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

Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 661 posts

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#171

Post by micromacrofoot »

Reubend wrote: post #3

While it's nice to have an open source client, please think twice about bypassing the premium subscription/ads to listen for free. Musician deserve to be paid for their work, and it's not fair to them to bypass all of the mechanisms to do that. Spotify doesn't pay musicians well, but there are still indie artists making a living from it nonetheless. I hear a lot of people these days complaining about ads, and that's…

if you think musicians should be paid for their work then you shouldn’t be using music streaming at all

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#172

Post by lxgr »

westhanover wrote: post #118
apwell23 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is an example of an artist not on bandcamp . This is what i am listening currently on spotify( I have no idea who this is) Odeon Yılları Album by Nesrin Sipahi

So mail her a check? Do we have to think of everything for you?

How do I find an artist’s mailing address? And what is a check?

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#173

Post by scosman »

Reubend wrote: post #3

While it's nice to have an open source client, please think twice about bypassing the premium subscription/ads to listen for free. Musician deserve to be paid for their work, and it's not fair to them to bypass all of the mechanisms to do that. Spotify doesn't pay musicians well, but there are still indie artists making a living from it nonetheless. I hear a lot of people these days complaining about ads, and that's…

“ It is still recommended to support the creators by watching/liking/subscribing to the artists' YouTube channels or liking their tracks on Spotify (or purchasing a Spotify Premium subscription too)”

Likes/subscribes are not support. Artists deserve to make a living.

I’m supremely frustrated by the current state of TV shows (need 8 subscriptions and still have shows I can’t watch). Music on the other hand is wonderful. Many services to choose from, all including basically all music. Different price points for ads/quality level. We should be delighted to pay $10 a month for unlimited music (or free ad supported) and not ruin a good thing.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#174

Post by yellow_lead »

denysvitali wrote: post #152
nunez wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, THAT is Hacker News worthy.

To be fair it would be more HN worthy if they managed to reverse engineer the DRM of Spotify to create a custom client without the Spotify library (which only works for Premium users)

There are bypass methods here for almost all platforms: https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/14rszaw/v3_the_ulti...

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#175

Post by unnamed76ri »

richrichardsson wrote: post #131
gnfargbl wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean the changes declared in https://artists.spotify.com/en/blog/modernizing-our-royalty-... , then I find it hard to reconcile the description given there with your editorialization.

> Starting in early 2024, tracks must have reached at least 1,000 streams in the previous 12 months in order to generate recorded royalties. This will take my Spotify income from pitiful to non-existent. Fuck Spotify.

As soon as this change was announced, I cancelled my Spotify subscription. I know it won’t mean much of anything to the overall number but at least in my case, they saved less than $10 in royalties at a cost of $132 in subscription fees.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#176

Post by amomchilov »

devjab wrote: post #56
monsieurbanana wrote: post #4

For something that puts "not using electron" so prominently I didn't expect it using flutter. I admit I don't really have much experience with it, I thought it was like react-native (but better?), still far from truly native apps. Im here to being told I'm wrong. I would love to, specially since we can transpile clojure to dart

I’m sort of surprised it’s considered a good thing. Some of my favourite programs use electron, like visual studio code. I haven’t used Spotify though, so maybe that is one of the many electron apps that suck? I was very unimpressed by flutter when we PoC it at work, but that was years ago, so maybe it’s gotten better since.

VSCode couldn't support multiple windows until just recently, entirely because of a limitation from the early days of Electron.

When "multiple windows" is a feature to be announced (as if weren't trivial on any native stack), you know it's a sad state is affairs.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#177

Post by unnamed76ri »

gnfargbl wrote: post #40
unnamed76ri wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know where you get your info but Spotify just effectively demonetized the majority of music on their platform. They’ve decided they have the right to just stop paying small time artists so they can funnel more money upwards to the record labels.

If you mean the changes declared in https://artists.spotify.com/en/blog/modernizing-our-royalty-... , then I find it hard to reconcile the description given there with your editorialization.

Taking the news directly from Spotify? Try this for another perspective: https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2024/01/11/spotify-stream-m...

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#178

Post by apwell23 »

marcomourao wrote: post #166
apwell23 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39066807 curious how do ppl discover your band on bandcamp?

Through Bandcamp itself, social media, music blogs...

does bandcamp give you this info?

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#179

Post by swozey »

The lengths that literal engineers will go to to not have to pay $10/mo for music or $3 to rent a movie in 4k immediately.

Can't believe I have adult friends who make 70-300k and they still pirate based on money, not quality/directors-cuts/anti-cheats, etc. I quit pirating when I got a real job and could afford to pay developers and movie teams for their effort.

I write software. I want to get paid too, right? Why shouldn't they?

And I pirated EVERYTHING as a kid/teenager. I had no money. Sketch Russian warez site? I'm in!

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#180

Post by gr__or »

scosman wrote: post #173
Reubend wrote: post #3

While it's nice to have an open source client, please think twice about bypassing the premium subscription/ads to listen for free. Musician deserve to be paid for their work, and it's not fair to them to bypass all of the mechanisms to do that. Spotify doesn't pay musicians well, but there are still indie artists making a living from it nonetheless. I hear a lot of people these days complaining about ads, and that's…

“ It is still recommended to support the creators by watching/liking/subscribing to the artists' YouTube channels or liking their tracks on Spotify (or purchasing a Spotify Premium subscription too)” Likes/subscribes are not support. Artists deserve to make a living. I’m supremely frustrated by the current state of TV shows (need 8 subscriptions and still have shows I can’t watch). Music on the other hand is wonderfu…

It should probably be said that the cuts artists get from the streamers are seen as insufficient and that platforms where you give more directly to artists, like BandCamp, are a better way to support artists you like.
Post reply on HN