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

Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

funkwhale.audio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 306 posts

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#281

Post by SamBam »

tegiddrone wrote: post #212

This looks nice! I am really interested in this space because I have a long build collection of mp3s and I'm not as interested in yielding to Spotify but I'm not always at the same computer or building for the accessibility. Thus far I've been using mStream https://mstream.io/ with decent success. You can federate collections with your friends. My tries with NFS or SSHFS doesn't work reliably on windows/mobile hosts,…

mStream does look very nice and straightforward. Is there any better UI for seeing all your music than what appears to be just a file dialog?

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#282

Post by tomc1985 »

crispyambulance wrote: post #172
greggman3 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which music service's discovery features actually work? For me the only one that worked was Google Play Music. The rest have been total and utter crap at discovery.

> Which music service's discovery features actually work? It depends on what you mean by "work". Discovery capabilities have certainly gotten vastly better. 10+ years ago, the only decent one was the now (effectively) defunct Last.fm. These days, they're all pretty good. Spotify, pandora, google music, and now youtube music will do a good job of giving you recommendations based strictly on what you've been cue-ing up…

DJs should be in your list -- downloading tracklists from sets that I like is my #1 method for discovering new music

Find a couple DJs you like, download everything you can from their soundcloud or mixcloud, then give it a listen. Keeping Shazam close by is also helpful

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#283

Post by sjy »

rglullis wrote: post #277
sjy wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which copyright law are you talking about? My impression is that streaming a reasonably large collection of copyrighted music (say 10,000 tracks) to a reasonable number of friends (say 10) would not be considered fair use by U.S. courts. The RIAA doesn’t sue people for this because it’s hard to detect and the damages are too small to cover legal costs, not because they accept it as fair use. In the Betamax case, the…

How is this different from the case of a dude with a big CD collection and a copier who tell his friends "bring blank cds and burn copies if you want anything"? Who would they sue, how would they monitor the usage and how would they enforce anything? With torrents and big sites it's easy to show who is distributing what and the distribution can be done by anyone. This is a decentralized tool that can have its access…

One difference is that blank CDs cost money. In the Betamax case the cost of blank tapes was one reason why time-shifting was not seen as a serious threat to the market that copyright laws are intended to support, because it made it hard to build up a big library. But in any case, I think the RIAA would say that both the CD dude and the Funkwhale dude are infringing copyright, and U.S. courts would agree.

It’s true that enforcement is a practical challenge. However, the developers of the Funkwhale software are probably not as decentralised as the operators of Funkwhale pods. Copyright holders could potentially get future development shut down on the basis that the service implicitly authorises or encourages copyright infringement, as they are trying to do to youtube-dl. The details depend on where the developers live, but this strategy has worked for some tools like Napster, KaZaA, and some BitTorrent trackers, while failing for BitTorrent clients. Which side of the line will Funkwhale fall on?

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#286

Post by anta40 »

dvno42 wrote: post #19

I've been using this for a little over a year and like it a lot but it lacks the music discovery features of commercial platforms (which becomes important when you have terabytes of music) and takes a lot of effort to organize music and create play lists. The music onboarding process typically starts with organizing metadata with Musicbrainz Picard then import the collection into Funkwhale's DB via a cli admin tool.…

Cool, will setup this at weekend.

I still heavily use Spotify. Yet I hate knowing some tracks are not playable (permission/copyright issue perhaps?).

Time to re-organize my MP3 collection, then.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#287

Post by 29083011397778 »

ezst wrote: post #77
gwillz wrote: post #60

This is great! I used to run a Subsonic server for myself but it kind of fell apart because the licensing in version 6 kind of broke the community around it. But it looks like this supports the same Subsonic protocol, which is pretty great. It's cool to not only take inspiration from predecessors but to also support and build on the same ecosystem.

Airsonic is what I went for after the licensing woes, recommended if you liked the server-side UI and want to keep the old data. If you think you won't miss accessing your tracks by directory, navidrome (written in go) has a smaller footprint and is quite actively developed (but the web UI is rather awkward)

> but the web UI is rather awkward

But does it work? My airsonic install consistently fails to play the next track at my work computer using the browser client.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#288

Post by deepstack »

black6 wrote: post #104
deepstack wrote: post #98

wow, totally support decentralized stuff like this. wonder how long will this get taken down like popcorn time?

It uses the ActivityPub protocol, so all someone has to do is spin up another instance in the fediverse (there are already many) if one gets taken down.

Nice! what about the list of instances that is running? Is that on DHT? Or are there some protocol level stuff in the Funkwhale to announce the instance over gossip protocol or something like that?

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#289

Post by deepstack »

deepstack wrote: post #98

wow, totally support decentralized stuff like this. wonder how long will this get taken down like popcorn time?

Also maybe a good idea not to rely on github, so we don't get another youtube-dl incident again. Knew MS is going to screw up something when they took over github.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#290

Post by vidarh »

crispyambulance wrote: post #276
vidarh wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "people who liked this song also liked that song" is that very often I don't want to listen to that song now even if it's something I really love. If I'm listening to ambient music I don't suddenly want to be ambushed by something uptempo. If I'm listening to e.g. Debussy, you might be excused for suggesting something vaguely new age in a similar mood and tempo, but certainly not rock. Another proble…

> you can't just take raw overlap in tastes, because some people like "everything", and the fact their tastes overlap with mine does not mean I'll like everything else they like. I think that these recommendation systems, especially youtube's, are much more nuanced than you're suggesting. And I say this as someone who finds these recommendation systems lacking and of limited utility compared to discovery from reading…

I'm sure they are more nuanced in that of course they will take into account differences in breadth etc. to some extent, but they are clearly not nuanced enough, because they barely work.

> Also, "genre" and "mood" of a piece of music are not easy to define, let alone measure. You're asking for a lot and I don't think what you're asking for is realistic from a piece of software.

Yet I think if you asked a bunch of humans to attach labels to tracks they like, you'd find they overlap closely enough.

I base that on the fact that while many will struggle to identify niche sub-genres or discriminate between genres they don't listen to, people certainly have a relatively large shared idea about major classifications.

What is more: You'd be able to find the labels of people who usually label the same way as you.

And it doesn't need to be precise. It just needs to better.

Post reply on HN