Live data from Hacker News

Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

torrentfreak.com

291–300 of 350 posts

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#291
post #15

Napster was such an improvement over what it replaced, but, it’s funny by today’s standards Napster was so “basic”. I remember waiting 3+ hours for a single song to download. Then discovering it wasn’t what I wanted but a troll who renamed the `Barney The Dinosaur I love you` song. Then I’d spend another 3+ hours downloading a different song. Ah 56k internet, what fun. Today, TPB and a quick search can give you an ar…

> And they’re so good at it, that the pirated product is usually substantially better than the official version How so, when most of these products are digital to begin with? If you have the quality of the studio master, then there’s nothing to improve.

If you want to watch Lord of the Rings without either a weird color cast or janky AI upscaling artifacts, you need to get a version that pirates have fixed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkNFZkUHeKQ

Streaming services show unskippable ads for their other shows before your stream. Amazon showed an ad for a violent war movie before a kids movie my family wanted to watch.

With pirated copies, you can often get subtitles that were not available with the original (fan-subs)

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#292
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious to hear more informed thoughts from old ISP folks, but afaik one of the things that made Napster possible was that 56kbps connections were roughly symmetrical (~33kbps up?). By capitalizing on the oft unused upload bandwidth, Napster provided a benefit at little cost. Would be fascinated to hear what this looked like on the PSTN backend load side, ~2000.

One of the coolest things about the modem age is that you could easily try a different ISP if you weren't happy with your current ISP's performance (upstream and down).

You can still do that in some places that have open fiber networks! I actually have two ISPs right now running over the same fiber connection (via separate PPPoE connections) - one ISP gives you fixed IP addresses with custom reverse-DNS for cheap so I use it for my apex domain, and the other ISP is Dynamic DNS but has much better performance.

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#293
post #80

Best part of Napster was searching for that one song you were interested in, and then looking through all of that user's shared files. It was an amazing discovery mechanism which I missed dearly with all the subsequent P2P apps. Spotify now fills this void, but it's not quite the same.

I'm pretty sure I discovered far more music through browsing people's Napster shares (and the file shares at LAN parties) than I ever have through the discovery features in the modern music streaming apps.

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#294

I rarely see it mentioned when discussing old file sharing programs, but I thought DC++ was the best. With the right hubs you could find anything you wanted, you could download parts of a file from multiple peers, you could browse a user's shared files to find new stuff, we had a server in our university network that RIAA/MPAA could find, there was a chat for each server, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC%2B%2B

At our university, DC++ was the king. When I started, each dorm room had a 10 Mbit switched port, and each dorm area had a shared 100 Mbit uplink to the university network. So if just 10 people were downloading, you'd instantly overwhelm the uplink. So everyone was instructed to [tag] their username with which dorm they were in, so you'd prioritize people in the same network as yourself for the fastest downloads and so that uni IT could keep a blind eye to us as we weren't killing the uplinks.

(a year or two later, the dorms were disconnected from the university network and connected to an open city fiber network with commercial ISPs with 100 Mbit ports and no uplink contention and DC++ went away as people could now use public BitTorrents)

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#295
post #129
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I find most strange about the modern day piracy is quality. For a lot of pirates, it's a niche hobby to preserve the best quality version of some media / art. I see it as an underground librarian archivist movement. In 100 years iTunes may be dead, but there will be some person with every album available in high quality lossless FLAC. Same with Netflix and it's bit starved encodes.

> In 100 years iTunes may be dead, but there will be some person with every album available in high quality lossless FLAC. Same with Netflix and it's bit starved encodes. Yeah, nah. WhatCD’s full catalogue has never been recovered.

By virtue of being a private torrent tracker, WhatCD never had that full catalog, itself. The members did and what you consider to be an inability to recover is only because the torrents were never remade. The same thing would happen if the tracker was up and there were no seeds.

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you use a private tracker. Public ones always have seeders whose job it is to collect IP addresses. You'll still get that letter in the mail about pirating

…if you live under a regime controlled by big media business.

Or when Comcast is your ISP...

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#297
post #15

Napster was such an improvement over what it replaced, but, it’s funny by today’s standards Napster was so “basic”. I remember waiting 3+ hours for a single song to download. Then discovering it wasn’t what I wanted but a troll who renamed the `Barney The Dinosaur I love you` song. Then I’d spend another 3+ hours downloading a different song. Ah 56k internet, what fun. Today, TPB and a quick search can give you an ar…

I remember getting transfer rates of around 10kbps and giving a solid nod of approval as I watched it go. Nice! I’ll get to listen to my song in… 80 minutes!

