On a related note -
this was a comment in an article about the recent news story, that a Samsung support clerk on twitter had a 15 tweets conversation with a twitterbot because the bot initially asked him how long the battery life on a Galaxy S 4 was.
http://nymag.com/following/2016/02/samsu...r-bot.html
Quote:I only can talk about the Samsung Social Media Support here in Austria, and no - we dont use a normal Twitter overlay - but as someone else in here already has suggested, an enterprise solution - where we cant see that persons profile - if we dont click through in an effort to see it.
We usually respond to every twitter posting with the utmost joy, because technical support through a medium that allows you to type two sentences at the most is incredibly stimulating for your creativity.
Try to explain to a customer how to do regular troubleshooting and do that in 3 lines of text.
You need to be creative.
Source:
http://derstandard.at/2000031195859/Auf-...-zu-helfen (comments section)
If you are asking where this behavior comes from and who exactly fosters it - look no further. Also understand, that for PR a successful interaction with a customer is not only one where you solve their problem - but also one, that gives them the impression that you care. Thats why most of them dont have any experience of getting any reaction that isnt overly understanding - no matter what they ask. There usually always is a paid customer rep that is willing to hold their hand.
Also notice - that they dont get their support in stores or from company portals anymore - they get it from asking "on social media". Customer reps have search queries running that look out for their brand being mentioned and they react. Thats "support on the internet" for the facebook generation. ("Which app should I...")
remove the ability of adding source and zips in the final release of jarvis.
job done.
(2016-02-17, 17:44)reilly nufc Wrote: [ -> ]remove the ability of adding source and zips in the final release of jarvis.
job done.
I'm genuinely surprised by how many people seem to think that's a good solution.
'Make it shit, then they won't want to use it.'
i am an amateur unofficial 3rd party addon developer im really surprised at those kind of comments as well especially the remove python ones from people who probably learnt to do what they have from xbmc. when i got in to xbmc i thought the whole ethos of it and the reason it was open source was to bring coding to a new generation of people that would never of thought about doing it and i am one of those people and their is a lot more out their granted their a lot of new people that are only interested in being a user or making money but is that enough of a reason to punish the masses who want to learn. im glad some of the senior members have clarified that they wont be taking any of these steps
(2016-02-17, 18:01)trogggy Wrote: [ -> ]'Make it shit, then they won't want to use it.'
Sorry, Kodi's own repo is big enough (for me, at least), and Kodi for sure wouldn't be 'shit' just because of non-Kodi repos weren't installable anymore...
What has been Kodi's aim from day 1: give its user a nice GUI (if not the nicest) for the big screen to make him/her enjoy his/her OWN LOCAL MEDIA - the streaming possibility was just a byproduct.
Nowadays, a LOT of questionable people simply abuse Kodi by making (more or less) unaware people believe that it is the absolute substitute for every cinema, cable channel or official streaming service existent on earth - for next to nothing.
I understand and support Team Kodi in its attempt to save the project, hold the team together and maintain Kodis reputation!
(Nevertehless I don't think Team Kodi would take that step.)
(2016-02-17, 19:12)Fry7 Wrote: [ -> ] (2016-02-17, 18:01)trogggy Wrote: [ -> ]'Make it shit, then they won't want to use it.'
Sorry, Kodi's own repo is big enough (for me, at least), and Kodi for sure wouldn't be 'shit' just because of non-Kodi repos weren't installable anymore...
Then you wouldn't mind. Good for you.
Fortunately - AFAIK at least - there's no suggestion that such a ridiculous idea is on the agenda.
removing support for third party add-ons and repos is not on the agenda. There have been talks about it, but an entire drop is at least at the moment off the table. Users should be free to do whatever they want.
Also, a first run disclaimer won't help, as everybody that is able to preload Kodi with illegal add-ons is also able to set a variable in a config file that this dialog has already been shown.
"KODI disclaimer is important to POP UP at first run."
This seems like a good idea, but in reality the only people that would see it are end users doing a fresh install. If the box comes pre-loaded it will already have a "first-run" negating the message. IMO it's best to have it embedded in the settings where end users first have to go to change settings regardless of whats pre bundled. Otherwise have the nag message pop up is kodi.log is improperly named.
"Remove python"
That would be like Jarvis removing Tonys suit.
"Remove install from zip and unofficial repos"
Besides the fact i can personally think of over 20 workarounds to beat this (renaming and substituting an unofficial source as official for starters, an addon that installs zips, etc), the legitimate users that would be hurt the most are 3rd party skin users. I have fixed PCs for 20 years and the one thing that makes me shake my head is the lengths people will go to add customization and themes; dlls be damned. People will then use whatever the skin people come up with as workarounds.
I like this thread simply for certain nouns i've seen. The long term users are saying things like we\ours\my Kodi. Entitlement be damned, that's kind of beautiful.
