What's the expert opinion on using Stremio with the extra add-ons for streaming? Seems a little too easy and convenient to be true.
I can't help but wonder what they get out of it, and how safe it is. Am I overthinking it?
What's the expert opinion on using Stremio with the extra add-ons for streaming? Seems a little too easy and convenient to be true.
I can't help but wonder what they get out of it, and how safe it is. Am I overthinking it?
Every time I recommend a show and they ask me where they can watch it.
Fuck if I know.
Why do people STILL recommend TPB in 2026? It's shady af.
Everytime I look for alternates I end up with sites that offer torrents of movies that end in .exe. so I end up going back to TPB.
As long you downloading only video/music content you are safe. The worst outcome could be only wrong content
Shady how? It ends up being the right place for 99% of my torrents.
Its fine if you know what you are doing. But because anyone can set up a pirate bay mirror at this point, it can be a bit iffy to download stuff from there. I'm in a happy position of being able to use a excellent private tracker, but about once a year I do get something from pirate bay because I cant find it elsewhere. I do feel a bit icky after, but so far, all has been fine. knocks all the wood I can find
I was getting something from TPB and got an email from Nintendo when I forgot to turn on my VPN.
I think it's more a generalised phrase, like when you Google something, but you don't actually use Google. Saying to look at / use pirate bay doesn't mean the exact site, just means to pirate it somehow.
Well as shady as a midnight walk to the convenient store... So not actually that bad.
I have been out of the 🏴☠️scene for a while and this was the most trusted one back in the days. Are there other alternatives now?
I would recommend 1337 instead. Has pretty much every category like TPB.
But if you are interested in self hosting, check our Arr stack for full automation and jellyfin as media center.
Uindex, but it's recent stuff only.
Isn’t Pirate Bay loaded with ads?
Not when you're using Firefox with uBlock Origin. Don't use any pirate sites without a good ad blocker.
Thanks to "arr, I haven't had to even look at an indexer in years. I don't miss manually trolling for torrents.
between strem.io and *arrs you never have to touch a pirate site friend
If there's nothing to watch then don't subscribe to four different services. Streaming gives you more say in which channels/services you get than cable does.
More like $165/month
I frequently listen to my coworkers/mutuals list how many streaming services they have and how much they cost a month, leaving the proper maths to only to the listeners because they won't hear the real bill.. I had to quit one that cost "only" 19€ per month because I wasn't able to afford it anymore!
Literal NPCs lol. How can people be this financially illiterate? It's like NOT consuming sth is an idea that never crosses their minds. Like they need to have everything, even if they don't need it.
These are the same people that also spend 10k annually on drive through coffee, work cafeteria lunches and second coffee, then takeout for dinner; while also complaining how expensive everything is and how poor they are. The word "budget" isn't in their dictionary
i cant imagine paying for 5+streaming which would easly be 100+, plus most of the shows/movies, they allocate all the resources to that one show but neglecting another.
Yeah, same. Everything is like 20-25 per month if not more, it just doesn't make sense. Or 10-15 WITH ADS? Why would I pay for watching ads? But they say they have to have all the +5 services, because they watch one, spouse the other and the kids want these..
Option C is to just go without, but apparently I'm the only fool doing that
In a sense I do think this kind of approach matters more than people give it credit for. Most people tend to see piracy as a way to consume media without supporting the rightsholders of that media, but even pirated consumption is still support.
A person who is, say, pirating Harry Potter books and other media is still giving Rowling and her franchise and ideas space in their head, maybe contributing to further conversations about her, and overall inadvertently promoting her whether they like it or not - as opposed to having used that time and energy to consume media from someone more worth the time and effort, like say, Ursula Le Guin.
For example I was watching a video from a YouTuber who does controller reviews. In that video he briefly mentioned two controllers that were of such poor quality that they were literally unusable. He went on to say that he would not be making videos about them, because he found that even when he goes out of his way to give a controller the worst review possible, tons of people still buy them.
Personally, I think that information freedom matters enough that anything published under licenses that are more restrictive than copyleft, permissive ones, or straight public domain is unethical. If private property is theft, and it is, that absolutely extends into knowledge and culture as well. If I were a purist about that, I would go out of my way to use things like the fully free Linux distros, and only consume media under those aforementioned licenses. Truth be told I don't though, I do pirate corporate media sometimes. But I do try to give space where it counts too - trying to use some time and energy to seek out any kind of media that's more open.
Tl;dr: play Battle for Wesnoth.
That is indeed my philosophy - "even pirated consumption is still support" in the form of giving a platform, publicity, or space in your brain. Even further so considering the many, many problematic artists out there, and the many other artists that have collaborated with them, making entire genres nearly unconscionable as a result.
I mean nobody is going to give you a medal for doing it so why deprive yourself?
The feeling of smug superiority is its own reward.
More like the feeling of not contributing to the problem, if anything I'm worse-placed for not knowing "general culture" references
What problem does sharing media contribute to, exactly? How many artists are starving because a fan downloaded their discography, vs the sheer amount of money owed to artists in unpaid royalties and "creative accounting"?
And this is happening to stars; it's got to be worse for smaller artists.
Artists make money from their fans. Fans discover artists through media sharing. If nobody shared media, I wouldn't have discovered my favourite bands and spent hundreds of dollars on tickets over the course of my life, or my favourite authors whose books I have bought as gifts many times over, or when I was younger my favourite kinds of games, that I would go on to spend tens of thousands of dollars on over the course of my life (and not just on Steam!).
From where I'm sitting, it sure does seem like it contributes - but not to problems.
And that is valid.
I have never subscribed any of these streaming services. The pressure from friends was intense but at the end of the day I simply felt no need and even less appeal to it.
Nowadays, I hear those same friends how expensive it has become to keep all of these services to follow their interests and how the catalogue has been degrading.
I sincerely do not care.
all 50 comments