Aw shit, it dropped to 3kbps.

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify posted €168M in profit for Q1 2024. But executives loving money is a separate issue from whether the company is profitable or not. Daniel Ek takes no salary but has filed to sell €165M in stock so far in 2024.

Executive compensation is part of a business’s expense, so it is not a separate issue from profit, since profit = revenue minus expense. Also, Ek could have sold his equity years ago and made more money with less risk by sticking it in SP500. If he really loved money, wouldn’t he have gotten rid of stock in a business losing money and stuck it into something less risky? My point is to say that Spotify is obviously in…

>Executive compensation is part of a business’s expense [...]

Right. So when you said this..

>Spotify loves money so much it has yet to show a profit in almost 20 years.

..was your point that Spotify, the company, doesn't love money, even if the executives might?

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so wrong it's fully in Poe's Law territory. Musicians at no point have made a majority of their money from album sales. To make any money off an album most bands need to sell tens of thousands of records. Most records never sell anywhere close to that number. Record labels are basically loan companies. They sign a band on a contract for X number of albums. The royalties of those albums is then divided up amon…

But before Napster, artists could sell more records and had a better chance of getting out of the hole with the record company. After Napster, not so much. And again, record companies won't touch your work if it's already out there on the internet. I used to work with people who tried to make it in the Boston music scene. They say it was great in the 90s because the scene was thriving. Then file sharing happened, kil…

Your Boston music scene friends are making a fundamental attribution error. They're blaming file sharing for the "scene" changing from factors entirely unrelated to file sharing.

1) In the 90s "record" sales were anomalously high. Record companies not only published new music CDs but republished fifty years of back catalogs either in compilations or CD reissues of albums that had long been out of print.

2) Movie soundtrack albums became big business. The 90s saw dozens of movie soundtracks go multi-platinum and many many more go gold. That was mostly unheard of in decades past.

3) Retail chains leaned into CD sales, some like Best Buy selling them near cost at times to pull in halo sales of other products. Specialty retail chains also grew during this time.

4) Malls as retail hubs also exploded during this time putting record stores in easy reach of more people.

5) Consolidation in FM radio and "format" stations massively increased the reach of label promoters. No longer did they need to deal with thousands of individual DJs, they could just don't-call-it-Payola-but-it-still-was promote stuff to programming directors and it would get on the air in a hundred markets.

6) CDs being much cheaper to manufacture allowed more independent labels to actually manufacture records for sale. Smaller labels serving niche genres were able to get in more records manufactured for sale.

7) Music got much cheaper to actually record and produce DAWs that just got cheaper and more capable. By the end of the decade you could record an album in a living room or garage and it could sound really good.

8) CD players became incredibly cheap and omnipresent. Every PC, portable stereo, car, and most game consoles (save Nintendo) ended up with built-in CD players.

All of these factors combined to form a massive sales bubble around CDs. It peaked around 2000 mostly because the anomalous sales of back catalog stuff reached a saturation point. It didn't totally burst because there was still a long tail of niche music being sold alongside megahits.

The sales of CDs dropped as sales through services like iTunes increased. Then further with streaming services.

While file sharing got a lot of attention it actually had a very small effect on music industry financials. Music buyers still bought music. The CD bubble burst because the back catalog sales had reached saturation.

The music scene changing in Boston or elsewhere after 2000 is more related to economic trends. Record chains overextended themselves and went out of business, they thought CD sales would continue forever. Chains like Best Buy, Walmart, and B&N ate their lunch because they could sell CDs cheaper. They could price CDs lower because they made their nut on other products. Music was just another thing to get people in the door. Apple and Amazon put the hurt on those chains with online sales.

Pretending every downloaded track on Napster was a "lost" CD sale is record label propaganda. They sell it to musicians so they blame evil pirates for picking their pockets so they don't notice the label's hands in there.

Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago

#300
post #80

Best part of Napster was searching for that one song you were interested in, and then looking through all of that user's shared files. It was an amazing discovery mechanism which I missed dearly with all the subsequent P2P apps. Spotify now fills this void, but it's not quite the same.

I'm pretty sure I discovered far more music through browsing people's Napster shares (and the file shares at LAN parties) than I ever have through the discovery features in the modern music streaming apps.

Hanging out in mates' rooms at uni, listening to and copying tunes, talking about music and software, smoking weed. This is the ultimate music discovery experience.
Post reply on HN