Text:
I consent to Plex to: (i) sell certain personal information (hashed emails, advertising identifiers) to third-parties for advertising and marketing purposes; and (ii) store and/or access certain personal information (advertising identifiers, IP address, content being watched) on my device(s) and share that information with Plex’s advertising partners. This data is used to deliver personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, audience insights and product development. Your consent applies to all devices on which you have Plex installed. You can withdraw your consent at any time in Account Settings or using this page.
Soure: https://www.plex.tv/vendors/ (Might have to clear cache)
Can also read about the changes here: https://www.plex.tv/about/privacy-legal/
Yes, that was the joke
There are so many differences between HA and Plex that it’s almost difficult to pick which one is most significant. All i’d say is - if plex was at all the same as HA, I would have zero problem with it. If jellyfin adopted HA’s model of paid development, I’d be thrilled. But HA’s strategy is actually pretty unique, it’ll take time for that structure to be stress-tested and propagate.
Yea but not really - google accounts are usually pretty specifically identifiable to a person/ad account/collected internet and device activity. Might not be a big deal to you, but having those things tied together is problematic on a number of levels. You can self-host an SSO, and you can also have a security-focused third-party SSO - both would be marginal improvements over using google’s auth system in terms of privacy.
Yes, 100%. If you’re at all concerned about privacy, plex is a terrible idea, with or without SSO. I’m glad you agree.
“What i’m doing is perfectly legal so it doesn’t matter if they have my detailed data”. You’re not hiding it because you think you don’t need to - that’s exactly the argument you’re making. Every step toward data privacy is valuable, even if your total data hygiene practice isn’t perfect. It still matters.
Good for you. Most of us do not.
Neither am I, but I guess I do feel quite passionately about keeping it private and I’m not shy about advocating for the practice. Probably for the same reason you’re very tight lipped about what country you’re from - you don’t necessarily think you’ll get swatted if you do, just that it’s a pointless detail to share with strangers if you don’t have to. Most of my family doesn’t care enough about not using netflix or disney+ that they’re happy to keep using them if my offering is too complicated. I’m happy to help them set up and learn how the server works if they’re interested, and a number of them have become enthusiastic self-hosters themselves as a result. If I was operating a mission-critical service on my server then maybe i’d care more about minimizing UX friction but since it’s not, I’m happy with prioritizing privacy and control over polish. That’s a pretty common mentality for a server administrator - i’m not running a SAAS here. At most I’m just the enterprise IT manager trying to keep the office slack channel running.
You can say that, but boy oh boy is that hard to believe. You certainly don’t think FOSS is worth any level of inconvenience. Looks to me like you’re the kind of person who wants the best tool for every job, regardless of if you could get by with a middling one that supports a FOSS project. That’s fine. I use adobe products for work because I can’t really get by without it, but I still use GIMP or Inkscape when I can and I support those ecosystems with my time and money because it draws more people in. And I actually do want my FOSS tools to be built as side projects, at least at first. There’s a place for polish and professional support, but a lot of this stuff needs to be built out and tested before that kind of thing happens. A lot of these projects act as beta testing for forks that will end up doing one thing really well to a high level of polish. Having a product that’s maybe a little complicated but extremely accessible from a configuration standpoint lets more tech-minded people build on top of them and work toward more polished solutions.
But I certainly don’t find VC backed projects entering into the FOSS space as a good thing. Maybe that competition drives positive movement in the open-sourced ones, but usually they turn out to be ‘embrace, extend, extinguish’ projects. Like, I don’t think meta’s Threads is a positive thing for federated social media, even though by this logic they are making it ‘more mainstream’ by their adoption of activitypub. There just isn’t a way to separate the product they produce from the economic model they operate under, and plex has chosen a model that inevitably leads to enshittification and walled-off content gardens.
