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

HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

gethiphop.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 163 posts

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#151

Post by krig »

adsr wrote: post #97
krig wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm interested to know what people think about this. Do people think that the end (taking power away from big music industry) justifies the loss for those small-time players, or is it something that simply hasn't been considered at all? My opinion: The end justifies the loss. Secure and private file sharing is going to be essential for ensuring liberty in the future. I am absolutely convinced about that. You can't…

But enabling private communication is not the same as a public free for all. Some information should use private communication, but not be shared publicly, some examples that comes to mind is credit card numbers or private encryption keys.

How do you determine what information is legitimately private and what is not? If the only information that is ever transmitted under encryption is that which your adversary doesn't want you to transmit -- that is, if the only encrypted traffic is communication which the oppressor regime doesn't want to allow -- then the oppressor regime can easily prevent all encrypted traffic from reaching its destination. The only way to fight that is to encrypt everything. And if everything is secret, how do you prevent piracy? You can't. It is impossible.

Thus, the only way piracy is ever going to be fought is through examples being made. A grandmother who inadvertently downloaded Madonnas latest album by mistake is sentenced to pay millions in damages. A teenager listening to her favorite band is sentenced to ten years in prison.

What is worse? Ruining someone's life because they listened to the music they like, or musicians /possibly/ not getting paid as much as they /possibly/ might have earned, were there no internet?

I know what I think is the right response to that. And I say that as a person who once thought he'd make a living making music. Of course, wanting to do that and actually being able to are completely separate things. Perhaps it's not the piracy which is holding the musician back. Perhaps they are just not good enough.

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#152

Post by newaccountfool »

Touche wrote: post #136
brentm wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify has paid artists more than $1B to date, $500 million in 2013 alone. source: http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/

Totals don't speak to individual income, what is the mean, median, and range per artist?

True that, they make pennies, but they do get exposure. But then if your going down the 'Every pirate play is a lost sale' route they should be giving the artists more. Has there been profit data released about spotify? What does there CEO make?

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#153

Post by 1stop »

Argorak wrote: post #140
1stop wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are collating youtube content... So... everything you said is a bit ridiculous.

I take offense in their statement, not the methodology. As I said in other responses: sold differently, I would be perfectly okay with what they are doing.

So you have no problem with the actions... just the rhetoric?

That's an interesting position I've encountered the opposite before, but not this.

Does the rhetoric really matter?

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#154

Post by 1stop »

bsilvereagle wrote: post #105
1stop wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First of all YouTube content is monotised by video ads None of that money goes to the artist... that goes to google... So you are okay with someone else making money of the free labour of artists, but not someone NOT making money of the free labour of artists. Interesting position. > Nobody has the right to decide that something someone else has spent time and money creating should be available for free without the…

> None of that money goes to the artist... that goes to google... Youtube uses an ad-revenue sharing program. So video creators/uploaders do get a share of money from the ad, even if it is marginal.

A tiny fraction sure. But google make a lot more.

So your real issue is with the YouTube API for not supplying ads with content?

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#156

Post by teknologist »

vcherubini wrote: post #106
Argorak wrote: post #69

> We believe that listening to music should always be free and available to everyone, and that only owning it should bare a cost. I hate this entitlement. As if it was their decision. As if they were running a social movement. I am all for open access to arts, but this is the artists decision and not some programmers, just because they can.

"We believe your HipHop software should be open source and available for everyone to investigate."

it is

https://github.com/hiphopapp/hiphop

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#157

Post by lorisg »

TilmanGriesel wrote: post #82
Argorak wrote: post #69

> We believe that listening to music should always be free and available to everyone, and that only owning it should bare a cost. I hate this entitlement. As if it was their decision. As if they were running a social movement. I am all for open access to arts, but this is the artists decision and not some programmers, just because they can.

Completely right! They have to build a spotify / popcorn clone for open, not for commercial music. I took a short look into their source code and I discovered that they are using youtube (google video) for playback, the iTunes API to get the top list, LastFM to get the covers. One song is round about 20MB because they play the entire video. Nothing more then a youtube fronted stitched together from 3 API's and inspir…

Except Google cannot block it so easily : API calls cannot be filtered out from legit ones using API keys or IP addresses

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#159

Post by tiglionabbit »

kuschku wrote: post #55
tiglionabbit wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, video is solved by Amazon Instant Video. They have everything, and it's usually $2-3 a video.

Again, this is a regional problem – in my country we have no Netflix and videos on Amazon Instant Video cost at least 7 or 8$ each (just for renting them for viewing them one time – if you want to view them multiple times, pay 19$) Which means Amazon Instant Video is, if you want to watch videos multiple times, more expensive than buying the DVD or BluRay.

Oh, you're right. I guess I mostly buy TV show episodes.

Re: HipHop: A "Popcorn Time" for music

#160

Post by hiphopapp »

TilmanGriesel wrote: post #82
Argorak wrote: post #69

> We believe that listening to music should always be free and available to everyone, and that only owning it should bare a cost. I hate this entitlement. As if it was their decision. As if they were running a social movement. I am all for open access to arts, but this is the artists decision and not some programmers, just because they can.

Completely right! They have to build a spotify / popcorn clone for open, not for commercial music. I took a short look into their source code and I discovered that they are using youtube (google video) for playback, the iTunes API to get the top list, LastFM to get the covers. One song is round about 20MB because they play the entire video. Nothing more then a youtube fronted stitched together from 3 API's and inspir…

HipHop is using Youtube's 128kbps or 192 audio stream only. It fallbacks on the video in the rare cases Youtube does not provide audio streams.
Post reply on HN