stonerboner

I switched to Apple Music. It’s not my fav, but the bundle with other apple services made the price right for a family plan.

Twitter was hardly profitable, but Spotify has never posted a profit. In fact, they are more negative in regard to profit every year. Twitter and Spotify are very similar in that their main success is volume, but not profitability.

I have no doubt Spotify could or would sell and get even worse. Just like Twitter.

People use it BECAUSE it was free and feature rich. When they start taking away the latter to bolster the former, you’ll see a migration to the next best free, feature rich service. I quit Spotify 4 months ago, and I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything.

Yes I feel the same way about YouTube, and I’m confident many others do as well.

You can pretend that users who trade their time listening to and viewing ads don’t deserve the to be upset with enshittification, but I wholeheartedly disagree. That line of thinking tracks very well with Musk’s approach to X, another service that was the “biggest” but not profitable. Look how they have done moving features behind paywalls and upending the expectations of their user base.

Apple has many more subscribers than in the USA, but I know Europe uses Spotify more. Being the biggest means they are more top heavy in the market.

But the funny thing is that even with a larger user base, Spotify has NEVER posted a profit (which gets significantly more negative each year). They also have been loosing a substantial percentage of their revenue per user each year as they further enshittify their platform.

They should be VERY concerned about losing users, and taking away features will end up doing just that.

Originally Spotify started with no users. So they’re not really losing anything if people migrate to another service lmao

Keep it up. Work is slow and watching you flounder is helping

Then you should write and call those lawmakers. You are a part of the body that elects them. Or run for office and fight the good fight yourself.

I do hope we do get some domestic reform, but I’m able to separate this small foreign policy win from the huge need for comprehensive domestic policy.

Lmao I must have struck a nerve to get 7 replies from you.

You keep returning to your red herring because you don’t actually have a decent argument.

I bet you’re really mad at some internet stranger, maybe you should take a break

I’m stating than less than 2% of American TikTok users will use VPN to bypass TikTok leaving the market.

You’re crazy if you think VPN usage is high among the general public on a regular basis. And that number’s intersection with using a VPN to specifically work around this will be extremely low.

I absolutely stand by holding TikTok responsible, and any other company responsible. This, coupled with the FTC poised to bring back Net Nuetrality, is a great step in the right direction. I look forward to this energy setting up more data protection, foreign and domestic.

Lmao “BFFS.” You love making me into whatever you want to rail against.

Congress didn’t ban an app. They requested data on where their information flows, and the “stupid dancing app” opted to leave the market instead of comply.

You don’t even know what the fuck you’re going on about haha

Ah, a red herring.

According to you, there should be only one law that protects people and protects them fully. If the law is specific to a sector, it’s bad because saving people’s data doesn’t give them healthcare. And if it doesn’t protect people in other sectors (foreign vs domestic) then it can’t possibly be a good move.

It’s an all-or-nothing mentality that is extremely idealistic to the point of ignoring incremental progress, and will make it so that no law is ever good or enough.

Stopping the bleeding of data harvesting to China is good. If you want other change alongside it, hold your elected officials to it.

There’s really no point in continuing a discussion with such an idealistic purist, as no law can be good enough.

The pedantry emanating from you is palpable.

You can just admit that protecting the public comes in many forms and one law won’t fix unrelated areas.

But you won’t, because you have a hate boner for our shitty oligarchy. You can also pretend like TikTok didn’t have a chance to prove they don’t misuse our data, but chose to exit the market rather than reveal where our data goes. The “cut” you bemoan, if it’s even true, would only occur due to TikTok’s choice.

But sure, they only passed a law after giving the company a chance to comply so they could get a pay cut. Genius.