(2016-02-16, 18:50)keith Wrote: [ -> ][quote='harlekin' pid='2247564' dateline='1455639848']
I have no idea what you are talking about. Amazon didn't remove us from their store because we were mis-using their brand name. They removed us because they thought we were responsible, directly, for the piracy.
The rest of your ramblings is super unclear. When Xbox launched, nobody posted up questions asking 'where can I find the latest download of a movie in the theaters?' 'why doesn't my torrent downloader work' they were related questions on the system. I was there, in #xbmp, and #xbmc, and on xboxhacker and xbox-scene, and nobody asked where to obtain content, which is essentially the problem now.
People don't view Kodi as a player, they view it as the vehicle to obtain copyrighted material, we just don't want *our brand* directly associated with the very clear copyright infringement that is obtaining content. We will never tell users how to use our product, but we don't want brand confusion with the box sellers, the manufs, the youtubers and especially people who literally have our name in their domain, twitter, fb, or use our logo/brand to sell their boxes that the sole purpose is 'free movies, tv, fully loaded'.
This was never a problem with the xbox scene.
I think this is a very valid point, no one associates "Safari" or "Internet Explorer" as a brand directly with downloading or streaming content even though it is if not just as easy, easier to do so with and more readily available, they associate "the internet" with it.
But this all leads back to a comment i made early, this really became a problem with the release of XBMC for android. First off lets not pretend that wasn't supported by Pivos with the sole intention of increasing sales on their boxes knowing fully well the vast majority of people wanted it for 3rd party add ons, they knew apple tv's were popular for the jailbreaking reason and there was pent up demand for an affordable conduit for the software. Box sellers appeared everywhere over night and had to use the XBMC name to market it as that is where the demand was.
Now the issue is for box sellers is if they make software and charge money for it they become liable under the enablers act. This holds true if all they do is make a fork of Kodi with a skin and change the name, they assume all liability. So convincing the box sellers to load their own "custom" versions renamed onto their devices is going to be an Herculean task at best. While right now as the software is free and open source there is no liability to the hardware seller under the enablers act.
So again the easiest method to end this box seller regime and restore order to the Kodi name is to cut it off at the head. Seeing how you do not want to lock down the software to prevent 3rd party add ons really the next best alternative is to end Android development. This would significantly reduce the amount of resellers, and yes i realize there is other devices but Android accounts for well over 90% of the market share. Yes these box sellers could use open elec or make their own build, but isn't that exactly what you want?
I get that you feel it is unfair Amazon removed Kodi as it felt it was software that enables piracy but can you really blame them? Besides this attack on you tubers which isn't really accomplishing anything at the end of the day as box sellers will continue to sell preloaded boxes with or without youtube videos, what has Kodi done to disassociate themselves with piracy? Hell i remember when there was a thread for the add-on i won't mention its name on this site until SOPA was a threat.
The problem Kodi's argument has is it conflict all the way through it:
We don't want to be associated with piracy add ons but we won't stop development of 3rd party add ons.
We don't care about public support, popularity or money, but we want our software readily available to the masses and we want to sign deals with companies to make software for them.
We don't want you tubers talking about the 3rd party add ons and using our software for piracy, but we support a youtube channel called "Kord Kutters".
We don't want box sellers selling our software with 3rd party addons, but we want our software available on the most popular platform for box sellers even though it doesn't run that great in respect to other devices.
I could go on but you get the point.
IMHO
Time for some inline quoting.
(2016-02-17, 23:18)Gombeek Wrote: [ -> ]But this all leads back to a comment i made early, this really became a problem with the release of XBMC for android. First off lets not pretend that wasn't supported by Pivos with the sole intention of increasing sales on their boxes knowing fully well the vast majority of people wanted it for 3rd party add ons
What? No one is pretending that release wasn't supported by Pivos. I think we even said in the initial port blog that we thanked Pivos for helping to pay for development. I'd heavily dispute the 3rd party addons part though, particularly given that at the time, I think there was only one or two piracy addons at all: icefilms and maybe navi-x, and neither one was especially heavily used, as far as I'm aware.
(2016-02-17, 23:18)Gombeek Wrote: [ -> ]The problem Kodi's argument has is it conflict all the way through it:
We don't want to be associated with piracy add ons but we won't stop development of 3rd party add ons.
We don't care about public support, popularity or money, but we want our software readily available to the masses and we want to sign deals with companies to make software for them.
We don't want you tubers talking about the 3rd party add ons and using our software for piracy, but we support a youtube channel called "Kord Kutters".
We don't want box sellers selling our software with 3rd party addons, but we want our software available on the most popular platform for box sellers even though it doesn't run that great in respect to other devices.
I could go on but you get the point.
