Can I specify "don't ever play/show me AI music" in my preferences? Then they can remove the badges also.
This is what I want. Unfortunately it's probably not going to happen
Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
271–280 of 329 posts
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it does something good for you, then you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made. You are letting your mind overwrite a genuine response you had based on an opinion that "it should not feel good because it's AI made". As I said in another comment - intelectualization.
> you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made That is not what they said. This reads like you're replying to a previous post and ignoring the actual explanation they gave.
It's my interpretation of "only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated" in this context
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The more appropriate question is why they published a AI artist at all. Because they allow anyone to upload to Spotify. There's nothing stopping me, you, or anyone from generating AI tracks with Suno & friends, downloading them, and using a service like LANDR or Amuse to distribute them to Spotify, all for free. > Like Spotify owns distribution, their largest investor Tencent Music Entertainment Group publishes AI-…
I basically only listen to AI music now... https://www.youtube.com/@EndlessTaverns
You couldn’t waterboard this sort of confession out of me. Imagine proclaiming publicly that you have zero-taste and only consume AI slop
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#274And what if a verified human artist uses AI for their music but doens't
tell you about it?
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right on what they're doing, but not the why: 1. They're getting the short end of the deal with music licensing (as are artists, btw) 2. They can't pay the artists more: the vast majority of the money goes to labels 3. The only way Spotify can grow profits if it moves to content that's not under the iron grip of the labels: podcasts, audiobooks, etc. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47783435
And yet somehow TIDAL is able to between three and four times the royalties per stream that Spotify does. Maybe Spotify could pay Joe Rogan a little less than a quarter billion dollars for a couple of years of podcasts.
> And yet somehow TIDAL is able to between three and four times the royalties per stream that Spotify does.
Looks like they do allocation differently between popular and indie artists, but the overall share, as percentage of revenue, is similar from what I've found searching online. The major record labels pressing for an allocation algorithm that favors them is kinda obvious.
This means that for an indie artist TIDAL is probably better - but not because Spotify itself is paying less, but because TIDAL was able to avoid being pressed into paying larger share to the record labels.
We get these numbers thrown online without saying if it's comparing direct artist payout, which plans are counted (Spotify has free plans, and free users are still counted in streams), is the artist indie, niche with record contract or very popular with record contract.
See: https://www.reddit.com/r/TIdaL/comments/1jxkoil/tidal_pays_a...
I don't listen to podcasts in general, wouldn't listen to Rogan even if I did listen to podcasts, and I buy (rent, tbh) my audiobooks from another evil company.
But even if they spent all that money on artists, the payouts would rise by 0.75% (percent of current, not cents): $11B artist payouts in 2025, $250M Rogan multi-year contract, assuming 3 years: 100 x (0.25 ÷ 3) ÷ 11 = 0.75%
Also, it doesn't make sense to compare a niche indie music artist with the most popular podcaster in the world. You should compare mega-stars with mega-stars.
Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny, Drake, The Weekend and Ariana Grande - neither of which I ever want to listen to on Spotify or anywhere else - got more money from Spotify than Rogan. (https://www.thestreet.com/entertainment/highest-paid-artists...)
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right on what they're doing, but not the why: 1. They're getting the short end of the deal with music licensing (as are artists, btw) 2. They can't pay the artists more: the vast majority of the money goes to labels 3. The only way Spotify can grow profits if it moves to content that's not under the iron grip of the labels: podcasts, audiobooks, etc. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47783435
You're forgetting: 4. Once Spotify wrests power from the labels, they start the enshitification process themselves.
I'm old school - I tend not to blame people (or companies, for that matter) now for things they might do in the future.
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the creator's perspective. From a listener's perspective, it's "do I enjoy it" or "do I not enjoy it". Everything else is intellectualization.
But that means nothing. There's no raw "enjoy", except maybe drugs, and I have my doubts about that.
> There's no raw "enjoy"
What do you mean?
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
why does it matter to you if it's AI or not? if you enjoy a song you shouldn't resent it just because it's AI generated. Me personally there's many AI songs that I like and enjoy listening to.
Because I care about art being a human endeavor. AI doesn't create art, it regurgitates an unidentifiable goop churned together in its stomach by all the crap its eaten. There is no thought. There is no feeling. There is no meaning. If you only care about the sound, that's cool, enjoy it, but I don't.
When a human makes a I IV V it's art
When a machine does it, soulless
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made That is not what they said. This reads like you're replying to a previous post and ignoring the actual explanation they gave.
It's my interpretation of "only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated" in this context
The key words are "there is none". It's not the label, it's the lack of the person writing those lyrics.
Re: Spotify adds 'Verified' badges to distinguish human artists from AI
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
There are underexplored musical genres?
There's currently a serious lack of banjo and didgeridoo collaboration, aside from that one human band from Elcho Island.
Clearly the world needs Clankers to bridge the shortfall of six fingered circular mouth breathers /s