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

Fastpotify

fastpotify.rocks

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 583 posts

Re: Fastpotify

#451

Post by embedding-shape »

km144 wrote: post #386
embedding-shape wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sucks is that clearly the author has prompted the model somehow to generate this text, and this prompt probably contains the actual meat that the model just "expanded on" while adding it's own fluff, and if the author just shared the actual verbatim prompt instead, the documentation would be 90% shorter but also 200% more "informative per character used". Just share the prompt you used, regardless of how low qua…

That would actually be a reasonable thing to do with a model that is good at writing though. I'm sure if you used that method on Opus 4.6 you'd get a pretty decent result, because Claude models used to be quite good at that sort of technical synthesis. Asking a model that is bad at technical writing (e.g. Opus/Fable 5) to write your docs is a bad idea.

Ultimately what seems more important that how good the model is at task X vs task Y, seems to be that the human accepting/rejecting/iterating on the text can actually identify "good" from "bad" text, and makes the effort to fix it. Otherwise it doesn't matter much what model you use, it makes boring, bland and bloated prose.

Re: Fastpotify

#452

Post by legohead »

If this player has true random playing of your songs, instant sell for me. Also, a mobile version would be great, even if I have to do a manual install.

Spotify's "random shuffle" has been broken for years, with a long running thread [1] complaining about it. A lot of the commenters think there is some kind of "artist priority" playing algorithm, with some kind of maximum profit goal or something. But I think it's simpler - if Spotify just plays the same ~20 songs, they save a lot on bandwidth as it can just play from a local store. Who knows the real reason, I just know that it's annoying when I have a 2000+ song playlist and only hear a small percentage of it.

And yes I'm aware last year Spotify announced "fewer repeats" shuffle - but it doesn't work, or isn't sufficient anyway.

[1] https://community.spotify.com/t5/Implemented-Ideas/All-Platf...

Re: Fastpotify

#453

Post by Klonoar »

bschwindHN wrote: post #321
magackame wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you list your exact complaints? It's a GUI like any other.

Alright I downloaded the thing, just for you. * Right off the bat in the login screen, if you resize the window, it flickers * I logged in. Double clicking the top part of the window doesn't maximize it, like I expect on basically all other windows. I'm using MacOS, btw * Resizing the main home screen is also a flickery mess. Though I'll give credit, it's a fast flickery mess, because the official spotify app resizes…

You should draw a distinction between “implementing the GUI” and “implementing OS behavior”. Flickering aside egui works mostly fine for the former; the latter falls apart on most non-browser-and-non-toolkit-wrapper approaches because people never stop to handle those things.

E.g your double click on title bar thing sounds less like egui to me and more like somewhere in the stack is missing an AppKit flag.

Re: Fastpotify

#454

Post by marcelo-earth »

abrookewood wrote: post #75

I think the key call out with this is how cool egui is (the Rust GUI library it uses). Check out their website: https://www.egui.rs/ The demos are very good: https://www.egui.rs/#clock Edit: egui is an immediate mode GUI library written in Rust. egui runs natively on , and on the web it is compiled to WebAssembly and rendered with WebGL or WebGPU. Everything you see is rendered as textured triangles. There is no DO…

It's the first time I've heard about egui. I'm currently working on a desktop app that uses Tauri, and I realized there's a Tauri plugin that connects the two:

https://crates.io/crates/tauri-egui

Maybe I’ll use it in my next project, the demos are good!

Re: Fastpotify

#455

Post by sbarre »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #303
eli wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The construction manager can’t say they built a skyscraper? In that only for someone who personally laid every brick and ran every wire?

No they can't. The construction crew - which includes the manager - can say that they built a skyscraper. If the construction manager did lay the bricks or did the majority of the work in all aspects, they could claim to have built a building. Otherwise they contributed work, no denying that, but they can't claim credit for building it. Same way that architects can't claim they built the skyscraper, even though they…

I think you're being pedantic to the point of losing all credibility. And you're gatekeeping in the worst possible way.

Your argument that using an LLM means you didn't "make" a thing could just as easily be used to say that if you used a framework or a library, you also didn't "make" a thing, because you didn't write all the code yourself and you didn't understand everything.

Would you say the authors of YT-DLP didn't "make" anything because they are a wrapper over FFMPEG and CURL?

If you produce something useful (even just to yourself), you "made" a thing.. It has a purpose, and it's useful. Who cares how you made it or how long it took?