IMHO
Here I think you're just making up conflicts. I don't think there's an inherent conflict in any of these statements. Point 1: Firefox also doesn't want to be associated piracy, yet they also aren't stopping the development of add-ons, and it seems to be working really well for them. Welcome to open source. Point 2: In addition to the other things we don't, we also don't want to sign deals with companies to make software for them. We'd like them to submit add-ons to our repo, but the XBMC Foundation has never signed a deal like that and never will. Making software available to the masses, again, is basically the point of FOSS. Point 3: We also support every other channel that makes content about us that doesn't associate us with piracy. We link to Lon Seidman when he talks about us. Lifehacker, Gizmodo, Jupiter Broadcast, AFTVnews, etc. etc. Basically, as long as it's not piracy related and is about us, we'll tend to give a social media tweet about it if it catches our notice. Those two things don't seem to have anything to do with each other? Point 4: Yes. Where is the conflict? And what do you mean "it doesn't run that great"?
I, personally, don't get the point.
@
Gombeek
In no particular order:
Pivos was a company for years before the XBMC/Kodi port, with products that only played back a user's local library. They wanted a better player for their hardware business. So, no, Pivos was not banking on the streaming add-ons (legal or not). There's no pretending going on, these are facts. You don't get to drag Pivos's name through the mud like all of the people who assume Kodi devs make Kodi for pirating.
Kord Kutters is not endorsed by the Kodi project, and does not promote pirate/bootleg methods. The concept of cord cutting is not defined by piracy. The term typically refers to using legal streaming services, OTA, and local media as an alternative to cable TV. Nate and I don't help anyone pirate content.
YouTubers are free to talk about pirate add-ons and even make help videos for them. It is about how the Kodi brand is presented, and not a ban on giving information. The Kodi group doesn't even have that kind of authority. They can't stop people from saying "this works in Kodi" or "this is how you do it in Kodi", but they can stop people who are making it sound like its something official or it's some kind of main feature (for a lack of better words, sorry).
The Kodi group does not sign deals with companies. Sponsorships are done as no-strings-attached, to the point where companies walk away because they don't get anything special. Major efforts have been taken to reduce the need for any sponsorship, and to hopefully be totally community funded.
There are certain values that have to be upheld for Kodi. User freedom, open source, ease of use, and others are among them. "Solutions" that violate those are not going to be accepted. We don't want to be called rapists either, but we're not going to stop talking to women. Stopping Android development is the most absurd suggestion I've heard yet. You might as well suggest stopping all Kodi development as a possible solution. You think there are conflicting positions because the Kodi group does not choose the easiest methods to solve part of the problem. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
The Kodi group seeks a solution that fits their goals, and is not simply whatever is easiest. It's very short sighted to think that it can't be done, and everything that has happened in the last week suggests that it can be done.
(2016-02-17, 23:18)Gombeek Wrote: [ -> ]The problem Kodi's argument has is it conflict all the way through it:
We don't want to be associated with piracy add ons but we won't stop development of 3rd party add ons.
We don't care about public support, popularity or money, but we want our software readily available to the masses and we want to sign deals with companies to make software for them.
We don't want you tubers talking about the 3rd party add ons and using our software for piracy, but we support a youtube channel called "Kord Kutters".
We don't want box sellers selling our software with 3rd party addons, but we want our software available on the most popular platform for box sellers even though it doesn't run that great in respect to other devices.
I could go on but you get the point.
IMHO
They responded to that. They stated they are not making a moral stance. They don't care about people using Kodi and Third party addons to obtain pirated content. What they want, as I understand it now, is to distance themselves from the perception that the Kodi Foundation is either promoting this behavior or that enabling piracy is their end goal. Kodi Foundation have their own agenda with other business deals or goals, and what is happening out there in the wild, is hurting their reputation and their ability to close these deals. They are acting on self interest, not from a moral or ethical stance. And that is ok, it is their right to act in their self interest. They aren't after copyrights violations (the code), they are after trademark violations (name and logo).
What I have said several times now, is that not striking a deal with youtubers. I believe this is a bad strategy were only the youtube people will end up benefiting. The Kodi Foundation do care about their install base. They quote it as a milestone in a video. It is the install base, and not features, what matter when trying to strike deals.
On a side note, since you mentioned it, I don't get the "Kord Kutters" name. Kodi is not a cord cutting alternative. They don't offer "real" content. They do support an interface free OTA, which people can do directly on their TVs anyway. SingTV, Netflix, Hulu, those are cord cutting alternatives. Just a side note, now back on track...
3679 is the number of items on eBay.co.uk after searching for "kodi fully loaded"
Where does one start to help with this problem
[/quote]
What? No one is pretending that release wasn't supported by Pivos. I think we even said in the initial port blog that we thanked Pivos for helping to pay for development. I'd heavily dispute the 3rd party addons part though, particularly given that at the time, I think there was only one or two piracy addons at all: icefilms and maybe navi-x, and neither one was especially heavily used, as far as I'm aware.
