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

Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 844 posts

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#701

Post by WalterBright »

kadoban wrote: post #665
WalterBright wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can set up whatever frame of reference works best for a situation. We do it all the time. It's very convenient for us earthers to use a geocentric framing of the universe for our daily life, where the skies revolve around the Earth. We do it every day. Such as the word "sunrise" is very geocentric. We don't even have a word for the heliocentric term for the same thing. We also use geocentric phrases like "jets ch…

You can use whatever frame of reference you want, sure. Does there exist one in which the Sun orbits the Earth though? I don't think so. Those examples sound either metaphorical or about angular position/velocity, not orbit.

> Does there exist one in which the Sun orbits the Earth though?

Yes. It's what I've been talking about in this thread. You could always, of course, demand that the local TV station change the word "sunrise" to "when the Earth rotates until the Sun shines on the TV station", but I suspect that won't be successful.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#703

Post by Clubber »

makomk wrote: post #479
JxLS-cpgbe0 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reduces the chance of transmission. That's how it protects others... > Vaccination only protects you False. Vaccinated people can still get sick, and vaccination reduces the spread of disease, protecting people that aren't you. http://cdc.org/

Except that all the existing evidence suggests your argument is backwards. Whilst Covid-19 vaccination doesn't provide full protection for either the vaccinated or those around them, it seems to be much more effective at protecting the person being vaccinated against severe symptoms, hospitalization and death than it does at stopping them catching and spreading the virus to others. As far as I can tell, literally the…

According to the CDC, each vaccine efficacy at preventing the recipient from catching the virus. To your point they also reduces severity of symptoms. Looks like the J&J one ain't that great at prevention.

Based on evidence from clinical trials in people 16 years and older, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 95% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed infection with the virus that causes COVID-19 in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.

Based on evidence from clinical trials, in people aged 18 years and older, the Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.

The J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine was 66.3% effective in clinical trials (efficacy) at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received the vaccine and had no evidence of being previously infected. People had the most protection 2 weeks after getting vaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different...

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#704

Post by ErikVandeWater »

snet0 wrote: post #684
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interviewing influential figures is important.

Why? Why do I suddenly need to know everyone's take about everything? Why is it important that we know what our favourite actor thinks about Trump? Everything is publicity. It's not achieving some important social need, its driving people towards new products. Interviewing Alex Jones isn't doing anything except making more people know what an Alex Jones is.

So they have a chance to explain their actions to see what influenced them and if they are justified.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#705

Post by imbnwa »

hellbannedguy wrote: post #559
handmodel wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the model of giving away Joe Rogan to all users of Spotify (even if not paying subscribers) is worst of all worlds from a business POV. Think how many people still subscribe and pay over ten dollars a month to listen to Howard Stern. I subscribe to a few podcasts on patreon at $5 just for the few bonus episodes. And I have trouble believing the ad revenue Spotify gets for this is anywhere close to what paying…

In Joe Rogan's case, I doubt people would pay. Then again, I haven't been able to understand his success. I cringe when he calls himself a Comedian. I cringe when he talks science. (Always felt someone should sit down with him and explain The Placebo Effect, and The Scientific Method, and what goes into a good Clinical study. I would be shocked if he ever even took Psy 101.) Is it the upfront pot use that garners so…

> He does know his MMA though

Eh, his relationship to MMA has been far more casual for years now, maybe in the aughts or early last decade, when he was more engaged by the sport this was true. His pod is still the highest honor media appearance for most MMA fighters though.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#706

Post by hobs »

cbozeman wrote: post #690
snet0 wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is naïve. Taking Sandy Hook as the example, do you think Alex Jones' discussion on Rogan increased or decreased its spread? It's very easy to pick up new conspiracies for a conspiracy-minded person. It's very hard to drop them.

What's "naïve" is you or anyone else thinking they have the power to "nudge people into better patterns", which is exactly what the kind of behavior you're promoting attempts to accomplish. You can't, and you never will. Culture evolves slowly, and humans even slower.

So we just be happy with the every growing cult that the children who were murdered were crisis actors? Nah, think we can do better than that.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#707

Post by jjeaff »

hellbannedguy wrote: post #559
handmodel wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the model of giving away Joe Rogan to all users of Spotify (even if not paying subscribers) is worst of all worlds from a business POV. Think how many people still subscribe and pay over ten dollars a month to listen to Howard Stern. I subscribe to a few podcasts on patreon at $5 just for the few bonus episodes. And I have trouble believing the ad revenue Spotify gets for this is anywhere close to what paying…

In Joe Rogan's case, I doubt people would pay. Then again, I haven't been able to understand his success. I cringe when he calls himself a Comedian. I cringe when he talks science. (Always felt someone should sit down with him and explain The Placebo Effect, and The Scientific Method, and what goes into a good Clinical study. I would be shocked if he ever even took Psy 101.) Is it the upfront pot use that garners so…

Have you seen his standup? He's pretty funny.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#708

Post by hobs »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #704
snet0 wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Why do I suddenly need to know everyone's take about everything? Why is it important that we know what our favourite actor thinks about Trump? Everything is publicity. It's not achieving some important social need, its driving people towards new products. Interviewing Alex Jones isn't doing anything except making more people know what an Alex Jones is.

So they have a chance to explain their actions to see what influenced them and if they are justified.

Seemingly chance after chance after chance.

Is that why the kardashians are so famous, because their continued media presence is our opportunity to see if they make sense? No, they are just crap and giving them more sunlight just gives them more undue fame, money, and power.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#709

Post by conductr »

nradov wrote: post #88
duxup wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda curious, do fans .. .care about that? I guess some do but I don't think I ever listen to past podcasts that I've already listened to...

I'm not particularly a "fan", but I do enjoy listening to some JRE episodes when he has interesting guests like Andrew Huberman. I don't care about losing access to old podcasts any more than I care about Netflix pulling certain movies. That's just the reality of all streaming services. Content gets removed all the time for all sorts of reasons. If you want to maintain access to something then you'll have to make a l…

It leads to that content never being produced. It’s a form of censorship.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#710

Post by lostlogin »

josephg wrote: post #564
dalbasal wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all competition for monopoly. No one "owned" podcasting, like itunes own streaming music and youtube own free-to-air TV. Spotify is trying to be the one that owns it. They bought exclusivity to as many top podcasts as they could in order to start centralizing podcasting on their platform. Eventually enough momentum shifts, and all the other podcasters have to go where users go, spotify. They may or may not succe…

Yeah, I’m a paying spotify customer and I hate this. And I also hate that the spotify client seamlessly mixes podcasts with music in its recommendations. It’s like a PM somewhere at spotify was offered a cash bonus based on how many podcast listens happen, and they decided that making the app trick people into playing podcasts was a profitable idea. It breaks trust, and makes the spotify app feel adversarial. Like I…

You have described it well. The force feeding of podcasts is unwanted. No one ever went to Spotify to listen to a podcast before, so forcing them at us from the UI is shit. I also don’t go there for recipes, movies or TV, they are a different thing and belong somewhere else.
Post reply on HN