Google shut down many services that might not have achieved their expectations, but my perception was that this one was very popular in the podcasting scene. I see it all the time in most podcasts that I subscribe to on Youtube.

This specific thing is about consumer protection, just like all the other gambling laws that are uncontroversial. This has nothing to do with the EU, though. Many countries across the world are now starting to take steps against loot boxes, even some states in the US. The other things you mention aren't connected with this.

It seems that you're aware that the EU had no say in this, which makes your comment about it really random. Maybe you should save your resentments with the EU for things that the EU does.

They would be better off disabling loot boxes in Belgium so no one's really pissed off about it. I doubt the loss of Belgium sales would be noticeable, so they might be trying to put pressure on Belgium by getting voters discontent with those laws if they don't have access to the games, especially if other publishers follow the trend, but that can also make Belgium try to escalate the issue to the EU level to gain leverage.

What does the EU have to do with this story?

There is a gap between these business models and new generations' expectations, and the gap is only getting bigger. I'm glad this show is pirated so much, if only as a statement that these business practices are anti-consumer, and should change.

Same here. I have my credit card info right here, HBO. Just let me give it to you, please. Thank you.

Like what?

That's all well and good, but the choices you're suggesting don't exclude the choice to criticize their (arguably) anti-consumer practices. Whether those practices are so obnoxious that justify piracy, is up to you. I for one am glad with all the news of GoT being the most pirated show ever, because it makes more obvious this friction between old business models in this field, and new generations' expectations.

I was in that boat, and I have to say, avoiding the book spoilers was way easier. Not even comparable. I got spoiled on the ending the episode 2 last week because I saw it one day later and a video on youtube's recommended list had the spoiler in the thumbnail. This is probably because the audience of the tv show surpasses the book's by a kajillion.

Yup, that started in my ISP way back in preparation of season 6 of Game of Thrones. I guess their DNS servers are malfunctioning *cough* which is unfortunate.

My quest to pay for Game of Thrones went down that exact path; then they wonder why it's the most pirated show ever. Mix anti-consumer practices and evolving people's expectations, and you get your answer. I'd gladly give HBO my credit card info, if they let me.

Sure, I also do some things for free, but for the most part I need some form of revenue because 1) I have bills to pay, and 2) being paid is one hell of an incentive. Before advertisement (which, btw, if you mean that literally then we'd be talking about an Internet fetus) you were much more limited in the business models you could use to justify investing in producing content on the Internet. Youtube is a good example of that; I regularly watch channels that manage to produce content full-time due to the magic of ad revenue, even with the miserable share they get. Also, without ads, good luck running millions of servers and all that bandwidth without a paywall.

Revenue of any kind incentivizes content creators. Obviously the internet has grown exponentially since the time there was no advertisement, and obviously being able to make money to produce content had something to do with it. I find it hard to believe you'd disagree with this.

If the net is cast that wide and applies to religious and political potential ads, then I don't see Dawkins problem. It doesn't sound like they're taking a stance against that church, it sounds like they want to provide a certain experience to their costumers, and that ad didn't meet those requisites. There's nothing to agree or disagree with here other than whether their criteria for ads are beneficial for their bottom line or not.