[/quote]
Thats a debatable stance and I'm not going to say one way or the other if that was the true sentiment when Pivos decided to help pay for development. Debating when critical mass was reached and 3rd party add-on users exceeded traditional user is a whole other discussion. But if I was to do the math i would look at how many users prior to apple tv 2 existed compared to after apple tv 2 and estimate at least 75% of the apple tv 2 users were strictly 3rd party add-on users at a minimum. Now please don't get me wrong, XBMC/Kodi is amazing software as a media centre and in fact i know a few people who use it strictly as a media centre sans all 3rd party add ons. Now that all being said, I think it is fair to say Pivos was aware of the market situation and who exactly would be interested in their product and made a choice to incorporate it, and I don't blame them, I would have done the exact same thing.
[/quote]
Here I think you're just making up conflicts. I don't think there's an inherent conflict in any of these statements. Point 1: Firefox also doesn't want to be associated piracy, yet they also aren't stopping the development of add-ons, and it seems to be working really well for them. Welcome to open source. Point 2: In addition to the other things we don't, we also don't want to sign deals with companies to make software for them. We'd like them to submit add-ons to our repo, but the XBMC Foundation has never signed a deal like that and never will. Making software available to the masses, again, is basically the point of FOSS. Point 3: We also support every other channel that makes content about us that doesn't associate us with piracy. We link to Lon Seidman when he talks about us. Lifehacker, Gizmodo, Jupiter Broadcast, AFTVnews, etc. etc. Basically, as long as it's not piracy related and is about us, we'll tend to give a social media tweet about it if it catches our notice. Those two things don't seem to have anything to do with each other? Point 4: Yes. Where is the conflict? And what do you mean "it doesn't run that great"?
I, personally, don't get the point.
[/quote]
You're right, firefox doesn't, but firefox also fits into that generic label as a web browser. It's not really fair that Kodi would be held to a higher standard but it's all about public perception and Firefox didn't explode in popularity due to piracy. The argument that could be made here is that Kodi doesn't represent its self as a brand as much as it should in order to be disassociated with 3rd party add ons or piracy. Going to CES and having meetings with interest parties is 1 thing, having a booth representing your brand would be another. Google also allows open development of APK's for their OS, but they don't allow just anyone into the Google Play store, the Google Play store is also MASSIVE and the official add ons far outweigh the unofficial ones... Kodi has a somewhat similar situation where they have an official add-on list but the difference being that there is far more unofficial add ons, which then starts to move perception of the main uses of Kodi towards the larger of the 2. This also opens up a different debate onto why there isn't more official add ons... In fact I have an add-on i haven't submitted but I'm going to do that right now, its important that official list grows.
Sorry point 2 was partially incorrect, in that you want the companies to make official software for Kodi but again the point stands. Popularity, money and public support matter to outside companies, it is very hard to convince someone to join your cause when you don't care about the same root issues.
Point 3 was directed at the fact the supported channel is named "Kord Kutters"... and while we can argue it is a vague title and can mean a multitude of things it really lends it self to the piracy issue. Im not trying to suggest that is what the channel is about, and in fact i enjoy the videos, i find them informative and showcase a lot of information you don't find on typical youtube channels, its just a bad choice for a user name.
Point 4 I mean it Kodi isn't optimal on a lot of the Android devices right now... sure they have come a long way and eventually it will be better but there is even a video on Kord Kutters where they discuss the Amazon Fire Stick and what a POS it is and how it is the worst thing you can use for Kodi.
Now you're completely within your rights to say I'm wrong about the above, it's just the general feeling general people get. I think the best way I can illustrate point is from my days in school. I have a marketing degree and design diploma, in my design school we had to make a manual on how to cook eggs.. some people came up with very elaborate and technical manuals, others very simple directions, the major problem with everyone's manuals was that a lot of assumptions were made, assumptions people knew what a frying pan was, what butter was, hell how to even crack an egg. The point was, ambiguity and assumptions are the enemy, this lesson was again taught in my marketing degree. By not seeking popularity or public support it has left Kodi at a disadvantage where its voice isn't being heard over those who rallied the support of the masses, albeit around a conflicting cause of 3rd party add ons.
IMHO
(2016-02-18, 00:56)Gombeek Wrote: [ -> ]Point 4 I mean it Kodi isn't optimal on a lot of the Android devices right now... sure they have come a long way and eventually it will be better but there is even a video on Kord Kutters where they discuss the Amazon Fire Stick and what a POS it is and how it is the worst thing you can use for Kodi.
That's a comment on the Fire Stick, not Android.
I can't remember the last time I had an Android-specific problem.*
*
so it's at least a couple of weeks ago. Probably.