Token Conservation and Reclamation

[HAMsmoke]

How can having the same number of tokens per provider be more prohibitive than one that is shared? With 5 current providers - 280 / 5 = 56 per provider vs 280 per provider. As the number of providers goes up then it only get worse.

That is not really correct - your statement makes an assumption that when a new provider is added, everyone will immediately want to download 46 (280/6 = 46.67) or more videos from the new provider without similarly reducing their consumption of content from the current providers. As I said before - all of you want unlimited downloads no matter how you wrap your argument. You will never be satisfied. And, RedFox 1 - you forgot to mention that we have 52 weeks in a year. So on top of the 1120 per month, you have an additional 1120 that you can use throughout the year. So let's see what we have: 1120 x 13 = 14,560 tokens.

I am just not one of these people who think they should be able to download more than that a year.

 

[zanetti]

If I was RedFox management, I would see this as all the more reason to not increase the token limit but rather tighten it up.

uf, dude. big yikes. if that happens, redfox can give us some moneys back. lol.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

@HAMsmoke your math is a little off mate. 1120 a month. You multiply that by 13. A year only has 12 months on my calendar, not 13.

1120*12=13440 in a year, not 14560.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

 

[RedFox 1]

@HAMsmoke your math is a little off mate. 1120 a month. You multiply that by 13. A year only has 12 months on my calendar, not 13.

1120*12=13440 in a year, not 14560.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

There are 4.34 weeks in a month X 52.08 weeks in a year 52.08 X a fixed value of 280 =14,582 tokens in a year. (if you want to be mathematically correct.) but who's counting.
Formula
for an approximate result, multiply the time value by 4.345 = 3d grade math LOL.

 

[tdfrgsn]

If I was RedFox management, I would see this as all the more reason to not increase the token limit but rather tighten it up.

I am just not one of these people who think they should be able to download more than that a year.

Yes, we get it, you don't see a problem. What I don't understand is why you think your personal use case and opinion should be the default standard for every other user when it should be abundantly clear that other people have a problem with it. Changing things would have absolutely no impact on you, you can continue downloading exactly like you have been except other people would also be satisfied and stop the complaining you keep reacting to. It's like you are saying "I don't eat ice cream so they should just stop selling it since no one needs it either."

 

[RedFox 1]

Yes, we get it, you don't see a problem. What I don't understand is why you think your personal use case and opinion should be the default standard for every other user when it should be abundantly clear that other people have a problem with it. Changing things would have absolutely no impact on you, you can continue downloading exactly like you have been except other people would also be satisfied and stop the complaining you keep reacting to. It's like you are saying "I don't eat ice cream so they should just stop selling it since no one needs it either."

He did not deem it a fixed value, RedFox did and they made it abundantly clear, and since you knew all of this before you bought the program, you agreed to those terms. I acquiesce.

 

[tdfrgsn]

He did not deem it a fixed value, RedFox did, and since you knew all of this before you bought the program, you agreed to those terms. I acquiesce.

You're right, I can't think of a single time in history someone changed a rule after it was written. It's not like the publicly available FAQ in this forum says: Download restrictions were forced to be put in place. These limitations are as follows (and will be re-evaluated after a while)

 

[RedFox 1]

You're right, I can't think of a single time in history someone changed a rule after it was written. It's not like the publicly available FAQ in this forum says: Download restrictions were forced to be put in place. These limitations are as follows (and will be re-evaluated after a while)

I guess that time has not come yet. Maybe I'll have a chat with the rules committee.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Yes, we get it, you don't see a problem. What I don't understand is why you think your personal use case and opinion should be the default standard for every other user when it should be abundantly clear that other people have a problem with it. Changing things would have absolutely no impact on you, you can continue downloading exactly like you have been except other people would also be satisfied and stop the complaining you keep reacting to. It's like you are saying "I don't eat ice cream so they should just stop selling it since no one needs it either."

It's not just that I don't need to watch that many videos. It's that I think it's fundamentally, morally wrong. There is absolutely no acceptable reason to download several hundred hours of video in a single week. Yes, Netflix technically gives you access to their entire catalog when you subscribe, but that doesn't mean they expect people to just up and download the entire freaking thing!

