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

591–600 of 661 posts

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#591

Post by Reubend »

madsbuch wrote: post #183
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…

> But when it comes time to pay for content, those people rarely are willing to pony up. You can see this happening with journalism, music, apps, etc. I think this sentiment is wrong. Personally, I pay for content and services that I find value adding (Kagi, Fastmail, etc.) That said: I am never going to pay for YouTube. The issue is that the entire platform and all of its content is catered to ad-revenue . I could b…

> Personally, I pay for content and services that I find value adding... That said: I am never going to pay for YouTube... I am going to keep on my ad-blocker.

So let me get this straight: you proudly claim that you pay for services which provide you value. But you don't think its hypocritical that you use YouTube with an ad-blocker and avoid paying for the subscription?

If you keep going back and using it, then it IS providing you with value. You might argue that the value is very small, but it's also not a big inconvenience to watch a few ads. You're still consuming content without contributing anything back.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#592

Post by madsbuch »

chefandy wrote: post #572
madsbuch wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Your opinion represents everything that stops progress: The idea that we can use moral instead of sane legislation.

I never said I was morally wrong. I merely said that I did not have a moral upper hand. I think I am morally indifferent.

> you must pay all of your music and other content, then

I do in fact pay for my music. I do in fact have news paper subscriptions. I don't think you got my point: I don't both want to pay for my cake on not eat it.

If I pay for content, it should not have sponsorships.

But then again, I did not grow up with paying for satellite TV while also being fed ads 20% of the time watching shows riddled with product placement. In Denmark we have proper public service offerings (that people pay for). In Denmark indie artists regularly receive grants to work on their art.

On the point of supporting artists, by virtue of being a European, I probably have the moral upper hand.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#593

Post by Reubend »

ekianjo wrote: post #206
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…

> Musician deserve to be paid for their work Nobody prevents them from doing live performances, you know?

Live performances are great! But the average person listen to hundreds of different artists through Spotify, and they most certainly don't go to the live performances of all those artists.

I'm not advocating for Spotify in particular. If you can support the musicians more directly, that's even better! But it's not fair to pay nothing, block ads, and then keep consuming content without giving anything back.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#594

Post by madsbuch »

chefandy wrote: post #574
madsbuch wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I live in a country where more than 80% of my salary goes to redistribution. That redistribution also finances artists through grants, education.

I do not believe in your rather narrow sighted way of thinking about how one pays for the artists - that is has to be private, directly for the service, and on commercial terms.

Especially since "me and many people in tech" has probably supported artists way more than you ever will by watching a Sneakers ad.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#596

Post by bayindirh »

NavinF wrote: post #507
hunter2_ wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reduction in soundstage/width is likely due to using "joint stereo" or "intensity stereo" encoder modes, which do things such as mid-side (M-S) conversion (which isn't itself the culprit) in order to give more bits to M (which results in better quality for sounds with high L-R correlation, like vocals) and fewer bits to S (which results in less quality for sounds with low L-R correlation, like a drum kit stereo mik…

Interesting, how can I check if a file was encoded with joint stereo? I've never seen those keywords in ffprobe output Is this only an issue for mp3 or do other codecs also use fewer bits for the difference between channels?

"file" command outputs the encoding used, alongside details.

Usage: "file test.mp3"

Rsult: test.mp3: Audio file with ID3 version 2.3.0, contains: MPEG ADTS, layer III, v1, 320 kbps, 48 kHz, JntStereo

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#597

Post by input_sh »

Spivak wrote: post #589
CharlesW wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too. Spotify may have successfully killed the "open medium" promise of the words "podcast" and "podcasting" as part of their embrace/extend/extinguish strategy, but there are many great podcasting clients that continue to support opencasting, and very few shows exclusive to closed audio platforms like Spotify.

Huh? Does Spotify have any exclusive podcasts worth bothering with? Because I haven't seen the death of open podcasts since every podcast is still on Apple Podcasts.

Spotify pretty much backtracked on paying huge sums for exclusivity about a year ago, and the list of Spotify-exclusive podcasts has definitely gotten a whole lot smaller since then.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#598

Post by recursive »

alerighi wrote: post #344
swozey wrote: post #179

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 sh…

It's not the 10$ a month for Spotify: 10$ to Spotify, 10 to Netflix, another 10 to Disney+, to Now TV/SKY (in my country), to DAZN, to Prime Video, etc. If you sum all the services you have to pay you spend easily more than 100$ a month in streaming services, that is 1200$ a year that is for most person in my country a month of work! And the others would rather spend if for other things, such as a vacation. Finally p…

I subscribe to netflix, and none of the others. You don't have to subscribe to all of them.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#599

Post by recursive »

alerighi wrote: post #514
sudobash1 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> using these proprietary services on Linux or Raspberry Pi etc is not possibile I can't speak to Raspberry Pi (and other non-x86 boards), but on my PC I can listen to Spotify just fine. I don't even have to use Chrome. It works as well on Firefox.

On a PC, yes. But let's say that I want to listen to music in my car, and I have an old stereo (that I don't want to replace) that only has CD and/or USB input. I can't from Spotify just take the music and download it to an USB stick or burn a CD, even with premium (I can download it to play offline, but they are DRM protected and I can play only from the official player)

For most people, that's a solved problem with bluetooth.

Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client

#600

Post by mr_mitm »

Spivak wrote: post #589
CharlesW wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too. Spotify may have successfully killed the "open medium" promise of the words "podcast" and "podcasting" as part of their embrace/extend/extinguish strategy, but there are many great podcasting clients that continue to support opencasting, and very few shows exclusive to closed audio platforms like Spotify.

Huh? Does Spotify have any exclusive podcasts worth bothering with? Because I haven't seen the death of open podcasts since every podcast is still on Apple Podcasts.

I've seen a few German productions. There is a worthwhile podcast about the wirecard debacle produced by a big German news outlet that was exclusive to Spotify.
Post reply on HN