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/

  • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    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.

    • their background as a nonprofit was oriented toward data privacy and portability to begin with. Their privacy policy is about as protective as they come. Compared with plex…
    • they have a paid service but they offer their base product as FOSS

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      1·
      1 day ago

      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.