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

571–580 of 661 posts

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#571

Post by selfmodruntime »

jjulius wrote: post #294
selfmodruntime wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Convenient for users, but you'd be hard-pressed to find artists who are content with the payments they get from Spotify. And that's across the spectrum, from world-famous pop artists to indie artists struggling to get heard. You're aware that you're in a thread for a tool which circumvents payments?

Well aware, but thanks for that snark. Might as well still ask people to support artists they love in a thread related to pirating, right?

in my opinion, you're much better off buying merch / vinyls online.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#572

Post by chefandy »

madsbuch wrote: post #563
chefandy wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am quite sure I do not have the ethical card in any of these discussions. Realizing that you’re doing something unethical is philosophically better than denying the obvious. However, as a commercial artist, I’m not really interested in any gussied-up justification beyond that statement.

as a commercial artist you should not tinker in ethics but try to sell and make some. money staying within the law. tbh,i hate moralization over what I decide to consume. If I should consume less travel for the sake of the environment, make it more expensive by taxing it. if you want to earn more money as a commercial artist, don't morally trip me into something I am not legally obligated to (watching ads), but deliv…

I actually make plenty of money as a very technical commercial artist coming from a dev background, but thanks for your condescending and presumptuous concern. Believe it or not, I actually care enough about people who aren’t even me to point out when people are doing something materially unfair just because they can. If you hate people commenting on your admittedly unethical behavior, you might consider not publicly discussing it.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#573

Post by Ger_Onimo »

ang_cire wrote: post #495
iamsaitam wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that the musicians still deserve to get paid from streaming. Ridiculous nonsense to say that if something isn't well remunerated, might as well go the illegal route and not pay anything at all.

Not ridiculous at all. If you use the service that pays the artists below the value, you are endorsing that underpayment. You're literally voting with your wallet that underpaying the artists is fine. Pirating doesn't support the artists, but it's also not weakening their expected rights for future business contracts, which supporting services like Spotify does; after all, if all these other artists are getting paid…

> near-100% cut that streaming services take

All the main music services operate on the 70/30 split in favour of the license holders.

If you pay $10 for a subscription, $7 gets put into a pool with all the subscription and ad revenue for your country, and that gets divided out proportionally based on the playback in your country. If Taylor Swift gets 10% of the plays in the US, she gets 10% of the pot.

If you're of the opinion that pirating artists' music is better for them in the long run, that's cool. But at least be informed on what the business model you're complaining about actually entails.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#574

Post by chefandy »

madsbuch wrote: post #563
chefandy wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am quite sure I do not have the ethical card in any of these discussions. Realizing that you’re doing something unethical is philosophically better than denying the obvious. However, as a commercial artist, I’m not really interested in any gussied-up justification beyond that statement.

as a commercial artist you should not tinker in ethics but try to sell and make some. money staying within the law. tbh,i hate moralization over what I decide to consume. If I should consume less travel for the sake of the environment, make it more expensive by taxing it. if you want to earn more money as a commercial artist, don't morally trip me into something I am not legally obligated to (watching ads), but deliv…

PS: I also specifically noted that I wasn’t suggesting getting rid of your ad blocker. I think the ad-driven surveillance capitalism model is a scourge on humanity, and I hope, for your sake, that you never have to see another ad, or be tracked by some creepy spy network ever again. But you, like many other people in tech, conveniently ignore the practically limitless sources of entertainment you can pay for directly and use your distaste of ad-driven platforms to not pay artists at all. And then, people usually talk about it like is some kind of activism rather than pure entitlement. Is especially great when people cite how poorly those platforms pay artists to justify not paying artists at all. lol

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#575

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

dangus wrote: post #540
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily for me, I don't feel like my employer has tasked me with working against our users interests. I want them to succeed at the things they're trying to do and I'm working in support of that goal. But if things were otherwise? Then yes, the users should either walk away or they should circumvent whatever handcuffs I'm hypothetically building for them. In that scenario, I'd absolutely participate in cutting my emp…

Sounds like a pretty luxurious position to be in. I wonder if your local Walmart associate ever thought of working for a more morally upstanding company? Maybe they could start their own retailer with better values. Should be pretty easy to spin up some distribution centers right?

