Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding youtube-dl specifically, it's only very little additional effort if you're already comfortable using a terminal.
yt-dlp now. youtube-dl is dead. :p
True, but its much more intuitive name lives on.
How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
61–70 of 90 posts
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the artists only get a couple hundred dollars per year from their streams, why even bother putting the music on Spotify? If your listeners don't want to buy your mp3s or CDs when that's the only option, then what's the point? Compare it to any other profession. Let's say a bricklayer decides to go work for a company. He works the entire year and builds houses for many people. Then he's paid a hundred dollars. He…
Discovery is one important reason. Not that that's guaranteed to work. You probably need to do your own marketing--including playing at local bars etc. for pennies and tips. Of course, the same things is mostly true these days for writers with a publishing contract. People pursue creative pursuits for a lot of different reasons, including personal fulfillment. But you pretty much have to win the lottery to make a dec…
I get it, but I just think it's strange. Like it would be wrong for a brick layer to let himself be taken totally advantage of, even if he enjoys laying bricks.
If it's for personal fulfilment, artists can be happy with the sales they can make on their own, even if the numbers are small. Or even give their music away for free, if they want to get as many listeners as possible. But what is the sense in letting a billion dollar company exploit you and make bank on your work, while paying you almost nothing in return?
Imagine if other professions were like that? "Just keep laying the bricks for free for my company, and maybe one day you'll be a famous bricklayer and I'll pay you millions".
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the artists only get a couple hundred dollars per year from their streams, why even bother putting the music on Spotify? If your listeners don't want to buy your mp3s or CDs when that's the only option, then what's the point? Compare it to any other profession. Let's say a bricklayer decides to go work for a company. He works the entire year and builds houses for many people. Then he's paid a hundred dollars. He…
It’s advertising to drive people to concerts and merch. Of course, generally people make music because they like making music, and streaming is a way to share it. If it connects with people, and they blow up, great. But if that’s the only drive they’ll probably have a bad time. The same could be said about GitHub… why would anyone put their code up there for free, or work on these hobby projects, when they aren’t mak…
Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art?
I'm talking specifically about the artists that are complaining about getting a raw deal from Spotify. And I agree 0% with your assessment that just because they are not happy with a hundred dollars per year means that they demanded to be multimillionaires. Maybe people just should to get their fair share for their work?
I am friends with some career musicians and I am forced to pirate their music if I want to listen to it, because they refuse to sell their music online and only have it on streaming services. Which gives them almost nothing in return.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#64Doing something highly illegal and finding a "community" and sharing it with a "friend" would be a stupid move. Don't ever disclose your name if you do something like this, unless you are in a safe country.
I have my own written SOPs for how I make personal back ups of commercial media I own (purchased licensed instance because you never really own it even after paying for access). In this case I enjoy maintaining a media archive but my choice of words provides a fully legal context. What I find interesting is the wildly differing approach to piracy between the RIAA and the MPAA. The music industry’s current approach is…
The difference is that music labels and artists are making up the difference with other streams of revenue, like live show ticket sales, merch, and sync licensing, all of which have gone up as recorded music revenue has flatlined or gone down.
Movies are not doing well with any alternate revenue streams yet. Ticket sales and merch are way down.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s advertising to drive people to concerts and merch. Of course, generally people make music because they like making music, and streaming is a way to share it. If it connects with people, and they blow up, great. But if that’s the only drive they’ll probably have a bad time. The same could be said about GitHub… why would anyone put their code up there for free, or work on these hobby projects, when they aren’t mak…
Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? I'm talking specifically about the artists that are complaining about getting a raw deal from Spotify. And I agree 0% with your assessment that just because they are not happy with a hundred dollars per year means that they demanded to be multimillionaires. Maybe people just should to get their fair share for their work? I am friend…
> Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art?
ghaff already covered why: because Spotify is the distribution channel.
40 years ago, they would've put their music on the radio. Today, they put it on Spotify. Why? Because if they don't, very few people are ever going to even know they exist.
And if you think the fact that Spotify is giving them a terrible deal means they shouldn't engage with them, then I'll point to any of a dozen other examples today of massive corporations profiting excessively off of people who have very little choice but to engage with them. Being able to choose to do otherwise, and remain in the music business, is a very privileged position to be in.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#66Doing something highly illegal and finding a "community" and sharing it with a "friend" would be a stupid move. Don't ever disclose your name if you do something like this, unless you are in a safe country.
