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

An odd discovery on Spotify

robinsloan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 442 posts

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#341

Post by ehnto »

411111111111111 wrote: post #274
ehnto wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it does, if you are alluding to electronic music that's also just as much about the human aspect of it. Lets be real, at the commercial end of the spectrum electronic music is trivial to make, but no one wants to hear "Song seed 2aslk3j25lh" they want to hear what their "Music Hero" has made. Another aspect is DJing, DJs don't even pretend to have made the music yet people will come out just to hear a s…

Let's be realistic here. Hatsune Miku was created before 2010. While I dislike the genre, they've completely sold out all tickets to these festivals where "she" "performed". You're really not thinking it through if you think any genre isn't going to fundamentally change once the industry starts to push virtual artists. They can be perfect and relatable to teenagers. You really don't need physical people to pull off a…

Hatsune Miku kind of helps my argument here, because they still needed a personified identity for the music even though none of it's real. So then we ask, if Hatsune Miku could be manifested into the real world, do you not think their fans would be absolutely ecstatic? Behold, humans, the solution to that problem.

I know it's possible to get some people excited about an avatar, but I'm going to argue that the vast majority of people would prefer humans for as long as they can get them.

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#342

Post by ghostpepper »

midasz wrote: post #160
merijnv wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Happens to me a lot on Youtube too - you watch just one thing - and now your recommendations are full of things like that one thing. Spotify's recommendation system is much better than youtube's (at least for me). I frequently "joke" that it is one of the few applications of ML that actively make my life as a consumer better. Having been following Spotify's "Discover Weekly" for several years now, I'm actually real…

As a father of a young child, Spotify's algo's are completely useless to me. If their ML is so smart it should be able to determine that Row row row your boat doesn't mix well with Anthrax. Wish I'd be able to toggle 'don't recommend kids music' somewhere.

I'm trying to avoid this outcome by playing as many different genres other than "kids music" as possible to my baby. Probably won't know whether it worked for a few years but in the mean time I get to listen to real music.

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#343

Post by yesbabyyes »

raunak wrote: post #322
yesbabyyes wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. Let's say you get a burner phone and hook it up at home. You need internet and electricity of course. Buy a Spotify gift card for $10 USD cash, use that to get Spotify Premium (first use the three months free of course). Play your (artists') songs, 30 seconds each (considered one stream by Spotify). That's 2880 streams per hour, 86400 streams per month. Spotify pays around $2-$4 USD per 1000 streams,…

Sorry, but wow you got this wrong. I’m not sure if it was just a guess or something, but look at the comment below for what it actually is. The money laundering is in the form of purchasing botted streams.

As another comment [0] suggests, this is common at least in Sweden. I have it on first hand that a successful local rapper has the whole apartment full of phones streaming his songs. Floor, shelves, sofa, all full of phones.

I'm sure mixing it with bot traffic is also popular. I also assume that Spotify (et al) are more successful in filtering out bot traffic from central Asia than legit phones in the middle of the target group.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32560737

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#344

Post by bombcar »

werds wrote: post #339
klabb3 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's very important piece of Spotify's rev share model, it has arbitrage built in(!), most people are not aware of this. Spotify pays PER STREAM, meaning that a bot account can funnel a massively disproportionate amount of revenue compared to a human one. In fact, you can generate more revenue than your subscription costs. Artists have complained about this forever, because 24/7 playlists at the gym with Justin…

i cannot fathom how your example here supports the idea that Bieber playing 24/7 in a gym is stealing money from the niche artist who are listen to by only a handful of fans?

I think the idea is that there are two Spotify subscribers in the whole world.

You, who listen to IndieBand™ for a total of an hour a week or so.

The Gym™ who plays Bieber 24/7 every day, all month.

You each pay $10 a month, so $20 total. Spotify allocates based on plays, so Bieber gets 720 "played hours" and IndieBand™ gets 4. So Bieber gets 720/724 of the $20.