Agreed, I'm fortunate, as are many of us on this site. We have opportunities to keep the powerful in check that others do not. Therefore we have a responsibility to take advantage of those opportunities, because it's a bit much to ask the Walmart employees to do so.

Also, you seem to me implying that a malware author and a shelf stocker are equally culpable for the actions of their employer, which is an odd sort of moral stance to take. Treating your users like enemies is a rather direct thing, and working for someone who behaves badly in some dimension unrelated to your work is quite another.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#576

Post by gitaarik »

petesergeant wrote: post #64
drewdevault wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Direct your passion for getting musicians paid to Spotify and the distribution system, not to this. If everyone who uses this software were to use Spotify direct, ads and all, in the long run it would make pennies for the artists at best. You're better off listening to music however you please and buying albums on Bandcamp to support the artists; a lifetime of spotify listening will make less money for an artist you…

> Direct your passion for getting musicians paid to Spotify and the distribution system Spotify pay 70% of their revenue back to the rights holders, leaving 30% for operating costs and profits. What percentages would you recommend, and what are you basing it on?

If you would pay $0.01 per song on Spotify. Then if you listen to an artist's album of 10 songs for a 100 times, so 1000 song plays of $0.01, that is $10. Spotify takes 30% cut, then the artist gets $7 and Spotify gets $3. Now if 10,000 people listen to the album a 100 times, the artist gets $70,000 and Spotify $30.000.

What the artist needs to do for this is come up with the songs, work them out, practice them with a band, record, produce, mix, artwork, release, promo.

For Spotify to release the album on their platform, they just need to sign a deal with the artist and add the album to their library. And this process is obviously largely (if not fully) automated. Of course they have some infrastructure and costs for this, but I think they're much better off than the artists.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#577

Post by fngjdflmdflg »

kevincox wrote: post #28
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

Flutter is pretty native as far as resource usage goes. The language does use a VM and GC but it's performant enough. There isn't native look and feel though. (They can emulate it a bit, but it isn't perfect)

Flutter doesn't use a VM for release builds anymore. (Still GCed obviously).

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#578

Post by fngjdflmdflg »

stolsvik wrote: post #560
jwells89 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I knew it had significant performance issues on iOS (framerate drops/stutters), which dampens its cross platform appeal somewhat and is part of why I’ve heard of apps using Flutter for the Android port of their app, but nowhere else.

How old is that info? We’re using it, and it is buttery smooth on both phone platforms.

Not that old. Only when Impeller was enabled by default last year did Flutter become usable on ios.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#579

Post by fngjdflmdflg »

tristenharr wrote: post #519
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 was surprised when I learned Flutter actually runs as native code without needing a JavaScript bridge like so many others. Although similar to something like React Native - Flutter does paint the screen. Personally I see it as a potential Electron replacement in the future. From what I’ve seen Impeller is also a big help on iOS. Screen jank was pretty bad for us when Flutter was using Skia as a rendering engine, al…

>can anyone comment as to if it’s “there” yet or not?

It's enabled for ios by default. Android probably in two more releases if I had to guess. If you were doing a lot of custom stuff you may run into issues with Impeller on some CPU bound tasks regarding tessellation but for a regular flutter app it will almost always outperform Skia especially around previous pain points like scrolling and animation.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#580

Post by jjulius »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #571
jjulius wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well aware, but thanks for that snark. Might as well still ask people to support artists they love in a thread related to pirating, right?

in my opinion, you're much better off buying merch / vinyls online.

Right, which is why I said...

>... if people are really digging a piece of music then please buy it directly from the label, the artist, etc. via other means, if possible.

Post reply on HN