What Pandora Pays Top Artists • Hacker News Board

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#81

Post by shock3naw » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 2:10 PM UTC

MiguelHudnandez wrote: post #48

pasbesoin wrote: post #16

Pandora: Is there a reason the image on this blog post is so large? This one image, resized in the browser to 300x200, is consuming 2+ MB. Namely, this one: I've been noticing the resurgence of browser-based resizing of large images on a few different business blogs/formats, recently. In this case (and some others), the resize is to much less than 1/4 the original, so I'm thinking it's not a "Retina" thing. Maybe it'…

This happens all the time, all over the web. It's because interns or non-webdev staff often don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post. So they'll upload a JPG right from a camera's memory card and use the WYSIWYG editor to set its dimensions. The worst are when images like this are referenced within broadcast e-mail messages. Luckily you can swap the file out on disk without…

Seriously not impressed by the generalization that interns are the ones responsible for "making the web a terrible place." So as soon as that same developer takes a position as a full-timer they're magically imbued with all the best practices and knowledge required to run a great website?

Also, you just admitted that your own place of work serves large images. Let's not throw blame around that we're not willing to take ourselves.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#82

Post by mratzloff » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 2:24 PM UTC

mtgx wrote: post #52

rm999 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have zero profit, so you could argue any single cost is taking away "all their profits". But I'm probably missing a more insightful point - maybe that the RIAA engineers the situation so that their margin is ~0.

Apple gets 30% from their music sales, and that still doesn't leave them with much. Let's just say the labels leave Pandora, Spotify and others with a lot less than 30%, which makes it very hard for them to operate their business, and if these services can't be sustainable and eventually start dying out, it will all because of the labels.

Which, of course, would be perfectly fine with the labels.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#83

Post by Calamitous » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 2:26 PM UTC

alexchamberlain wrote: post #71

MiguelHudnandez wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens all the time, all over the web. It's because interns or non-webdev staff often don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post. So they'll upload a JPG right from a camera's memory card and use the WYSIWYG editor to set its dimensions. The worst are when images like this are referenced within broadcast e-mail messages. Luckily you can swap the file out on disk without…

Any real evidence that interns are any worse than full-time employees?

They're easier to get rid of, for a start, and that makes it harder to establish firm relationships and long-term projects.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#84

Post by elliottcarlson » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 2:47 PM UTC

hnriot wrote: post #61

bo1024 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit different when your job is to make a website.

But blogs are often run by marketing interns who usually don't care or know any better any bandwidth.

Or marketing executives with the same lack of concern.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#85

Post by imtyler » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 4:34 PM UTC

conradfr wrote: post #76

imtyler wrote: post #13

This is probably going to end up being a controversial opinion, but I just don't think music is worth that much anymore (fiscally speaking). Sure, there was a time when being popular meant signing a contract-- it was the only way to distribute your music on a large scale. Radio and physical copies were the only way to hear music, period. But these days with the internet and the right software practically anyone can c…

An IDE and a server are cheap, why should developers be paid good salaries ?

What I said wasn't meant to be construed as a universally applicable statement, quite the opposite. It's highly specific to the industry. Music isn't the same as software. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs [1] (which is a theory, admittedly) music is used to self-actualize, which is less important than, say, food and water (which are physiological needs). The only value to music is the value the listener places on it. It's not really necessary for everyday life.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#86

Post by earbitscom » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 4:45 PM UTC

joelrunyon wrote: post #50

earbitscom wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because Pandora only has about a million songs in their catalog, where iTunes has like 30 million. All Pandora has to do, and you better believe they did in order to write an article like this, is classify an unknown artist that sounds like Coldplay into the system. If you've experienced Pandora, you know that after a few weeks you hear the same music over and over on any given channel. Suffice it to say, acro…

How many total artists do those million songs translate into?

They tend to classify whole albums, which would be an average of 10 songs. So, 100,000 albums. Of that, there are going to be some artists with multiple albums. You can probably estimate about 70k-80k.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#87

Post by RobotCaleb » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 6:27 PM UTC

rthomas6 wrote: post #80

RobotCaleb wrote: post #56

I dislike Pandora and much prefer Grooveshark. I'd like to see Grooveshark make a similar post, but I have a feeling it'd leave me sad.

What about Spotify? Spotify seems like a better Grooveshark, to me.

Last I checked Spotify required a Facebook login. I deleted my account a couple of years ago.

Re: What Pandora Pays Top Artists

#88

Post by MiguelHudnandez » Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 9:14 PM UTC

shock3naw wrote: post #81

MiguelHudnandez wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens all the time, all over the web. It's because interns or non-webdev staff often don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post. So they'll upload a JPG right from a camera's memory card and use the WYSIWYG editor to set its dimensions. The worst are when images like this are referenced within broadcast e-mail messages. Luckily you can swap the file out on disk without…

Seriously not impressed by the generalization that interns are the ones responsible for "making the web a terrible place." So as soon as that same developer takes a position as a full-timer they're magically imbued with all the best practices and knowledge required to run a great website? Also, you just admitted that your own place of work serves large images. Let's not throw blame around that we're not willing to ta…

You're right, generalizations are not impressive.

> you just admitted that your own place of work serves large images. Let's not throw blame around that we're not willing to take ourselves.

Yes, it happens at my place of work, and that is where my generalization came from. I intended to indicate that even when taking steps to mitigate the issue, it still crops up because it's a hard problem to fix. Eventually, work gets delegated to people that don't know everything they should. It is not a big deal as long as people are learning from it.

It happens when we assign web tasks to interns "and non-webdev staff" without proper education/training. So if you follow Toyota's "five whys" rule, it is not the interns' fault at all.