The OP is saying in this case, Bieber should get $10 and IndieBand™ $10 (minus fees, etc).

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#345

Post by pards »

fersarr wrote: post #326
midasz wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a father of a young child, Spotify's algo's are completely useless to me. If their ML is so smart it should be able to determine that Row row row your boat doesn't mix well with Anthrax. Wish I'd be able to toggle 'don't recommend kids music' somewhere.

THIS! People have been asking for different listening profiles for ages. But they keep ignoring those feature requests in their community websites.

Spotify has supported this for many years - it's called Spotify Premium Family[0]. You get 6 separate accounts for $16/mth. It is worth the price of admission just to keep my listening history / algo feed clean.

[0]: https://www.spotify.com/us/family/

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#346

Post by fencepost »

EMM_386 wrote: post #330
nosianu wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really interesting - although when I read that story I thought the point was the broken recommendation system. Happens to me a lot on Youtube too - you watch just one thing - and now your recommendations are full of things like that one thing . Or Facebook/Youtube, somehow: I watched a single video on Youtube about Viking sword fighting and suddenly my people recommendations on Facebook were at least 20% milit…

> Happens to me a lot on Youtube too - you watch just one thing - and now your recommendations are full of things like that one thing. I've heard reports of this happening but for well over a year, YouTube was still recommending relatively high quality videos to me that went along with my interests. Until last week. Somehow, somewhere along the line I must have clicked on some sort of "influencer" video. Now all I se…

You can review your history on YouTube and remove videos (or at least tell it to not use them for recommendations). You may find one obvious culprit a few weeks ago.

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#347

Post by Applejinx »

pnt12 wrote: post #270
mgdlbp wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I listened to the users also and it's nearly the same comment with minor variations. Imagine finding dozens of threads where the jokes are all the same, but with very unsubstantive changes in phrasing as the site is turning into Reddit.

I listened to mgdlbp also and it's nearly the same comment with minor variations. Imagine finding dozens of posts where the rants are all the same, but with very unsubstantive reasons in phrasing, as the old userbase complains about the new userbase ad nauseam.

I didn't listen :)

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#348

Post by werds »

fassssst wrote: post #325
alkonaut wrote: post #151

This is the TikTok-ification of music. The required response is the same here, as it is to the consumption of any other media, which is the same as when ordering food. Don't order food out of a random dark kitchen. Order from a brick and mortar restaurant you know . Don't use algorithmic feeds to discover video. Find a channel/producer you like and watch that. The same applies to music. Assume everything fed to you i…

https://www.kexp.org/ Eclectic music curated by real DJ’s, you’re welcome.

https://vintageobscura.net/ https://imr.party/ https://www.nts.live/ https://sohoradiolondon.com https://worldwidefm.net/ https://www.dublab.com/ https://netilradio.com/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_6music https://poolsuite.net/ https://somafm.com/

i only listen to live radio, this is my station rotation (in addition to KEXP)

Re: An odd discovery on Spotify

#349

Post by wldcordeiro »

nosianu wrote: post #131
usednet wrote: post #28

People have been noticing this a lot recently but what nobody seems to know is that this is a form of money laundering/“scamming.” I know because I used to be active on crime forums and talked to some of the people who engineered this scheme. People will set up fake Spotify artist accounts with stolen identities and bank accounts, pay a musician for songs that pass as music, and then bot millions of streams on them.…

That's really interesting - although when I read that story I thought the point was the broken recommendation system. Happens to me a lot on Youtube too - you watch just one thing - and now your recommendations are full of things like that one thing . Or Facebook/Youtube, somehow: I watched a single video on Youtube about Viking sword fighting and suddenly my people recommendations on Facebook were at least 20% milit…

The Youtube algorithm bothers me a lot because they have the subscribe system but as soon as you do subscribe to a channel that channel basically disappears off the recommendations/front page.
Post reply on HN