5 ms·
The solution is comfort in going without.
by abxyz 1y ago
The solution is comfort in going without.
- snihalani 1y agoI'd vote we build a spotify for new subscription where you get a share for views
- micromacrofoot 1y agospotify isn't sustainable as a primary income source for ~99% of artists on it
- jennyholzer 1y agoSpotify is actively hostile to artists who intend to use it for income. Spotify allocates a finite pool of funds to be paid out to artists. Spotify pays the artists whose work they host in proportion to the percentage of the platform's streams which that work generates. E.G., say Spotify's users streamed 10B songs in 2024. If Taylor Swift is responsible for 1B (10%) of those streams, she would be paid 10% of Spotify's artist fund for 2024. Recently, Spotify has attracted attention for promoting "ghost music" created en masse by in-house producers. this is done with particular intensity in non-vocal music styles, like ambient and jazz. See [The Ghosts in the Machine by Liz Pelly for Harper's Magazine](https://harpers.org/archive/2025/01/the-ghosts-in-the-machine-liz-pelly-spotify-musicians/ https://harpers.org/archive/2025/01/the-ghosts-in-the-machin...) for more details on this. Spotify stuffs their promoted playlists with this music, and tunes their automated recommendation features to prioritize this music. This has the dual effect of (1) inflating the number of streams on the platform, and (2) algorithmically crushing the possibility of discovery. This means Spotify cannot be used effectively for promotion (obviously excluding the top .01% most popular artists), and whatever traffic an artist is able to drive to Spotify is devalued.
- Supermancho 1y agoThe fun and innovation of circumvention will never get old. There is no comfort to be had in stagnation.
- tshaddox 1y agoNote that this, like ad blocking or piracy, also doesn’t help fund the creators.
- Henchman21 1y agoIf you’re indeed “going without” you have no obligation to fund the creators?
- tshaddox 1y agoIs the goal to fund more creators, or just to have fewer people with a supposed obligation to fund creators?
- Henchman21 1y agoWell, I dunno what goals you have, but my goals include paying for the content I read and not paying for the content I don't. This is something I already do. Paying multiple parties for access to content isn't some maddening problem where the masses are crying out for a solution. Perhaps I'm utterly missing the point in this thread?
- tshaddox 1y agoThat's well and good, but I don't mean your goals for yourself. I'm asking what our goals are (or what they ought to be) for how people broadly interact with creative works which are easily copyable.