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

451–460 of 963 posts

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

#451

Post by VRay »

johns wrote: post #314
sharpneli wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I visited San Francisco I saw some cafe lattes and similar to be over $10, and that was the smallest size. That place is seriously expensive. On the other hand it’s nice to visit a place where restaurant food costs more than in Finland. EDIT: A Finnish comparison might be ”It’s just a pint or two per month”. So not that expensive.

Show me one place selling a $10 latte in SF. $5-6 sure, but you're exaggerating for no good reason.

He was probably at some swanky overpriced restaurant

I've definitely seen $8+ lattes at some super expensive restaurants in various cities around the world

A little bit of rounding up, excessive generalization, and not backing down, and BAM!

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

#452

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

No one is allowed to guarantee that an ad shows up on a screen I own. They can TRY to show an ad on my screen, and I might let them. But the conditions of use of any type of free service they emit out into nature emphatically does not include being allowed to control what appears on my screen. Nope. Never.

I am perfectly allowed to consume their free service AND ALSO control what I allow to appear on the screen that I own. It’s my screen.

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

#453

Post by c22 »

School-Cotton wrote: post #348
c22 wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You go to the presentation and someone demands you empty your pockets into a bowl that they will take into another room while you watch the presentation, wallet, phone, keys, etc.... You decline and leave, but you already ate the bread! Did you steal it?

No. That's analogous to choosing to leave Spotify after you already listened to some music because you decide you don't like their ads. Which is fine.

I'd say it's more akin to using Spotify with an ad blocker before this change. If Spotify wants to switch to only handing out bread after the presentation obviously that's fine too, but it doesn't make the whole proposition any less shady.

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

#454

Post by NullPrefix »

jamespo wrote: post #93
dessant wrote: post #13

They allow advertisers to run JS on your device, and ads are a trendy way to deliver malware. People are using ad blockers not just to hide annoyances and to improve performance, but to protect themselves from bad actors. https://spotifyforbrands.com/en-US/ad-experiences/ > JavaScript or iFrame Tags: All third-party tags and tracking URLs need to be in https format. I was on the fence about this because there is a le…

Access to spotify free tier is not a human right, it's quite easy to just not use it

Access to my site that tries to inject your pc with malware isn't a human right either.

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

#455

Post by johnm1019 »

gowld wrote: post #410
wool_gather wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $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.

Google Music allows exactly this. You upload all the stuff you own and have ripped yourself. Then, you can listen to that without paying. If you subscribe, you can build playlists and what not that include any song either from your library or their global library. Pretty neat.

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

#456

Post by judge2020 »

some_random wrote: post #421
djohnston wrote: post #256

Spotify: Provide service that costs labor, resources, licensing, etc. Spotify: Use ads for non-paying users to help cover the costs Freeloading Users: Use third party software to sidestep this source of revenue, essentially getting the product for free. Spotify: Ban these users. Freeloading Users: shocked_pikachu.jpg

Spotify: Serves arbitrary, third-party content through known malware vector. Users: Blocks known malware vector. Spotify and 'the usual' HN crowd: shocked_pikachu.jpg

At least now, Spotify can only be downloaded in the Windows store (they discontinued use of the desktop application on Windows 10). As I understand it, W store apps are sandboxed, so something like this reasonably isn't possible anymore (at least without an escape exploit)?

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

#457

Post by School-Cotton »

lurchedsawyer wrote: post #444
School-Cotton wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, even if these users have zero value to Spotify, then why terminate them? When I go to a restaurant and eat without paying, why do they kick me out?

More like "We sent a free pizza to their home. How dare they not eat the pineapple toppings!?"

Right, and what’s happening now is Spotify choosing not to send free pizza to those people anymore. What’s the matter with that?

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

#458

Post by scarejunba »

interestica wrote: post #387
reaperducer wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These two items do not go together: happened to use Spotify for a while on a system with adblocking enabled drive a lot of potential customers If they're not paying and blocking ads, they're not customers. And if they weren't willing to pay for Spotify, why would they suddenly be willing to pay for Apple Music? being on a Pi-Hole network The number of people setting up home filtering devices isn't even a rounding err…

Their customer bases aren't distinct streams. They want existing users to upgrade to a premium version. They're not going to be helped by banning those that are already in their system and a click away from an upgrade. Or, like myself, someone who tested out other similar systems and then decided to upgrade again. Does trying to use my account on a system with an adblocker (that I may not know about) warrant a ban?

This is just the “exposure” argument. Not every client converts to being a paid user. The kind that use free service and then block ads may not convert at a high enough rate to justify providing the service. Especially since it also cannibalizes the other product (paid streaming). The marketing team can then decide they’re not worth it.

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

#459

Post by cabaalis »

kgwxd wrote: post #425
akerl_ wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I've never used this phrase in my entire life but it seems absolutely perfect for the described scenario. Sorry not sorry. I personally chose not to use Spotify at all, but I'm not going to fault anyone for using it with a thrid-party blocker. Even if Spotify didn't also do advertising the right way (e.g. branded playlists (I believe paying users get those too)), no one is obligated to subject themselves to personal…

I believe it's safe to assume that (1) You sell a product or service for which people pay you, or (2) You derive an income working for someone else that sells a product or service for which people pay, or that (3) You receive financial support from someone who is within one of the above.

What happens to the food on your table when people take that product or service without giving you money for it?

Post reply on HN