* depending on another, rival company
* mysterious bugs you have no control over
* loss of your own data
* giving your customers data to a company for free that maybe even would have paid for the same data
* not your users having a conversation about your product on a media that you don't control (which is not necessarily bad, but is definitely a side effect)
* it is illegal to embed youtube in Europe, without asking consent first, and immoral in the rest of the world too*
and such. 'Funny' as in 'ridiculously bad decision'. If I were at Netflix I'd just put the videos on a netflix server in a standard media format, embedded with html video tag. Simple way to ensure that as long as the website is up the video is also up, users are not redirected from your website, the video is fast, good quality, and so on.
*Not the act, but how they do it currently. When you open the article, it tells google that you have opened the article for no reason. They should avoid this if they can (and they can), also they should put google in their privacy statement which they didn't do.
Why is this funny? Netflix is not a video hosting website? It's a subscription-based on-demand streaming service. You can't host my videos on Netflix, can you?