For example I've made plenty of bash scripts over the years that were effectively thin wrappers that combined other tools, but they did something novel and useful that saved me tons of time, and I've shared those as gists or in other ways.

Some of these scripts took me mere minutes to make. I didn't use an LLM to make them, but the "heavy lifting" definitely wasn't in my script. No one ever showed up to berate me and try to tell me that I didn't actually produce anything useful in any of these cases.

So this "in the past" that you imagine where people were held to some bullshit standard for what is accepted as "making" a thing?

That past doesn't really exist, and if does where you are, it sucks.

Re: Fastpotify

#457

Post by sortoflog »

bko wrote: post #422
sortoflog wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This person doesn't owe you any work. He's providing a product for free A product being free doesn’t make it exempt from criticism. It’s not about “owing” anybody work. > and this is a reasonable enough description of the product. It’s not a great idea to signal a lack of effort, nor is it wrong for users to pick up on that signal. This is the post-llm equivalent to spelling or grammatical errors. > I'm pretty sure…

> A product being free doesn’t make it exempt from criticism. It’s not about “owing” anybody work. You can criticize it but your criticism is hallow > It’s not a great idea to signal a lack of effort, nor is it wrong for users to pick up on that signal. This is the post-llm equivalent to spelling or grammatical errors. Why should you put in effort to something that should be effortless? Why should I waste my time wri…

> Why should you put in effort to something that should be effortless?

Why should it be effortless?

> Why should I waste my time writing some inferior copy by hand?

Have some faith in yourself :) If the LLM writing was superior then surely nobody would’ve noticed?

And to the question: because lack of care in one area implies that that the same approach might extend to other areas. Nobody’s forcing you, but it definitely sends a particular message.

> Humans produce code which is fairly ‘locally optimal’

I’m taking this to mean you find the phrasing vague. LLMs are good at avoiding the sort of fine-grained security bugs that you see in some human written code.

> Also, interesting you use ‘ as a quote rather than '. I notice these quotes are used with LLM generated text, as I can't find this on my keyboard.

Funny, but FYI a fair few mobile keyboards use non-ascii punctuation

Re: Fastpotify

#458

Post by suslik »

mogoh wrote: post #264
rot256 wrote: post #238

Spotify is, without doubt, the worst piece of software that I still use on a daily basis. It's incredibly buggy, incredibly slow, and the UI has so many "usability inconsistencies". I find the Android app particularly bad, just a couple of examples: - Under a playlist you get a list of suggested songs, the UI element looks like a "regular song", but unlike every other "song" element the user has been trained to recog…

Why is spotify so popular? There are different solutions to listen to music. What does spotify do that almost no one else does? Is it the music library or something else? I use youtube music, but I am looking for alternatives (but not spotify for various reasons).

I have been on Spotify from almost the beginning, and see zero reasons to switch. The app never bothered me at all - I find the reactions in this thread startling.

Re: Fastpotify

#459

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

rplnt wrote: post #394
lostlogin wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a music player Spotify doesn’t completely agree with that. ‘Spotify is a digital music, podcast, and video service that gives you access to millions of songs and other content from creators all over the world.’ I left in the middle of their ‘we do Podcasts’ bs, where they were pushing Joe Rogan hard. Yuck. https://support.spotify.com/nz/article/what-is-spotify/

Isn't it just another ad distribution platform? The amount of ads they started to push to paying(!) users recently makes me want to cancel it every day (but I'm also too lazy to seek alternatives).

> The amount of ads they started to push to paying(!) users

I have never in the history of paying for Spotify had an ad play.

Re: Fastpotify

#460

Post by skydhash »

rplnt wrote: post #426
darkwizard42 wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see you publishing something which further reduces the memory footprint? Given the project is open source, have at it! See if you can help improve it instead of complaining. This is a significant improvement and a cool project!

I'm not complaining and it is a cool project (from what I can tell). But I think it's fair to say 200 MB memory usage is a lot without providing source code as a proof. Just by feel when you recall what were computers capable of when they did not have 100s of MB to spare.

I remember when I was scrounging memory sticks to get to 512 mb for my windows xp setup. And I was able to play Unreal: Return to Na Pali[0] on that.

[0] https://unreal.fandom.com/wiki/Unreal_Mission_Pack:_Return_t...

Post reply on HN