Netflix Original or else there probably wouldn’t have been one.
This is really ticking me off. 30% EU content? What about the rest of the world? This is like welfare for the EU. Child support. Netflix says it’s not my kid but the judge says take care of it until it looks like you. Why try to dictate something like this? If the content is good then Netflix will buy it. So if there aren’t enough good shows then what? You fill the rest with crap?
As was said before by saying someone else here, Netflix and Amazon know that EU citizens watch. Why mess with that? I know Netflix and Amazon will be able to deal with it but may concern is for Crunchyroll.
A very important item in this discussion is language. English has a very dominant position for audiovisual content, due to the enormous world wide market of English speaking spectators/listeners. The cost of English content per consumer is by definition much lower than Dutch, Danish, Polish, ... content
The EU has 24 official languages. After the Brexit only a small portion (the Irish) will be native English speaking. The EU commission does want to support non English culture without disturbing the competitive market. This can only be done by imposing that at least some percentage is created locally.
This does not mean that people are forced to look at non English content, only that local non English content has at least a chance to compete on quality.
Which means that the French will eventually succeed in getting their Language to be the language of the world... Well at least they'll get rid of English as a preferred language after all, the Irish don't count. Then they'll press for French to replace English in Schools all over the EU.
Comments
(In effect these are digital tariffs).
Protectionism is the new libertarianism.
I for one embrace our new (nude) European Media Overlords...bring it on.
There is a big difference between creating a material (at the cost of x20-200 times of what the commercial industry would be able to) and creating something that you can sell, employ people, have a working business that pays taxes (along with people who work for that business). The gov-t is only good at the former, while businesses are good at the latter.
And here JUST one example of where the reality collides with your bubble and destroys it:
1. C was originally developed by Dennis Ritchie between 1969 and 1973 at Bell Labs,[6] and used to re-implement the Unix operating system (wiki) - (no gov-t here, just D. Ritchie working on C).
2. Nokia Bell Labs (formerly named AT&T Bell Laboratories and Bell Telephone Laboratories) is an industrial research and scientific development company, owned by Finnish company Nokia. (wiki) - again (no gov-t here either).
So, why did you claim the gov-t jump started the work? Are you insane or just plain delusional?
GPS was never developed as a commercial tech, instead it was a military tech (very expensive, again). For private enterprise, Irridium system is an example of how it would be done if not for the gov-t.
"In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,. "
You don't need to imagine. A lot of companies do their own research which they do not publish. The fact that a lot of universities consume a lot of tax payer's money is no proof that this spending is producing any value, primarily because the gov-t does not care about the quality of the results....unlike a commercial enterprise.
In fact, I dare you to publish statistics on how much it costs to sponsor uni-research and how much good of an outcome came out of that, that outshines the private industry!
Good thing, Ford Company was created by the gov-t so poor people can afford a car...oh wait!
99.999% of the products you use today, were not created by the gov-t, nor they were made cheaply and with enough quality so you could buy them happily.
Bell labs are an actual outlier. Most of the winners of the Turing prize did not work in industry.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_Award
Of course capitalism then takes that primary research and makes products. Computer engineering rather than science. And that mixed economy works. Only libertarians think that it’s all the private sector.
Our cops don't shoot anyone randomly. But they do shoot a very few people that are resisting arrest and threatening the cop's lives.
You just think that you are actually free. And in reality most Americans live a higher standard of living than most Europeans! It's true the Europeans do have more vacation days per year and a few more Europeans have health care benefits, but that's pretty much the extent of the advantages Europeans have over the US.
Netflix and Amazon know far more about what people in the EU actually want to watch than any useless EU bureaucrat ever will. They can see exactly who watches what at all times. if EU citizens want to see EU content, Netflix and Amazon will be the first to know, and will bust their butts satisfying the demand. If the bureaucrats have to force them to make more, that is a sure sign that there isn't actually a demand for that content.
edit: I love Wikipedia!