Define a safe country. I highly doubt there are any, after what happened to Aaron Swartz.
Russia is currently the preeminent power that lies beyond the reach of US law while still having functional internet infrastructure. If you stay reasonably low-profile and stay out of the way of domestic interests, you should be safe.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? I'm talking specifically about the artists that are complaining about getting a raw deal from Spotify. And I agree 0% with your assessment that just because they are not happy with a hundred dollars per year means that they demanded to be multimillionaires. Maybe people just should to get their fair share for their work? I am friend…
> Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? ghaff already covered why: because Spotify is the distribution channel. 40 years ago, they would've put their music on the radio. Today, they put it on Spotify. Why? Because if they don't, very few people are ever going to even know they exist. And if you think the fact that Spotify is giving them a terrible deal means they should…
> remain in the music business
If you're not getting paid, you're not doing "business".
Yes, there are many other examples of companies having exploratory practices the same way as Spotify. That still does not explain very well why people put up with it.
If a farmer exploits a migrant worker, the migrant worker gets paid enough for shelter and food. He is depending on that job for surviving. When artists are exploited by Spotify, the money they usually receive is nowhere close to paying for shelter or food, so they have to survive by other means anyway. Keeping their music on Spotify or removing it from Spotify doesn't make any difference for their livelihood.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? ghaff already covered why: because Spotify is the distribution channel. 40 years ago, they would've put their music on the radio. Today, they put it on Spotify. Why? Because if they don't, very few people are ever going to even know they exist. And if you think the fact that Spotify is giving them a terrible deal means they should…
> remain in the music business If you're not getting paid, you're not doing "business". Yes, there are many other examples of companies having exploratory practices the same way as Spotify. That still does not explain very well why people put up with it. If a farmer exploits a migrant worker, the migrant worker gets paid enough for shelter and food. He is depending on that job for surviving. When artists are exploite…
Because the other thing Spotify gets them is exposure. Whether or not it's worth what they have to deal with from Spotify, I have no idea—but I can absolutely see many artists putting up with it in hopes that being heard on Spotify will get people to buy their merch, come to their concerts, etc.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#69A lot of people will argue about the morality and legality of this sort of thing within the system, but I think this sort of thing is truly the result of rising pressures on society to be as efficient as possible in the domain of capitalistic activities. Of course, as a content creator myself, I do believe that there should be some sort of reward and protection for creating content. However, I also know that we have…
> even the middle and upper class are forced to live in a world where they are absolutely dependent on the upper tech elite for basic things,
paradoxically, we are all super dependent on the poor and low-income earners as well. If everyone was as well-off as the average HN poster, things would get expensive and services would become scarce. I don't say this to disagree with you, but rather to support the fact that we need to have a middle and lower class for our economy to function. the cost increases in basic goods (including books and entertainment), but especially housing, is destroying the middle and lower class. why would someone participate in an economy where the lowest-paying jobs don't even pay enough for a place to live?
> it should not just be those who can pay who should have access to knowledge and ideas.
I've thought a lot about this and particularly for prisons, where by definition there isn't a market for them to buy much of anything. They should make prisons, and perhaps hospitals, copyright-free zones because even if they brazenly "steal" content, its not really possible for the consumers to pay for it anyway. And prisons could use premium IP materials as an incentive to reward good behavior or placate them, without technically stealing anything.
Re: How to become a pirate archivist (2022)
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? I'm talking specifically about the artists that are complaining about getting a raw deal from Spotify. And I agree 0% with your assessment that just because they are not happy with a hundred dollars per year means that they demanded to be multimillionaires. Maybe people just should to get their fair share for their work? I am friend…
> Okay, but why does the artists have to make Spotify multibillionaires with their art? ghaff already covered why: because Spotify is the distribution channel. 40 years ago, they would've put their music on the radio. Today, they put it on Spotify. Why? Because if they don't, very few people are ever going to even know they exist. And if you think the fact that Spotify is giving them a terrible deal means they should…
I'd say streaming is the distribution channel. Apple (especially because their bundles) and maybe Amazon probably have opinions about Spotify specifically being the distribution channel. But that's probably being pedantic because the deals are almost certainly similar.