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

291–300 of 306 posts

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#291

Post by ngold »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #244
xook wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throwing this out here - Airsonic is the current FOSS iteration of the software https://airsonic.github.io/ Subsonic went closed, and the rebrand to LibreSonic had some unrest with the maintainer, so Airsonic is leading the way in the line of *Sonics.

Or if you want something that can run easily on a RaspberryPi but still gives you Subsonic compatibility, try https://github.com/sentriz/gonic

This is a great link, I've been looking for a pi project and a music server sounds really spiffy.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#293

Post by Johan-bjareholt »

anderspitman wrote: post #265
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.…

> There is an unofficial mobile client called Otter that makes listening to music on Android very pleasent Is there some reason servers like this require a special client? Can't you just provide URLs to m3u8s which in turn have URLs to mp3s? Is it just that there isn't an agreed-upon protocol for listing directories? Or maybe auth concerns?

And maybe for creating playlists? And maybe for modifying playlists? And maybe for searching for songs/albums/artists? And maybe for modifying metadata?

Considering all these features that needs to be supported it makes sense IMO that it's a specific protocol.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#294

Post by escalt »

sir_brickalot wrote: post #257

There is one Spotify feature I started enjoying lately: Seamless playback between all connected players (including Chromecast) and every instance works as a remote for the other players. Just great!! Any FOSS service with this set of features?

With Jellyfin (more geared towards movies than music) you can use your clients as a remote for another currently playing client

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#295

Post by squarefoot »

A word about Clementine, the desktop player: it's powerful, very complete and works well, however it's literally huge, consumes a lot of resources and has some serious memory leaks that if left on for days will either make it eat all system memory, or die without any errors. This doesn't happen in normal use, it has to be left on for a few days, in fact I'm using it extensively, however it's still really too heavy. I'd be all for a lighter less demanding player.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#296

Post by rglullis »

sjy wrote: post #283
rglullis wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Sorry, your whole argument smells of FUD.

> One difference is that blank CDs cost money.

So does internet access, electricity to run the servers, disks to store the data. Your point?

> 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.

Bullshit. The same argument could be made against a web browser. It's not just because RIAA is making some absurd claim that is yet to be dropped in court that their claims are valid.

Also, even if the RIAA managed to block access to a central point of development, it would be at most a nuisance. Developers of whatever project gets blocked from Github need to do nothing youtube-dl

> this strategy has worked for some tools like Napster, KaZaA, and some BitTorrent trackers. while failing for BitTorrent clients.

Very easy to see how the strategy only works against corporations, not against open source projects. KaZaA got sued, but GnuTella lives on.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#297

Post by dvdgsng »

Kaze404 wrote: post #272
dvdgsng wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they banned folks for really minor reasons from their Matrix channel, e.g. saying "Hi guys, I have a question about ..." can get you banned. So no, this CoC leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth for the entire project.

I have no memories of that happening. They'll probably tell your not to use the word "guys" in that context though, which is fair imo.

it happend on Wed, Apr 24 2019, if you want to review it.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#298

Post by sjy »

rglullis wrote: post #296
sjy wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Sorry, your whole argument smells of FUD. > One difference is that blank CDs cost money. So does internet access, electricity to run the servers, disks to store the data. Your point? > 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. Bullshit. The same argument could be…

My point is that the courts decide what constitutes “fair use,” and based on past decisions, I don’t think they would agree that using Funkwhale to share 10,000 tracks with 10 friends counts. Until a court says otherwise, it’s not FUD, bullshit or absurd to point out that these tools exist in a legal grey area.

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#299

Post by reimbar »

tchaffee wrote: post #2

How do musicians get paid on this platform?

Donations, according to the creators of Funkwhale.

Some comments here are making assumptions about the motivations/ethical principles of the developers, but how about reading directly what they say?

It turns out that they've been thinking quite a lot about this problem: https://agate.blue/blog/2018/05/11/funkwhale-content-monetiz...

Re: Funkwhale – Decentralized, self-hosted music server

#300

Post by rglullis »

sjy wrote: post #298
rglullis wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, your whole argument smells of FUD. > One difference is that blank CDs cost money. So does internet access, electricity to run the servers, disks to store the data. Your point? > 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. Bullshit. The same argument could be…

My point is that the courts decide what constitutes “fair use,” and based on past decisions, I don’t think they would agree that using Funkwhale to share 10,000 tracks with 10 friends counts. Until a court says otherwise, it’s not FUD, bullshit or absurd to point out that these tools exist in a legal grey area.

And my point is that claiming it to be in a "legal grey area" is the absurd part. Funkwhale is as much of a legal grey area as a web browser and a web server.
Post reply on HN