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

581–590 of 963 posts

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

#581

Post by delecti »

hacym wrote: post #251
phailhaus wrote: post #165

The amount of people here outraged that Spotify is preventing them from blocking ads on the free tier is astounding. Pay for the service if you don't want ads.

I think the outrage is more so that Spotify thinks it can tell you how your computer is operating. Other companies have found ways to circumvent adblockers, which is the route they should be taking here... Not telling users that their computers have to conform to some set of standards so that they can inject ads into your experience.

You can buy (rent, access, whatever) their product with one of two forms of payment: money or ads. If you don't like how their ads are delivered (admittedly fair) then pay, if you don't find either of those acceptable then you don't get their product. Disabling ads is requesting a completely free third option, which isn't something they choose to allow.

I don't understand the entitlement you seem to feel to demand that third option.

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

#582

Post by tzakrajs »

munk-a wrote: post #562
admax88q wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The hard thing for platforms is that no one trusts the platform to not lie about delivery metrics. Thus the need for advertisers to run code to verify it ran and run alternative networks. None of that is my problem as a user though. I'm not obligated to expose myself to malware so that Coca-Cola can accurately track how many people saw their ad.

Within current legal standards you are. Ideally the government is supposed to step in and regulate situations like these to remove bad actors and provide consumer protections, since in a monopoly/oligopoly consumers can be forced to go without a service to comply with onerous conditions for that service and the music industry loves their monopolies. A website is currently absolutely within their rights to decline you…

This is what is frustrating. I will agree that users are subject to civil law, but that is not a moral claim. I am seeing so many people on HN taking a strong, rebuking moral stance on a civil matter. They hand wave the morality of Spotify allowing RCE by third-parties but feel indignant for a person breaking a fucking TOS or EULA.

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

#583

Post by wasdfff »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #471
grogenaut wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard thing for platforms is that no one trusts the platform to not lie about delivery metrics. Thus the need for advertisers to run code to verify it ran and run alternative networks. No idea why advertisers trust the ad networks over say spotify. This was going the otherway then facebook's massive lies about video ad views tanked it. Other services like twitch have done what you said and users are equally irate…

Of course, radio was paid for by ads as well.

Metallica doesn’t get a dime when their records played all night on college FM. The local hardware store on the radio ad also doesnt know anything about the personal lives of who might have heard their ad.

It is a different landscape now than just buying a primetime slot, advertising is much much more about gleaming any piece of potentially useful personal information about a user for an advertisers own furure use or for sale to the highest bidder. And personally identifiable information held by third parties will never be secure as it is a challenge and a prize for talented people to steal.

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

#584

Post by pytyper2 »

Changee6 wrote: post #407
pytyper2 wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Then you can't target the ads to those who most likely will buy, then each impression is worth less in most ad marketplaces. I don't think you will be able to suggest a solution if you ignore the true desires of the buyers and sellers of ads.

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

#585

Post by chrisweekly »

cletus wrote: post #255

Good. Spotify has a pretty cheap paid option that removes all of that. To those who justify wanting the paid service for nothing by saying Spotify won't "take responsibility" or "assume liability" for their ads or those ads "might deliver malware" or are "intrusive" as a weak rationalization, you present a false dichotomy. There are at least three options: 1. Pay for the service 2. Suffer through the ads 3. Don't use…

Yeah, Spotify's premium plan with family member access is $15/mo. It's worth a lot more to me than that. I can't imagine tolerating ad intrusions (or feeling justified in working around their free plan's ads) to save 50 cents a day.

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

#586

Post by pytyper2 »

munk-a wrote: post #567
CharlesColeman wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? As a user, I do not care one iota about advertisers who "want all the data." They can all die in an adblock-fueled fire and I won't shed…

Unfortunately a compromise like that could only be reached through enforcement by a third party (probably the government) and in the current political climate that's not going to happen.

Oh no don't suggest that.

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

#587

Post by ghettoimp »

reaperducer wrote: post #377
yial wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using US prices, a black basic coffee is probably $2-3 at a coffee shop. Any kind of specialty drinks, which most people I would believe get at Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, the local coffee shop, end up being $5-8, not even in a major city or metropolitan area.

Using US prices, a black basic coffee is probably $2-3 at a coffee shop. Any size coffee is $1 at McDonald's 24/7. The quality is improving, too, so it's something to remember when you're traveling in unfamiliar territory.

Hrmn, no thanks. I've never gotten a coffee at McDonald's that was a remotely drinkable temperature.

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

#588

Post by chadlavi »

ryandrake wrote: post #580

I wonder how this works with things like Pi-hole. I block ads at the DNS level for my whole house with dnsmasq. Any guest who connects to my WiFi AP gets this benefit through their DHCP configuration. Will Spotify ban their accounts for using the service while visiting me?

I also wonder about this. I'm a paying Spotify member who uses DNS-level ad blocking. Without a clear explanation of how they detect as blocking or if this applies to paid members, I can't tell if things I'm doing for web safety will get me banned from a service I was never trying to block ads for in the first place.

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

#589

Post by tzakrajs »

People here on HN are confused and believe that breaching a TOS is some sort of moral peril.

Calm down. It’s business and no one is going to jail because they blocked an advertisement. Society at large doesn’t think piracy is even worth punishing, so why and when did we become obsequious for RIAA or MPAA?

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

#590

Post by v_lisivka »

munk-a wrote: post #553
zanny wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ToS's (online, at least) aren't legally enforceable. If they were actually legally binding companies would be sueing users for violating them all the time. Theres a reason the extent of ToS enforcement is just account closure, its because they have no legal standing and just act as a safeguard against actual legal challenges.

The legal enforceability of the TOS isn't really important here, when you use a service there are conditions with that service. Go ahead and try walking into starbucks, paying for half of a tall americano and walking out the door with half of a tall americano. Service providers have the inherent right to place conditions and limits on the services they provide.

IMHO, the more correct analogy will be to walk into cinema and watch cinema without paying for pop-corn, despite the fact that theater makes most of their profit on pop-corn.

I have no obligation to make a business profitable.

Post reply on HN