I am PROBABLY (!) right. Of course, you coudln't admit it straight, could you? lol
Refutation of what? You did not provide any link/study suggesting the importance of the gov-t in the task of creating of new tech.
And no, Bell Labs is not an outlier. It is a norm. There is a lot of free enterprise that did a far better job utilizing resources in proving something new and useful to the public.
The private sector is gonna make profit (aka create value (services and products) regardless whether there was an "investment" made by a gov-t or not.
On the other hand, if the private sector does not care (or can't make profits), it will not bring you any innovation even if the gov-t spent whole bunch of money (meaning = NO VALUE - that is your scenario, by the way). My point is - the gov-t
Even GPS does not work without the receivers, which are privately manufactured units, that cost tens of dollars and not thousands of bucks, as would be if the gov-t was to control its manufacturing.
Heck, even best US public schools SUCK, comparing to the private enterprise in terms of quality AND price (look up stats on the average grades and how much it costs to educate a person). Sorry, these are just facts.
I would rather choose a complete libertarian society, than a communist one (the one that has ultimate control over everything, including creating/manufacturing of goods), because the former gives you a free economy and a lot of goods, while the latter gives you a lot of useless "services" at exorbitant prices and no way for you to opt out of that. Why would you want to pay more for less, is beyond me. At least, I hope you do know why you want that.
The EU is not telling us what we want to watch. They’re telling streaming services (lots of them being American companies) not to be lazy and reselling American content, but also to invest money in original local (European) content.
Before streaming services existed, local television stations were the main content distributors. So a large part was locally produced content.
Now, with the rise of large streamers like Netflix, HBO and Amazon, we as European citizens are flooded with American content. Which is ok, but shouldn’t be the only choice; at least I don’t want to be ‘forced’ to watch that.
Furtunately Netflix is already doing a great job in producing local content. HBO and Amazon not so much, yet.
So the proposed law is actually a good thing, giving Europeans more to choose from, and European actors a larger change of earning some money too. And eventually this will benefit the Americans too, because they’ll probably diversify their viewing habits with some more European content... (and there are A LOT of amazing European movies and series, really!).
Not agreeing with the path you took to make your point, but I agree with the point. Butt out governments. We should all be wary about these kinds of moves by governments. It’s all about money when it’s all said and done. EU meh.
What is it you mean with ‘higher standards‘? Bigger tv’s? Bigger cars? Cheaper gasoline? Huge malls? A huge, almost exclusive, choice in fast food? Freedom to carry guns? School shootings? Trump?
Or do well maintained roads, nice architecture, cozy terraces, surprising neighbourhoods, tiny winding roads, and cops that do not shoot before asking questions, not count in your worldview of ‘higher standard‘?
I’m loving my (American invented, China made) iPhone, MacBook, etc. And the American made Netflix series “The Americans”, “Breaking Bad” and “House of Cards”. And I thanks you Americans for that.
But please don’t embarrass me and your fellow Americans with your ignorance and lack of knowledge about other cultures. And start watching some Scandinavian, French, Italian, Spanish or other series, before spreading you ignorance.
Free tip: Start with the Spanish Netflix original “La Casa de Papel” (in Spanish with English subtitles, of course)
And here are some lists with countries with ‘high living standards’ (whatever that may be):
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/countries-with-the-highest-standard-of-living-social-progress-index/
http://uk.businessinsider.com/19-countries-with-the-highest-standard-of-life-according-to-the-social-progress-report-2016-6
This is really ticking me off. 30% EU content? What about the rest of the world? This is like welfare for the EU. Child support. Netflix says it’s not my kid but the judge says take care of it until it looks like you. Why try to dictate something like this? If the content is good then Netflix will buy it. So if there aren’t enough good shows then what? You fill the rest with crap?
As was said before by saying someone else here, Netflix and Amazon know that EU citizens watch. Why mess with that? I know Netflix and Amazon will be able to deal with it but may concern is for Crunchyroll.
PROTECT CRUNCHYROLL!!!