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

Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 781 posts

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#761

Post by unethical_ban »

koheripbal wrote: post #756
unethical_ban wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the parent's point. I read it as, "if you get kicked out of every restaurant on the planet, it might be your fault." Of course there are protections for certain classes of people based on their attributes or fundamentals, but society can call your bullshit out.

This is hollow logic. If I say someone is punished unfairly, it's probably because they deserved it? Maybe you should tell that to a rape victim some time.

"dang", is it okay if I call this a stupid argument?

Someone is comparing social shaming for hate speech and lies and defamation - to someone getting physically raped.

So someone who willfully, repeatedly, taunts murder victims' families, spreads lies and conspiracy theories, and feeds off the attention of the mentally ill - getting taken off private platforms that not only host his content for free, but earn him money:

Is the same as telling a woman she somehow deserves getting raped.

Grow the fuck up.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#762

Post by [deleted] »

ghthor wrote: post #316
leephillips wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“despite he himself finding those views to be inaccurate and repugnant” If only that were true. Most people who look into this are dumbfounded at Chomsky’s support of Faurisson— not just his right to speak, but his insistence that we take this holocaust-denying nutjob’s “research” seriously.

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#763

Post by armandhammer »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #329
busymom0 wrote: post #122

I agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips wh…

Their web player doesn't even work with desktop Safari...

Yes it does, I'm using it right now. Safari 13.1; macOS 10.15.4; 2014 MBP. Nothing special here, it just works (though I normally use Brave).

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#764

Post by afiori »

rorykoehler wrote: post #712
afiori wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His podcast is about getting to know the guests, it is not meant to be an adversarial interview.

Hard questions are how you get to know someone.

There many ways to do that, the format Rogan chose is to try and let each guest feel at ease and let them properly explain their stances. Rogan's role is then to play the audience role in the conversation, asking question/clarifications.

What rogan usually does not do for example is to bring up controversies about his guests.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#765

Post by fareesh »

carapace wrote: post #745
fareesh wrote: post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ezekiel 5:10

I don't see the connection. That passage isn't advocating cannibalism, it is portraying it as a divine punishment.

It's portraying it as a consequence - he was too. If there is no food, he will have to feed his kids somehow, etc.

"I will be forced to eat my neighbour" versus "Sky fairy warns that people will eat one another"

The second is more ridiculous, and more people believe it.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#766

Post by danielscrubs »

busymom0 wrote: post #122

I agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips wh…

5. In regards to number five, at the time Spotify came out I was still using Winamp. The just completely insane thing to me was that I could from a cold start, start the app and listen to a new song in Spotify in noticeably less time than in Winamp where the songs where on my PC!

To this day it still perplexes me. Nowadays I think(?) they have switched to a more web-centric GUI-framework and a Server-model, but at that time, Jesus Christ was it impressive on my crappy computer. It was a beast.

PS. for a nostalgic trip, anyone remember Foobar?

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#767

Post by codeddesign »

GoofballJones wrote: post #283
busymom0 wrote: post #122

I agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips wh…

Alex Jones being kicked off those services isn't the same thing. He was spreading major misinformation and targeted harassment at innocent people that were involved in a tragedy. He wasn't "conspired" against. They just told him to go host his hate somewhere else. And stop with these "censorship" BS. Alex Jones has every right to start his own network if he wants and put anything on it. There's nothing stopping him f…

1. Be realistic. He wasn’t on Nickelodeon with a very large following. Google and YouTube have a heavy bias, that isn’t new news.

2. If your ISP starting preventing you from viewing HN, would that be censorship or their own right? Since you have your own right to start your own ISP.

3. If I own a cake business, is it perfectly acceptable to refuse to make a cake for a gay couple? (We all know how that turned out)

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#768

Post by jokit »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #733
jokit wrote: post #729

I hope and doubt this will change JRE much. On the topic of libertarianism.. Almost all statists share some libertarian perspective on some issues. No libertarian has statist perspective on any issues. There are a lot of self proclaimed libertarians, Christians, Muslims, or people of any principle, who are incorrect. Unlike "Republican" and "Democratic" which don't mean anything, "libertarian" means something. You ca…

This is a little "no true Scotsman," no? Self-identification is probably the best indicator we've got for whether a label applies to a person. If enough new people label themselves a thing, and use the word to mean something different, I'd argue the word itself has begun to change, or at least has aquired multiple definitions. Coopting a label in the political sense sucks (see: "liberal"), but from a linguistic persp…

Like "Literally" "evolving" to mean "metaphorically"?

When "X" becomes "Not X", that's not evolution but coopting. It's degradation, and it's often purposeful.

"Libertarian" means something, which is why the "Libertarian Party" required an oath to adhere to the non-aggression principle. The fact that statists moved in to ruin the "Libertarian Party", take the oath and betray it, may make them "Libertarian Party" members, but doesn't make them libertarian (in fact, the opposite).

Are you a Christian if you're not Christian but call yourself "Christian"? Are you an atheist if you believe in a god? Are you "blind" if you have perfect vision?

I realize that this assault on reality/truth is at the heart of many issues today.. We have no language if things can mean both a thing, and/or the opposite of that thing.

...which is the point.

You may have a libertarian perspective on an issue, or a group of issues (as almost everyone does), but that doesn't make you libertarian, which means liberty in all issues. There is a line between minarchist and anarchist, and a reason for both terms.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#769

Post by krapp »

jokit wrote: post #768
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a little "no true Scotsman," no? Self-identification is probably the best indicator we've got for whether a label applies to a person. If enough new people label themselves a thing, and use the word to mean something different, I'd argue the word itself has begun to change, or at least has aquired multiple definitions. Coopting a label in the political sense sucks (see: "liberal"), but from a linguistic persp…

Like "Literally" "evolving" to mean "metaphorically"? When "X" becomes "Not X", that's not evolution but coopting. It's degradation, and it's often purposeful. "Libertarian" means something, which is why the "Libertarian Party" required an oath to adhere to the non-aggression principle. The fact that statists moved in to ruin the "Libertarian Party", take the oath and betray it, may make them "Libertarian Party" memb…

>I realize that this assault on reality/truth is at the heart of many issues today.. We have no language if things can mean both a thing, and/or the opposite of that thing.

Contronyms exist in many languages[0]. They're not part of some nefarious scheme to corrupt Libertarian identity or anything of the sort.

That is how language works. The language you're typing your prescriptivist nonsense in has become bastardized and corrupted from its Latin and Germanic roots over generations, after all.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#770

Post by bitwize »

tim333 wrote: post #616
koheripbal wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate Alex Jones, but I have to agree. There's a difference between being kicked out of a restaurant for being an ass, vs being kicked out of EVERY restaurant on Earth for the rest of your life - without due process. These online services aren't small mom/pop shops that you can just replace and patronize another. They are global near-monopolies that you cannot function without. Google isn't just my search provider -…

I'm skeptical of "kicked out of EVERY restaurant on Earth" The Daily Stormer is fairly bad as sites go "Jews Howl as Portuguese Move to Shut Down Their Citizenship Scam" typical story - and after various attempts to get rid of them all you have to do to go to the site is google them and click on the link in the wikipedia page. About the only sites that are really kicked out of all restaurants are paedophila ones and…

Twitter has actually vowed to support pedos, as long as they don't talk about plans to hurt actual, particular children.

But the community of "MAPs" is protected by social media these days. Repeat the 13-50 statistic, though, and you're out (though the likes of "kill all white people" appears to be ok).

Post reply on HN