Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

821–830 of 963 posts

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#821

Post by Marsymars »

WilliamEdward wrote: post #643
colemickens wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shameful that people mindlessly spend $1000 on the latest fashion, sorry, tech accessory but can't afford a few dollars a month to enjoy the creative output of others.

I am in this predicament, and every one of these people are making up a blatant lie that they can't afford it. What they really mean is they are stubborn. They don't see money logically and clearly, where if they could they would realise their hidden costs far exceed $10 a month... Things like coffee, gas. They don't realise it racks up $10 $15 and $20 dollars behind the scenes. But theyre happy to pay for that... wh…

> Spotify is extremely affordable, for literally everyone who can afford an internet connection.

Maybe everyone in the first world, but certainly not everyone who can afford an internet connection. Smart phone internet connectivity is still pretty ubiquitous in many areas where the typical smart phone is <$100 and the average income is an order of magnitude lower than the developed world.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#822

Post by kingosticks »

hanspeter wrote: post #813
jsgo wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get married. The agreement between you and your significant other is that both parties will be faithful and to perform various duties within the relationship. Also, if the marriage is ended, both parties leave with their individual things/pay/etc. You decide to play the field. Your significant other decides to leave you and you are now responsible for the tasks/financials that your significant other previously as…

Can you point to the part of the Spotify ToC, where you agree not to block ads? I haven't been able to find anything about it.

Section 9.10

> circumventing or blocking advertisements in the Spotify Service, or creating or distributing tools designed to block advertisements in the Spotify Service

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#823

Post by jsgo »

drewmol wrote: post #754
jsgo wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get married. The agreement between you and your significant other is that both parties will be faithful and to perform various duties within the relationship. Also, if the marriage is ended, both parties leave with their individual things/pay/etc. You decide to play the field. Your significant other decides to leave you and you are now responsible for the tasks/financials that your significant other previously as…

>once they're settled... Should I be expected to monitor changes to a living document that I never read in the first place in order to know whether the current version means I am married to Spotify and act accordingly? Spotify is the one who defaulted first by not providing me the limitless free music I am owed.

If the terms change, they contact you that they changed. At that point, yeah, you’re bound by new terms if you continue using the service. That’s kind of been the way things have been since the advent of Internet services in general.

I’m curious how you’re certain they defaulted first when you state that you never read the document in the first place.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#824

Post by ghettoimp »

darkpuma wrote: post #735
ghettoimp wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hrmn, no thanks. I've never gotten a coffee at McDonald's that was a remotely drinkable temperature.

This meme is staler than McDonald's coffee. The temperature of McDonalds coffee is comparable to the temperature of Starbucks coffee, and always has been. > In 1994, a spokesman for the National Coffee Association said that the temperature of McDonald's coffee conformed to industry standards.[2] An "admittedly unscientific" survey by the LA Times that year found that coffee was served between 157 and 182 °F (69 and 8…

I'm not trying to bring up a lawsuit, just saying that the coffee is way too hot for me. I have the same problem at most places you can stop on at the road. I usually get my gas station coffee with a side of ice.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#825

Post by adamrt »

clubm8 wrote: post #805
cletus wrote: post #255

Good. Spotify has a pretty cheap paid option that removes all of that. To those who justify wanting the paid service for nothing by saying Spotify won't "take responsibility" or "assume liability" for their ads or those ads "might deliver malware" or are "intrusive" as a weak rationalization, you present a false dichotomy. There are at least three options: 1. Pay for the service 2. Suffer through the ads 3. Don't use…

>Good. >Spotify has a pretty cheap paid option that removes all of that. Five dollars a month for the rest of my life is not "cheap". Frugal people look at the total cost of a loan, not just the monthly payment.

$1,200 for 20 years of music, updated constantly. Still seems cheap.

Less than 5 grand for a literal life time of music.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#826

Post by userbinator »

To the other (currently) highly-positioned comment here who proposes "just pay for it or don't use it":

How do they know if you close your eyes or look away? How do they know if you plug your ears? How do they know you are actually paying attention to the ads and not just ignoring them? Are those actions, none other than the human free will, not essentially a form of adblocking?

My biggest concern with the "just pay for it or don't use it" attitude is not how much it costs. That's irrelevant. It's the idea that it's wrong to not "consume" ads somehow, or that it's acceptable for companies to use increasingly intrusive techniques to monitor users for "compliance" of this consumption.

Not a Spotify user, so I have no skin (or ears...) in this game. But now I'm even more unlikely to become one.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#827

Post by userbinator »

cletus wrote: post #255

Good. Spotify has a pretty cheap paid option that removes all of that. To those who justify wanting the paid service for nothing by saying Spotify won't "take responsibility" or "assume liability" for their ads or those ads "might deliver malware" or are "intrusive" as a weak rationalization, you present a false dichotomy. There are at least three options: 1. Pay for the service 2. Suffer through the ads 3. Don't use…

...and of course the user who works for Facebook is espousing the position that we must be forced to consume content. (See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19115460 for more context.)

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#828

Post by s_tec »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #806
s_tec wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should you be allowed to use a service in a way they don't intend you to use it? The Free Software movement has been fighting against this exact mentality for decades. Digital autonomy should be a basic human right. Anyone should be able to download and execute whatever code they want on their own computer. Spotify also has this right, of course, and is free to block users if they choose. I am not morally oblig…

If you're running the Spotify client, you're using their computer, too, not just your own. You have the right to kick them off of your PC or phone, and they have the right to kick you off of their server. What's the problem with that?

No problem at all. Spotify has every right to do this.

The original comment seems to argue that ad-blockers are morally wrong, which I disagree with. Ad-blockers are a morally neutral technology, even if they hurt some company's bottom line. Companies that dislike this reality can deploy technical countermeasures, like Spotify is doing.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#830

Post by s_tec »

saalweachter wrote: post #804
s_tec wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should you be allowed to use a service in a way they don't intend you to use it? The Free Software movement has been fighting against this exact mentality for decades. Digital autonomy should be a basic human right. Anyone should be able to download and execute whatever code they want on their own computer. Spotify also has this right, of course, and is free to block users if they choose. I am not morally oblig…

That's the free software movement, not the free music movement Although the latter may actually be the more venerable body.

I'm talking about the Free Software movement. I have a moral right to use ad-blocking technology, or any other software on my own computer.

Spotify can refuse me service if they have a problem with this (no free music), but they can't make me feel guilty for blocking ads.

Post reply on HN