Already sort of built this a while ago at https://parallelsocial.net
Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
641–650 of 661 posts
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#642For 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
People will always complain, but in reality you can make an electron app which no one will distinguish from a native app, and you can make a native app which will lag so hard that it would feel like a browser page from 2004. People just like to put the label "electron" or "flutter" on it and base their blames on that.
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#643Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> But it's not fair to pay nothing, When you listen to the radio you pay for nothing. I don't really see where is the injustice here.
The radio station does pay royalties to the artists. And in case you forgot, they play ads as well. Sure, you can "skip" ads by switching to a different station, but the point remains that they compensate artists.
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#644Earlier 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…
> a lifetime of spotify listening will make less money for an artist you like than buying a single album from them on Bandcamp. This is false. And I mean, dramatically. > Even if you only listen to one artist, 8 hours per day, 365 days a year, they will earn a whopping... 100 bucks from Spotify. It's roughly 200$. Number of songs per hour: 60 minutes / 3 minutes per song = 20 songs Total listening hours per year: 8 h…
The problem is with streaming really. Come to a shop where physical works of music are sold, everything is free for listening there. Come to bandcamp – where you can buy and own a digital album, everything is free for listening there. Come to spotify - here you pay to a middle man, who decides whatever crap cut he will pay to a musician per play button pressed – it is instantly visible the whole model is not viable and only makes the middle-man really profit
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#645Nifty. Please be aware that this is not a "spotify client" per se. It gets the data from Spotify, and plays the audio from YouTube. It's an interesting invention, and worthy of the first page, if you ask me.
> It gets the data from Spotify, and plays the audio from YouTube.
How soon before they modify their apis to stop that?
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#646If you also integrate Soundcloud, this could be the One-Stop-Shop for all music needs. I've had a Spotify Premium subscription for almost 10 years now, but whenever a song is not available there and it's only on YouTube I wish there was a way to integrate them.
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not the fault, nor responsibility, of developers and API access. API access (interop) is a digital human right. If companies can't be profitable without restricting that then that's a deficiency upon them and their gormless VCs
> API access (interop) is a digital human right I'm with it on this idea, but comparing it to a "human right" will not lead to the desired response in non-tech people, who will write off the idea as taking the Internet too seriously if phrased that way. A human right carries a much heavier, more fundamental connotation than just a right on its own Even if you consider it a human right, might be better to brand it dif…
Respectfully, I'm not trying to win people over or proselytize. This is what I believe strongly and I'm not trying to make it digestible. It is what it is.
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#648It's puzzling to me how much excitement this is suddenly generating on HN. Yes, mixing Spotify playlists with a YouTube frontend is a great idea, but in no way is this new. Anyone following the app modding scene on XDA-Developers (pre-enshittification) or Telegram has likely seen atleast half a dozen apps that have been implementing the same thing for the last five years.
What happened to xda?
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#649Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then just host it elsewhere. Spotify isn't an American company and not everyone who uses Spotify lives in America.
The implicit question of: > Would be far less worthy if, by the time we get to the README, we only get to see a take down notice from Github. Instigated by Spotify for breach of not sure what. was what violation would cause Github specifically to take it down, not whether it could ever find a host. The parent brought up Github, not I.
I picked Github simply because Spotube happen to have been pushed there.
And because Github is by far the most popular platform to host projects that gets discovered.
And because they've taken down many projects in the past, blocking broadwide access not just from jurisdictions where not sure what non ethical law makes not certain what illegal.
Re: Spotube: Open-source Spotify-Youtube client
#650Earlier quoted context omitted.
$250 for Windows?? You’re off by an order of magnitude, just buy it from a reseller: g2a.com/search?query=Windows I’ve never had a problem with that site.
It used to be the case that they were all keys that aren't technically allowed to be resold per their agreement. Either OEM or business copies and the like. So really we're back to some form of piracy because Windows is too expensive.
You say that used to be the case; has that changed? How does it work now?