this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2026
66 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
41266 readers
517 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are several albums I listen to as a complete work. But you can't tell me that albums with one good track and a bunch of detritus weren't a thing.
But why listen to just one song? It seems a waste to sit down, put on headphones or fire up the stereo, all for only a few minutes of music.
What makes you think it is just one song? In the 1980s it was a mix tape that took the good tracks from several albums. With computers it is a playlist. Or more often it is a play random tracks from my large collection until I hit stop.
I do listen to just one song once in a while when that is all I have time for, or when some song comes to mind that I want to hear. However mostly it is a playlist that I created.
There are a few albums that are related collection and work best listened together, but most are just a bunch of songs and you can listen in any order.
I was playing a role to try to make a point to the OP.
I guess that's certainly a thing to do. But not all albums are journeys, and thus, one buys individual tracks because the rest of it sucks.
I mean, I can just choose a track on my phone or computer, hit play and have music. I don't currently have a speaker setup.
That's no way to enjoy music. You can hardly hear anything on that tinny little phone speaker.
The computer speakers aren't terrible, and my earbuds acquit themselves decently when using my phone. Would I like some nice 8" speakers and a subwoofer? Sure. Not realistic in a van.
I was trying to be subtle, but that doesn't seeme to be working.
The point is, lots of people enjoy music lots of different ways, for lots of different reasons. Just because you don't use subscriptions doesn't mean they aren't valid and useful to anyone who isn't you.
In short: Don't gate keep
I'm sorry to jump in out of nowhere, but this argument can be used against your top comment in this thread. Some people listen to single tracks, others to whole albums. Am I missing something? I thought you two were just comparing points of view, not trying to decide who was right.
You're tying your access to music to a subscription. That feels wrong to me.
Why do your feelings about how others pay for things matter to anyone?
Why does it even matter to you?
You could argue it matters because spotify has impacted the music industry negatively as a whole. Why would I want people giving their money to a company like that to make the problem worse?
Regardless of whether I personally use the service or not, other people funding it contributes to the downfall of something I like just for a bit of convenience.
I wouldnt make the same argument for every other streaming service because they all have different levels of ethics they abide by but spotify.... no good ethics I can see.
Streaming isn't the problem. The lables screwing over the artists on their streaming cut is the problem. Stop supporting the lables.
Thats correct, streaming is not the problem. Streaming is just a technology. The companies are the problem.
Record companies dont walk in to spotify HQ and say "give me this much for this artist". Spotify has a very specific payment model that fucks over small artists.
There are also many labels made by artists that are great and really support their artists so your point doesnt really work.
None of this is even touching on how spotify fills its curated playlists with slop so it doesnt have to pay as much royalties or how the only way it can make more money and appease shareholders is by constantly squeezing the consumer and charging more like this article. They have nothing innovating to offer to justify their price hikes.
I love streaming, I think it is incredibly convenient and effective for listening to music. I do not love companies that take an amazing technology and exploit it to destroy an industry that is already struggling in the name of profit.
Support your favourite artists directly or switch to other less scummy streaming services is my opinion. Spotify is destined to fail anyway or at least mutate into a "top 40" only platform with how many artists are leaving.
Why are you taking personal offense that I said I didn't understand the behaviour of others? This is a petty hill to die on.
Look, people waste money on plenty of things, myself included. It just feels like being at the mercy of a company to listen to music is a poor choice.
Judgmental attitudes ar an accepted cancer of online discourse. And I try to point it out sometimes.
Are you not judging me without context?
Paradox of tolerance
Sometimes hypocrisy is necessary
OK. Listen to what you like, I'll listen to what I like, and we can go about our days.
There you go. Good on you
I'm not an asshole, just an opinionated prick.
So are we all