Cool. For all those hating on grifters, I don't think anyone's in the moral right or wrong here. Spotify is trying to monetize a free service, some people don't like that. This won't affect Spotify's profits meaningfully, and the grifters will always grift.
Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
771–780 of 963 posts
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#772Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bandcamp is another option. They have multiple download formats, including FLAC. Lately I've been seeing more albums from artists on ("major" indie) labels, not just self-released.
Bandcamp is my favorite service precisely because they include FLAC downloads.
This. I've started actually buying music for the first time ever because it sounds so good from Bandcamp.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#773Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advertising can be done without arbitrary code execution. Magazines, broadcast TV, radio, podcasts, movie theaters, billboards, news papers, etc. all manage to do it without that. Spotify already has a way to deliver audio and video to the machine, nothing else is required, and if they used that existing avenue, blockers couldn't stop it.
Audio and video ads are super annoying and I'm reminded of that every time I listen to radio or watch TV, which is why I gave up on both. No thanks. The issue isn't one of arbitrary code execution. Lets not be hypocrites. AdBlock Plus has over 200 million installs on the desktop alone. Are you going to tell me that those 200+ million users of AdBlock Plus are concerned with arbitrary code execution? What percentage o…
Whitelisting won't even be a factor because ad blockers won't work against ads delivered along with the main content. At least not without way more processing power, much more complex software, and a lot more volunteers creating filters manually. The current ad delivery methods are what makes the ads so easy to block. So, being unable to block ads, users will either deal with it, pay for ad-free, or leave, and then the real value of the service will be revealed.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#774Earlier quoted context omitted.
15 year old me had basically nothing. Paying $10 per month for pretty much anything was unthinkable. I still wanted to listen to music though, so I found ways. I really don’t think that was so terrible, and neither do I think the few million people that block ads are.
That's great, but you live in a country that have these things called laws and you have to follow them whether or not you personally think that breaking them "isn't so terrible" or not. If enough people think the laws are terrible, then lobby your representative to have them changed. This is how the system works. Half the reason it doesn't work is admittedly our corrupt officials taking the big media money (RIAA and…
> you have to follow them whether or not you personally think that breaking them "isn't so terrible" or not.
That's plain incorrect, many people manage to do things that the state considers illegal.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#775Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#776Good. 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…
it boils down further then that.
I have the right to selectively choose what code runs on my computer, including code designed to grab ads and display/present them.
I also have the right to selectively choose what requests and traffic to allow in and out of my network.
Spotify has the right to do the same, including to deny to send me any traffic from their service for any reasons.
I also have a right to not like it if spotify does that, and everybody else has a right to not care if I do or don't.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#777Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, but your agreement with Spotify on the free tier is "we provide music, you agree to be subject to our ads." If you block the ads, they can then yank the music. Personally, I haven't jumped on the streaming music thing (iTunes Match is about as close as it gets for me with buying CDs or MP3s to add to it in time), but I don't think what they're doing is a bad thing. Now, if you have some means to force the vario…
>> your agreement with Spotify on the free tier is "we provide music, you agree to be subject to our ads." If you block the ads, they can then yank the music. Companies have a habit of trying to squeeze all kinds of stuff into their ToS/AUP, hoping they can get away with it. Who'd want to bet Spotify's bans would survive both a) the courts, and b) public opinion? Remember they'd need to win in both.
a) absolutely - they are not stopping you from doing whatever you want on your machine, they are just not allowing to use their service. I don't think anyone would advocate making "ad blocker" a protected characteristic alongside race, gender, sexuality etc
b) absolutely - most people either don't use ad blockers, and of those that do, most people are not militantly committed to them. There will be a set of people who stop using the service out of principle, but almost all of them weren't making any revenue for spotify anyway.
The only risk to spotify I can see is if they use somekind of nefarious method to detect ad-blockers (eg root kits) and I 1) don't think they're that stupid 2) don't think they would be necessary or useful anyway.
I guess another risk is if they force people to turn off ad blockers, then accidentally serve them malware, but afaik, various other sites have done this and nobody seems to care.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#778Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've paid for Spotify for a while, so its been some time since I've heard an ad. But from what I remember, if you put the volume below ~30%, the ad pauses.
I haven't ever used spotify, so forgive my ignorance. How are they measuring the system volume from inside a webapp? Shouldn't that information not be visible to them?
I have this issue with the NPR One web player on Windows7. When the laptop is muted and I press the physical button to unmute it, the mute light goes off, but the web player soft-mutes. Argh.
Why can’t the mute button just be a physical switch!?!?!?
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#779Good. 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…
It's funny because whenever the adblock discussion comes up the standard argument is always "why can't the site have a paid subscription option? I would gladly pay for it."
Now that a service is offering subscriptions, people still don't want to pay for it, and the goalposts are shifted further.
Re: Spotify will now suspend or terminate accounts it finds are using ad blockers
#780Interesting. I wonder if this includes paid customers. 'cause I pay for Spotify, but run ad / tracker block on my network. If they suspend or terminate me they'll be losing a paying customer.