this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
202 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

59103 readers
5282 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] themurphy 152 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Spotify is saying it's "a real blow to innovation".

Honestly wtf they on about. 1-2% tax on their massive multi million platform, and the tax goes directly to support music in the country.

Fuck Spotify.

[–] LazaroFilm 65 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Spotify still can’t figure out how to make a profit even with all their subscribers. Theo the 1% tax adds to their loss. Still fuck Spotify.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I have a good idea of where they could have found about $200M.

[–] De_Narm 27 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh yeah. Innovation from Spotify. Like their great recent one, copying TikTok for a few weeks.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What are you on about?! Spotify innovates all the time. Almost every week I'm greeted with a new way to fuck up their app and/or service. That's impressive! 😐

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana 8 points 10 months ago

Also fucking recommending me podcasts even though I just want to listen to music

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Innovation? The fuck have they innovated? They're stupid Bluetooth spotify only car thing that they bailed on?

Spotify wrapped .. yeah no shit I played my favourite song the most this year.... Such an inovating feature of useless information...

They did innovate underpaying artists tho.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well you know how before Spotify, people used to listen to music from their favorite artists? Spotify made it so that you could listen to music from your favorite artists via a middleman.

🫲innovation🫱

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I used to listen to my favorite music only when someone else choose to play it on the radio. Even before Spotify, it was known that buying CDs was giving more to the recording label than the musicians. If you want to support the musicians: Go to live shows and buy their shirts.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

I mean, I’d record songs off the radio on tape and make my own mix tapes and trade them with friends. I’d buy CDs and rip them to MP3s, made custom mix CDs, and CDRs full of 700 mb of mp3s. I owned several MP3 players before the iPod, and since. People listened to music in thousands of ways before Spotify, and will after.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago

Innovation my ass. Their UI has been as a disaster as ever. Major reason why I stopped paying for their crappy service years ago

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Wait, what does "to support music in the country" mean? Spotify already pays the majority of their revenue to record labels. That is funding for the music industry. Aren't French labels a part of this scheme?

Not a Spotify fan, just thinking about this on the basis of some facts I'm aware of.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Its not unusual for countries outside the biggest media producers (like the US for instance) to have rules in place to make sure there is continued local cultural output.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Ah similar to Canadian content (CanCon) policies in Canada. Got it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What have they ever innovated?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

It "starts instantly" or some shit.

[–] foggy 44 points 10 months ago (3 children)

When a huge company pulls out if a country due to its laws affecting their ability to make money, it should tell you that the company in question only has its status due to exploiting something that should be being regulated.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

Or that a quant figured out it would be cheaper to cut staff and stop operating in a specific region vs pay extra fees to continue operating in that region.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Like Twitch and South Korea huh?

[–] pandacoder 4 points 10 months ago

Well in this case the companies that should be regulated are the Internet companies in SK. 😂 Good counterpoint (not /s)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Well yes... Or that the government has enacted laws to extract rent from international companies.

[–] SquiffSquiff 26 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I'm in the UK. Spotify family subscription is £17.99/month (US$ 22.84). Same price as Netflix premium, although I have Netflix standard at £10.99 (US$ 13.96). Now, I know that they give a high percentage to the record companies, source says 70% but really? What are they doing over there? They seem to have some fundamental problems. With Netflix, my history, watchlist, search results, etc. are consistent across sessions and devices. Spotify can't manage this. Netflix of course produce a significant quantity of original content. Spotify do a few live music sessions. I don't think that the user experience with Spotify has changed significantly in the last 6 years that I have been a customer.

So they're not making money. They're not improving the user experience or meeting the market standard for it. They're not producing original content and they seem unable to comply with local laws. Why have they not been disrupted by one of their competitors?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 10 months ago

What you are missing is that they are majority owned by the same record companies they are paying out 70% to. They even specifically structured the deals between Spotify and labels so that they pay labels in a way that allows labels not to credit artists for nearly 50% of all streams meaning the label gets to keep it.

Chokepoint capitalism by Cory Doctorow is a great book that goes into detail about how it works

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Tbh I prefer the different play sessions between devices of device A is offline.
That way I have my work playlist at work and my home playlist at home ready to play.

[–] PlantObserver 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Anecdotally, about 25% of my circle have moved to various other services, so maybe not a huge disruption but they're definitely losing some customers to competitors at least

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

I like Deezer.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

I'm experimenting with Synology music without subscription.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

I moved to Tidal.

[–] triptrapper 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I've been using Tidal for a couple years and I don't miss Spotify ever. Same price, higher quality, and they don't pollute my screen with endless recommendations.

[–] cyberpunk007 4 points 10 months ago

If you ask support they will tell you that they're recommendations, not ads. 😂. Like fuck off. I don't want full screen ads. I want music. Also forget podcasts. God damn.

[–] daft61lunacy 18 points 10 months ago

Innovating ways to pay less the artists.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago

Also known as divesting, smdh