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

Backing up Spotify

annas-archive.li

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 732 posts

Re: Backing up Spotify

#281

Post by basisword »

chrneu wrote: post #159
cm2012 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leak will also be really useful to bad actors who will resell the music from this list without paying royalties to the artists.

this argument is so tired. most artists dont really care about streaming or selling their music. most of their real money comes from touring, merch, and people somehow interacting with them. most musicians just want to make music, express themselves, and connect with folks who enjoy their stuff or want to make music with em. Even some of the largest artists in the world only receive a few grand a year from streaming.…

Ah so you're only stealing a bit of money from the artists. That's ok then.

Re: Backing up Spotify

#282

Post by DrammBA »

dmicah wrote: post #218
Spivak wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in no way saying that this is cheap but 300 TB will set you back a little less than $6k with tax. Very attainable for people other than OpenAI and Facebook. And it's not crazy at all to snag a server with enough bays to house all those.

For reference, considering you can purchase a 12-month Spotify Premium subscription via a $99 gift card at the moment, that same $6k could be used for 60 years of Spotify Premium.

For reference, cosidering the backup has 86 million music files, at an average of 3 minutes per file it would take you around 490 years to listen to all the tracks.

Re: Backing up Spotify

#283

Post by silcoon »

Aurornis wrote: post #21
crazygringo wrote: post #11

This is insane. I definitely was not aware Spotify DRM had been cracked to enable downloading at scale like this. The thing is, this doesn't even seem particularly useful for average consumers/listeners, since Spotify itself is so convenient, and trying to locate individual tracks in massive torrent files of presumably 10,000's of tracks each sounds horrible. But this does seem like it will be a godsend for researche…

> The thing is, this doesn't even seem particularly useful for average consumers/listeners, since Spotify itself is so convenient, and trying to locate individual tracks in massive torrent files of presumably 10,000's of tracks each sounds horrible. I wouldn’t be so sure. There are already tools to automatically locate and stream pirated TV and movie content automatic and on demand. They’re so common that I had non-t…

> The Anna’s archive group is ideologically motivated.

Anna’s archive business is stealing copyrighted content and selling access to it. It's not ideologically motivated.

What ideology is about pirating books and music where most of the people producing this stuff cannot afford to do it full-time? It's not like pirating movies, software and large videogame studios, which is still piracy, but they also make big money and they don't act all the time in the interests of the users.

Writers and musicians are mostly broken. If we sum the rising cost of living, AI generated content and piracy, there's almost no reward left for their work. Anna’s archive is contributing to the art and culture decadence. They sell you premium bandwidth for downloading and training your AIs on copyrighted content, so soon we can all generate more and more slop.

Re: Backing up Spotify

#284

Post by MarcelOlsz »

flxy wrote: post #75
Etheryte wrote: post #28

To put this into perspective, What.CD [0] was widely considered to be the music library of Alexandria, unparalleled in both its high quality standard and it's depth. What had in the ballpark of a few million torrents when it got raided and shut down. Anna's rip of Spotify includes roughly 186 million unique records. Granted, the tail end is a mixed bag of bot music and whatnot, but the scale is staggering. [0] https:…

I think what earned what.cd that title wasn't necessarily just the amount but the quality, as you mentioned, as well as the obscurity of a lot of the offered material. I remember finding an early EP of an unknown local band on there, and I live in the middle of nowhere in Europe. There were also quite a few really old and niche records on there which possibly couldn't be put on streaming services due to the ownership…

email me please

Re: Backing up Spotify

#285

Post by lysace »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #251
lysace wrote: post #247

[flagged]

Why... does Putin like music more than the next guy?

Why would you want to destroy your enemies' industries, is what you're asking?

Although I suppose that is predicated on seeing Russia as the enemy. Strangely not always the norm these days in the new world.

Re: Backing up Spotify

#286

Post by ThatMedicIsASpy »

cedws wrote: post #277
cm2012 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leak will also be really useful to bad actors who will resell the music from this list without paying royalties to the artists.

I just started DJing and something I quickly noticed is how garbage Spotify's music sounds compared to FLACs I've purchased. The max bitrate is very low.

tidal is a thing and can be scraped the same way. I wonder how big that collection would be as it can go from 50mb to 300mb for 3min

Re: Backing up Spotify

#288

Post by ZeWaka »

Since the article asks:

> We're curious about the peaks at whole minutes (particularly 2:00, 3:00, 4:00). If you know why this is, please let us know!

As a hobby video/audio editor, people will start with their track taking up a preset amount and fill up the time - even if it means having some dead space at the end.

The other alternative is algorithmically created music.

Re: Backing up Spotify

#289

Post by nemomarx »

ZeWaka wrote: post #288

Since the article asks: > We're curious about the peaks at whole minutes (particularly 2:00, 3:00, 4:00). If you know why this is, please let us know! As a hobby video/audio editor, people will start with their track taking up a preset amount and fill up the time - even if it means having some dead space at the end. The other alternative is algorithmically created music.

I've heard 2:00 is some kinda sweet spot for the Spotify algorithm and payouts? You get paid per play so you don't want to it too long, but if your track is much shorter than two minutes you get penalized or something. I know they've had to remove ambient tracks that were cut into 40 second clips as part of this.

So you might see a lot of anchoring just like YouTube videos kept stretching to almost exactly ten minutes?

Post reply on HN