this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2026
80 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

80724 readers
3580 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 26 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

This is going to become more of a standard due to people vibecoding their own clients for every dumb thing.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

It's all about profits and psying major labels even.more

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 11 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Even the Spotify shuffle feature is built to maximize profits and to hell with the user experience.

I have almost 2 thousand songs on one playlist and Spotify plays the songs from minor artists (who don't get paid much) constantly, while songs from major artists (who get paid a lot more) are never played. I'm actually surprised to hear those songs when shuffle is turned off.

They've also recently added "Video Episodes for You" to my home screen with no way to turn it off. It takes up 1/3 of the screen with helpful titles like "Session 105, Hillory Duff", and "Reinvent Life from Rock Bottom and Become Unrecognizable." I have never watched a video or listened to a podcast on Spotify.

When it comes to enshittification Spotify's got it down.

Maybe someday one of the other music services will create something like Spotify Connect.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 7 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

tidal.com

Lacks a few of Spotify's features, but the audio quality is great, and it's cheaper. Plus, fuck Spotify.

Qobuz is also good, apparently.

[–] andyburke@fedia.io 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

seconding Tidal.

but also feeling like buying more physical media going forward.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 3 points 12 hours ago

Yeah, I tend to buy vinyl for the artists that I'm really into.

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I looked at a tital a year or so ago and it wouldn't work for me. Will look again, maybe they've improved it.

[–] AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 hours ago

I came to the same conclusion., I need a "Spotify connect" type feature, and when I looked, tidal had just axed their equivalent.

Until a competitor allows me to play music on a headless Linux box and control it with my phone, I'm stuck with Spotify

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago

Depends what you define as "Wouldn't work for me." Song library has improved a lot, if that's what you mean.

[–] Yaky@slrpnk.net 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

For me it was the opposite: Every "made for you" mix and playlist is fairly popular songs from artists that I like... But they are always the same few dozen songs, just shuffled in different order.

Video suggestions seem to appear if/after you listen to podcasts or audiobooks. I had them, my partner did not.

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

My "Made for You" has occasional popular artists but most of the songs are from people who are relatively unknown. The only way I listened to a podcast is if I clicked on one by accident.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

I think it's more about closing a backdoor to free product that was generally out of reach for most people a few years. Free API access for devs has been a thing forever for the most part, but the barriers are now lower for people to abuse it.

Yes about profits in the sense they don't want people getting free access to content, but I don't think this is designed to net them a bunch of money or anything.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 16 hours ago

Agreed. To me, this sounds like a continuation of the abolition of Web 2.0, the era where APIs were open and nobody was talking about how they'd pay for it.