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

Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 963 posts

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#401

Post by gowld »

akerl_ wrote: post #340
kgwxd wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrary to popular belief, ads can be delivered without arbitrary code execution. The Spotify app already has the ability to deliver audio and video, that's all they need. The mistake here is letting third-parties onto users devices. It's a disgusting industry-wide practice that needs to stop. Using the existing audio/video delivery system would render "ad blockers" useless. "thrid-party blockers" would still work a…

And if the approach is “I won’t use services that want to use 3rd-party-RCE-style ads”, it makes sense to me. But the folks who are blocking ads are taking Spotify’s offer (pay us, let us run our ads, or don’t use our service, pick 1) and trying to shoehorn a 4th option that Spotify doesn’t offer: get the content w/o Spotify getting paid. To tell Spotify “I’d use your service if you added an option where the ads didn…

Pandora and Google Play Music (and maybe Spotify too I don't know) put ads in the audio stream (and video, if you are looking at the app screen while listening to music for some reason).

Seems simpler to do this than get into a technical arms race with users.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#402

Post by bad_user »

kgwxd wrote: post #258
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I pay with my time to watch or listen to your stupid ad. Not if you're using an ad-blocker. Perhaps the reason you're using an ad-blocker is because you don't want to be tracked, and the only way to do that is to block ads completely. I get it. But you're also using up Spotify's bandwidth and licensing fees (which in turn allow music to be created in the first place), without providing anything in return. This is o…

Advertising can be done without arbitrary code execution. Magazines, broadcast TV, radio, podcasts, movie theaters, billboards, news papers, etc. all manage to do it without that. Spotify already has a way to deliver audio and video to the machine, nothing else is required, and if they used that existing avenue, blockers couldn't stop it.

Audio and video ads are super annoying and I'm reminded of that every time I listen to radio or watch TV, which is why I gave up on both. No thanks.

The issue isn't one of arbitrary code execution. Lets not be hypocrites.

AdBlock Plus has over 200 million installs on the desktop alone. Are you going to tell me that those 200+ million users of AdBlock Plus are concerned with arbitrary code execution? What percentage of those users do even know what that even means?

Between 10% and 20% of Internet users are using ad-blockers. Lets do an imagination exercise and say that Spotify would only serve images for ads. How many of those 10 to 20% of Internet users would whitelist Spotify?

"None" would be my guess.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#403

Post by IlGrigiore »

driverdan wrote: post #240
SnowingXIV wrote: post #118

Long time premium spotify user, but it seems they are more interested in their ad-tech than anything else. They introduce 0 new features or improvements and in fact actually remove things over time. It's amazing to see a product continue to get worse. Before you could send your friends a message within Spotify to send a song for them to listen while in the application and could even carry on a discussion. It was slic…

Remember when subscribing to artists would give you alerts for when they released new content? It was a fantastic way of keeping up with new music. For me it was a killer feature. They replaced it with the terrible "Release Radar" playlist that shows a small sample of whatever this week's ML algo recommends. It's garbage.

For me it usually does what you describe. When opening the application it shows me the new release of an artist I follow if it finds one.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#404

Post by pnutjam »

givinguflac wrote: post #372
g45y45 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I typically buy at least 1 coffee a day for $7 at starbucks. Without this, I cannot function. I still cannot justify paying for any media. Certainly not $10+/month for Spotify or Netflix. Sorry. I don't care this seems inconsistent, its consistent to my own beliefs.

Do you pay for cable tv? How do you consume media? Piracy?

Piracy!? Perish the though..

Is it piracy if I buy cable tv and timeshift with a torrent my dvr missed?

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#405

Post by mikestew »

number_six wrote: post #244
dessant wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attitude you describe can easily hurt their business. They may be future paying customers that are exploring your service, or don't have the money yet to subscribe. And even in the latter group there is an opportunity for building brand loyalty. But to see these opportunities, the first step is to not have a hostile attitude towards your users.

but you forgot how businesses work these days: Fuck you, Pay me

As opposed to the good ol' days when businesses all incorporated as 501(3)c's, funneling their funds to widows and orphans?

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#406

Post by jbeales »

wool_gather wrote: post #394
jbeales wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the thing(s): 1. It's not just 1 type of ad. In Little Snitch, I have permitted Spotify to connect to 281 different domain names, most of which are ad-related. That's a lot of companies being allowed to run JS in whatever webview Spotify uses to display ads. I don't listen much on my computer anymore. 2. They keep advertising deals to me - $0.99 for a month, or $9 for 3 months, that I can't subscribe to becaus…

> $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year This is good in other ways! One of the problems with Spotify is that the musicians don't really get paid a realistically useful amount. I say this as someone who has both a Spotify subscription and musician friends whose music is on Spotify. That said, I personally find the subscription price surprisingly low for what I get, but I wouldn't try to tell you what to do with your mone…

There's a strong argument for "$10/month is amazing for unlimited access to this entire catalog!" But I wonder how many songs or artists I actually listen to. Is it really that much more than I would if I were buying CDs?

I do enjoy the personalized playlists a lot, though.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#407

Post by Changee6 »

pytyper2 wrote: post #390
Changee6 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't even have to go that far. You could let ads still be html iframes with text/image/video/audio content. Just no javascript or cookies. (enforcable via csp sandbox) And "acceptable ads" policies of blockers could require those properties. They wouldn't even need a fixed whitelist or cooperate with specific companies for that, all they have to do is allow iframes with appropriate CSP rules. I.e. it's a vendor-…

They would not get as much telemetry, they also want all the data, it's not just the showing of an ad, it'c collecting everything the internet knows about the user and their pc. The problem is the tracking, collecting and resale of personal data. NOT simply viewing an ad! Ya dig?

Inert, no-cookie ads are the compromise position between total blocking and allowing arbitrary code execution and tracking.

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#408

Post by 00deadbeef »

guitarbill wrote: post #396
00deadbeef wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it's the opposite way around. Netflix's UK catalogue is tiny compared to the US, but Spotify always has the music I want. I pay for Spotify, but not Netflix.

That might have been true a while back, but Netflix' US catalogue seems seriously small these days due to the fragmentation of video streaming in the US, and them focussing on their own original material (at least some of it is good). Assuming you have Netflix and Prime Video, these days I'm finding more and more occasions when the selection in the UK is bigger (!).

I might give it another try

Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers

#410

Post by gowld »

wool_gather wrote: post #394
jbeales wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the thing(s): 1. It's not just 1 type of ad. In Little Snitch, I have permitted Spotify to connect to 281 different domain names, most of which are ad-related. That's a lot of companies being allowed to run JS in whatever webview Spotify uses to display ads. I don't listen much on my computer anymore. 2. They keep advertising deals to me - $0.99 for a month, or $9 for 3 months, that I can't subscribe to becaus…

> $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year This is good in other ways! One of the problems with Spotify is that the musicians don't really get paid a realistically useful amount. I say this as someone who has both a Spotify subscription and musician friends whose music is on Spotify. That said, I personally find the subscription price surprisingly low for what I get, but I wouldn't try to tell you what to do with your mone…

CDs don't send money to musicians either, unless they are self-publishing. But there's still a gap: I can't mix my paid-for (ripped) CDs and paid-for MP3s/AACs with streams in one app. This is the problem of letting the music distributer (Spotify) also control the player app.
Post reply on HN