It's no better than piracy at that point. And I would like AnyStream to not be seen as a piracy tool. Not least because it would incentivize providers to dedicate more resources to blocking it, and if they succeed, I will quite literally be unable to "continue downloading exactly like I have been."

Just lay off a little, for [insert deity]'s sake! AnyStream allows you to download more videos in a day than you are physically capable of watching in a day! That's not just way more than enough—I'd say it's far too much! I have no idea why RedFox made the token limit so high!

 

[RedFox 1]

As a matter of fact, it was meant to be a tool for people that were going to someplace or vacationing in a place that had no internet or wifi. So they could bring a few movies with them for purely entertainment purposes. It was not meant to be a program that Wowfunhappy, described above. He is 100% correct, and I applaud his post.

 

[zanetti]

It's that I think it's morally wrong.!

yes, sir. i would download a car. and i will download a car, as soon as it becomes possible.

thank you.

 

[tdfrgsn]

There is absolutely no acceptable reason to download several hundred hours of video in a single week.

So downloading 140 episodes of Futurama is fair use but downloading 706 episodes of The Simpsons is piracy? I'm really interested to know where the cut off is because the 259 episodes of King Of The Hill seem to be in a gray area.

 

[RedFox 1]

yes, sir. i would download a car. and i will download a car, as soon as it becomes possible.

thank you.

I am designing one on my 3D printer, you can download it if you like. It looks a lot like a Lambo. I already have the whole front end printed. *I have to give my son a lot of the credit for this, its his printer.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

Feel free to share the stl, then i can print one on my CR-10 MAX 3d printer ^_^

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Don922]

That is not really correct - your statement makes an assumption that when a new provider is added, everyone will immediately want to download 46 (280/6 = 46.67) or more videos from the new provider without similarly reducing their consumption of content from the current providers. As I said before - all of you want unlimited downloads no matter how you wrap your argument. You will never be satisfied. And, RedFox 1 - you forgot to mention that we have 52 weeks in a year. So on top of the 1120 per month, you have an additional 1120 that you can use throughout the year. So let's see what we have: 1120 x 13 = 14,560 tokens.

I am just not one of these people who think they should be able to download more than that a year.

I never said I wanted unlimited downloads. I think the token system should stay in place. I just think it should move to a token by provider system especially as more providers get added.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RedFox 1]

I never said I wanted unlimited downloads. I think the token system should stay in place. I just think it should move to a token by provider system especially as more providers get added.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But what if I do not subscribe to that provider, or I can only afford to subscribe to one, do I lose all my other tokens and only get the ones for the subscriber I need? So lets say I get 40 tokens for Disney+ but I am not subscribed, what happens to those tokens? If you take them away, that's not fair, if you add them to the ones I subscribe to, we have the same thing as we do now.

 

[tdfrgsn]

But what if I do not subscribe to that provider, or I can only afford to subscribe to one, do I lose all my other tokens and only get the ones for the subscriber I need? So lets say I get 40 tokens for Disney+ but I am not subscribed, what happens to those tokens? If you take them away, that's not fair, if you add them to the ones I subscribe to, we have the same thing as we do now.

It's not as though you can't watch your movies on your browser.

 

[RedFox 1]

It's not as though you can't watch your movies on your browser.

So you are saying you don't have an answer to my question. Fair enough. And mostly I do just watch on my browser, some things I just don't want to watch twice, not even half of that stuff is not worth space on my hard drive. I am happy with what Redfox has decided upon, even though I do think its too many, maybe they should just slow down the downloads, that would take care of this whole conversation.

 

[HAMsmoke]

52.08 weeks in a year

RedFox 1 and Ch3vr0n - the math is this: Each year has 365.25 days (accounting for the leap year) and 365.25/7 = 52.18 weeks per year x 280 = 14,610.40.

 

[RedFox 1]

RedFox 1 and Ch3vr0n - the math is this: Each year has 365.25 days (accounting for the leap year) and 365.25/7 = 52.18 weeks per year x 280 = 14,610.40.

You are correct with leap years and other small factors included, I got 52.08 but your number is so close it's a slight variation.But we are all close enough.