comment: >
  
  Jokes on them I'm cancelling anyways.
context: The Hasbro school of making an unpopular announcement, spending time clarifying that announcement, then pretending the announcement and time spent clarifying it was all just an accident. Is this the new corporate trend? >
  
  I’m not sure why they don’t do little surveys on the website or something like “if we did this would you still love us?” Would save a lot of embarrassment and probably some stock money >
  
  I've done a shitload of A/B testing and requesting user feedback just for things like where to put a button on a webpage. It's fucking wild to me if corporations are starting to take these kinds of risks with their brands without any sort of analysis. Then they follow up with PR statements sounding like a kid caught with their hand in the cookie jar. >
  
  The weird thing is that they did the analysis. They've been flirting with this idea for years, floating test balloons and preliminary announcements every eighteen months or so. And every time they even hinted at it, the backlash was instantaneous and overwhelmingly negative. 
  But they got a new CEO two weeks ago, so of course any analysis that was done before he took over must have been flawed, and his ludicrously dumb idea was the genius move that was going to save the company billions. >
  
  Don't worry, if Netflix starts to do too badly, they'll just layoff enough of the actual working people until they are turning a profit again, then he'll leave and get millions of dollars as a reward for his genius leadership that hurt the company's value and cost people jobs, only to be hired for millions somewhere else because of the bravery, tenacity, and forward-thinking he's shown at his time at netflix! >
  
  Yeah, I doubt that. More likely they saw the backlash and went "naw JK guys! It's only a prank" >
  
  I wonder what percent of customers they estimated to lose, obviously enough for them to completely backtrack on something they seemed pretty confident about. I don't know what they expected, or who's getting paid big bucks but this wasn't exactly a head-scratcher. >
  
  I just don't understand.
  IMHO, if they wanted to curtail large # of customers from sharing, just put password retention rule of 6 mo. or something like that where password has to be changed every 6 mo.  That way, if for some reason password was given out to friend of friend, they will no longer have access and with password change every 6 mo. people close enough will just be given new password so people won't feel "fleeced".  It can be done under guise of "security measure" probably without HUGE backlash. >
  
  This seems like a reasonable way to prune some people off into their own accounts. >
  
  Also seems like a good way to lock grandma out of her account. People under a certain age can handle it but some of the older folks would have a hard time. >
  
  I mean forget grandma, I’m a fucking millennial and I have like 300 different accounts/passwords for various things (bc you have to make an account to do literally anything on the internet/on an app these days) and I have no clue what like 75% of the PWs are... 
  Half of them I’m just permanently logged in from the time I created the account, and immediately forget the pw and have to create a new one whenever I get logged out, and the other half is super not secure cuz it’s just the same pw I use for everything lol
  If we start throwing 6 month expiration dates on passwords.... god help us >
  
  You should consider a password manager, it is really useful and it will improve your security in a major way (separate password for each account, passwords generated by manager are strong etc.) >
  
  It is not insignificant how much time I’ve saved using a password manager that autofills passwords for me.
  I sometimes imagine people having to manually login entry time. And think if they did passwording right and made different passwords for everything. >
  
  This is the kind of flimsy excuse you expect to see from someone in 7th grade? Not a multinational streaming corporation. >
  
  That moment you learn that the grown ups who are supposed to be in charge, are not really grown ups at all, and there's probably no such thing and oh God, we're all doomed aren't we? >
  
  Most CEOs were the most annoying kid in class, keep that in mind too. >
  
  Well when HBO says in it's terms of service that you are allowed to share with 5 people, this seems like a really bad idea. >
  
  Oh you can believe that other streaming services will follow Netflix’s lead unless there is a huge backlash and subsequent loss in Netflix stock value as a result. >
  
  Were all the password sharing warning emails I got this week also an accident? >
  
  “In error” means they made a terrible business decision but don’t want to accept the fact they made a terrible business decision. >
  
  WOTC: Tried that mate, good luck >
  
  Netflix is about ten days out from releasing all of Stranger Things under CC-BY-4.0. >
  
  Posted in error and took how long to correct. Netflix should just make a survey on their front page if they want people's opinions. >
  
  I don't see how this is hard to solve for Netflix in any capacity.
  If I pay for one screen, then that screen is my business and makes no difference where it is or when it happens or who is watching. Seems super easy to only allow one stream at a time per customer for this "tier". This is fair for everybody involved. >
  
  I subscribe because I travel a lot and taking a roku with me allows me to watch whatever I want wherever I am. I’ll def unsub if I have to do some bs verification each time I go to a new internet connection. >
  
  My question is how many accounts were deleted before they reversed their decision? >
  
  I cancelled as soon as they announced their intention, over a year ago.
  It was the final nail in the coffin >
  
  New Coke has entered the chat. >
  
  It's the '8os all over again. >
  
  Coming Soon to Netflix: The Netflix Story >
  
  Cancelled after the first season.