I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
-
@lislegaard@sonomu.club Bitcoin. If you know a more ecofriendly, fairer and sovereign way to transfer value, please share!
ah! the thing that people bought multiple GPUs for before ai you mean?
-
ah! the thing that people bought multiple GPUs for before ai you mean?
@lislegaard@sonomu.club do you know of a more ecofriendly, fairer and sovereign way to transfer value? How is NOK issued? Petrol? -
@lislegaard@sonomu.club do you know of a more ecofriendly, fairer and sovereign way to transfer value? How is NOK issued? Petrol?
pumping up oil and investing in war i think.
sorry not intending to be too trollface here. probably the right place for me to call off this track
i don't actually know enough about crypto to bitch too much about it.
-
pumping up oil and investing in war i think.
sorry not intending to be too trollface here. probably the right place for me to call off this track
i don't actually know enough about crypto to bitch too much about it.
@lislegaard@sonomu.club fuck crypto and screw money. until we figure out the social bits, Bitcoin (a peer2peer electronic currency backed by the laws of physics) remains the most ecofriendly, fairest and most sovereign way to trabsfer value. -
@lislegaard@sonomu.club it's also very pirate friendly: those who want to save the music to a local drive can inspect the xml file (it's all just RSS). but then again all of the (open source) apps have a button for that.@lislegaard@sonomu.club being able to save the music locally and share it with friends without caveats is probably the most interesting part of this branch of your thread. And no one is obliged to monetize: it's essentially gift-economy. the shocker is that a remarkable portion of people actually want to support art
thanks for balling!
-
@lislegaard@sonomu.club being able to save the music locally and share it with friends without caveats is probably the most interesting part of this branch of your thread. And no one is obliged to monetize: it's essentially gift-economy. the shocker is that a remarkable portion of people actually want to support art
thanks for balling! @lislegaard@sonomu.club Here's a tool to publish your own feed from the comfort of your domain name with the tools you already have.
https://new.musicsideproject.com/
Look into it sometime and never hesitate to reach out if you want guidance! Sovereign Art is issued by sovereign Artist!
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard 5% is more than I expected imo (still not much). I was expecting something around 0.something% -
@lislegaard 5% is more than I expected imo (still not much). I was expecting something around 0.something%
maybe i just listened to 5% pop, lol!
-
@lislegaard Yeah, it's really extreme ime.
Even in selfhosted land people arrive with "But how on earth can you find new music?" The idea of using 'the internet', other humans, the radio or god forbid a shop seems completely alien.
I left Spotify after a, free, year as the music it kept feeding me was so unfathomably awful I was gonna crash the car....and people actually pay them to fuck artists over for this.
@groot @lislegaard Over the past few years, I've found that the very, very beat way for me to discover new music is by hosting my radio show, where listeners suggest stuff to me all the time that I've never heard before. It's wonderful!
No algorithm, just human connection.
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard @janeishly I always viewed the Internet as a tool for disintermediation. Lots of great bands simply don't have enough general appeal to score a contract with Big Music. But the Internet can allow them to reach people who do like their music, and that can generate enough income for them to thrive and make more music for years.
I''m not sure why that hasn't happened. I would love it, since my music tastes are, uh, "eclectic".
-
@lislegaard 5% is more than I expected imo (still not much). I was expecting something around 0.something%
It'll be 0% for a lot of musicians these days since Spotify changed their contract
Apparently they did this "to help protect and strengthen our music royalty ecosystem for emerging and professional artists", which can be abbreviated to read "to make Spotify more money"
https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/article/track-monetization-eligibility/
-
It'll be 0% for a lot of musicians these days since Spotify changed their contract
Apparently they did this "to help protect and strengthen our music royalty ecosystem for emerging and professional artists", which can be abbreviated to read "to make Spotify more money"
https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/article/track-monetization-eligibility/
@Cyclist @lislegaard ah, yes. I forgot that nowadays Spotify helps "protect and strengthen our music royalty ecosystem for emerging and professional artists" by not paying them if they have too few streams. -
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard $1215 is the amount Spotify have returned to me for 500K streams. Such a motivator!
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard #Deezer have been proposing a fairer model of distributing those payments for years (link below). As far as I know this has been blocked by the major labels who effectively control the industry and also own a sizeable stake in Spotify.
https://support.deezer.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360002471277-Artist-Centric-Payment-Model-ACPS
-
@lislegaard #Deezer have been proposing a fairer model of distributing those payments for years (link below). As far as I know this has been blocked by the major labels who effectively control the industry and also own a sizeable stake in Spotify.
https://support.deezer.com/hc/en-gb/articles/360002471277-Artist-Centric-Payment-Model-ACPS
yup this is correct! which is why i could imagine a future being that only the major label artists are on spotify etc. and that the rest is
- free givaways for promo
- on a smaller streaming platform without the major labels and where your money gets distributed to what you were listening to (and maybe less if the listening was through an algorithmic playlist)
- sales of downloads and physical media
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard
It's sad they didn't distribute according to users' streams. That perhaps would have made it valuable for independent artists to have a presence.Now they aren't any better than any local royalty organisation using crude chart stats to redistribute the fees, or even worse with their AI stance.
-
Unlike Google to shut a service down.
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard or you could have asked any Norwegian musician.
-
@firn @lislegaard many years ago I had children, so I'm getting unsolicited cat pics for the rest of my days on earth.
@groot @firn @lislegaard can a cat pic ever be unsolicited. We all secretly want them, even if not spoken.
-
I used a Norwegian open-source tool to analyze my old Spotify data as a customer.
I don't use Spotify anymore, but I can announce that of all the money I ever paid them, approx. 5% went to the artists I listened to.
That is a pretty insane transfer of wealth from the bottom / middle to the top if you ask me.
I already knew Spotify is a big scam for those not at the top, but seeing the numbers still gives me a bodily reaction.
@lislegaard Could you provide the name of this tool?