I just don’t see any reason to blow smoke for plex. Their UX is fine (great, even), but they’re doing basically everything else wrong. They’re reliant on VC capital, they’re collaborating with private media and tailoring their TOS to protect copyright holders, they’re collecting data they don’t need and forcing features that reduce privacy, they’re changing their privacy policies to enable data sales and monetization, they’re bait-and-switching users by placing popular free features behind paywalls, they’re banning lifetime paid users for perfectly legal use of their services… the list goes on and on. At some point, a company like Plex crosses the line from ‘reasonable profit-seeking’ to ‘actively user-hostile’, and I think they’ve already crossed that line. Maybe you think their UX is worth the abuse, but I certainly do not - not when there’s a perfectly fine alternative that fits my needs and more.
Well, hey, there we agree, then. I’d say that the setup for HA is actually fairly Mozilla-like, and people don’t seem thrilled with THAT, so it wasn’t a given you’d agree. Plex certainly isn’t that. For one thing it’s commercial and closed source. But crucially HA’s commercial branch WILL have a bunch of your data, including voice processing and login info, if you do buy into their paid subscription service.
As for the rest of the argument, most is redundant so I’m not gonna go through the loop again, I am actually busy. But I will add a few things. For one thing, whether I think FOSS is worth “any level of inconvenience” is irrelevant. I do, and I do live with the inconvenience in some cases. But if the goal is for FOSS to be mainstream and a primary choice (and it can absolutely be, there are plenty of examples), then it doesn’t matter what I think. The reason the privacy tradeoffs make sense for Plex is that Plex is an app your family is likely to use. Mine does, and they sure won’t put up with bad UX for the sake of using an open alternative. OBS didn’t crush Xsplit out of the market because of ideology, it did it because it became more powerful, usable and reliable.
And let me clarify I don’t “blow smoke for Plex”. I opened this whole subthread by saying I wanted to use Jellyfin (hence all the testing we’ve been nitpicking about) but couldn’t justify it. I’ve said this above. I’d drop Plex in a heartbeat if Jellyfin was just as good to use for me and the rest of my household. But it isn’t. There’s no reason to blow smoke for Plex, but there is a reason to not delusionally pretend that open source alterantives are better than they are. You’re not going to gaslight normies into using them that way and the complacency just makes it less likely for them to succeed at what they’re trying to do. It is, after all, the year of Linux desktop.
It would be great if JF did something similar, but I think they don’t specifically because they’d be liable for their users illicit use of it. That’s basically the whole reason OSS streamers exist. Plex started out that way, but when they decided they wanted to compete with the big boys they were forced to lock it down more to protect themselves against legal challenges. That’s why I think you’re kidding yourself if you think it’s a long-term solution for streaming ripped media. That’ll only last until copyright owners decide to push plex to take action against it.
I don’t think that should be the goal - FOSS as a model will never outcompete for-profit corporate models. IMO the goal should be to encourage people to learn the minimal amount of tech self sufficiency so that they can choose FOSS when they need it, rather than pushing FOSS to become OSS, and then eventually just SAAS. Firefox is a good example of what can go wrong with chasing mainstream adoption. There’s a place for projects like Plex, but im pretty adamant that those should be halfway solutions more than end-goals. I’m fine with leaving that as a disagreement.
Nobody is saying JF is easier to use than plex, we just prefer the flexibility and privacy and aren’t bothered or slowed down by the complexity. That’s fine. You just have different priorities than the rest of us. I’m glad there’s an option for you.
I think your read on what people typically do with Plex probably doesn’t align with reality. I also think in the end you’re way less optimistic about the potential of open source software than I am. There are multiple areas where OSS options are either dominant or very competitive, but I am also clearly way less picky about how that gradient of openness to commerciality than you are. We can agree that it’s fine that there are options for both or all steps in that gradient, but there is a ton of snark and all-or-nothing attitude in that community as well.
I will say that If you have a commercial option like Plex and a couple of open alternatives (say Kodi and Jellyfin for the sake of argument) I would prefer one of those to have the type of UX that can compete with the closed commercial product because you can compete with open alternatives.