So you think running a video game through a jpeg compressor would be a bad idea?

I’m ready to roll up my sleeves, man. A little elbow grease can work miracles.

This isn’t a fair comparison.

The game should get to go through the same compression algorithms first.

I believe this is the article that kicked off support for the idea. Thankfully it’s not a Medium-requires-an-account article (ugh).

One thing I’m not sure about: when academic ideas filter through other parts of society, they’re often stripped of most of their nuance. “Toxic masculinity,” for instance, a lot of people misunderstand to mean that masculinity is toxic.

I can say that I view this article as a general response to questions from conservatives circa 2005 about why the left was antagonistic to, I don’t know, racism. But I don’t know if this challenge to them is the same as a challenge to Popper.

I think I have to admit I don’t actually know what Popper has to say on the matter. Though, I get the impression these two authors might agree, at least broadly, and are simply viewing the same problem through different lenses.

That is, resolving the paradox might be interesting to someone if paradoxes bother them, and perhaps “but it’s not a paradox” is something they could say on a Fox News panel, but I’m not sure it will otherwise inform their political strategy.

They can do whatever they want at that point.

What else do you imagine they’re doing, though?

I mean, Uber has constructed a model where “waiting for your next fare” and “going home to your partner” look the same in a spreadsheet, and that then becomes the justification for not paying them. It’s sleight of hand.

And they run ads. The free-tier is not actually free, you know.

None of those things replace that content, though.

Look, I dunno if this is legally a copyrights issue, but as a society, I think a lot of people have decided they’re willing to yield to social media and search engine indexers, but not to AI training, you know? The same way I might consent to eating a mango but not a banana.

Wow. That sure is a comment.

This reminded me of Ayn Rand’s Dream World.

They’re complaining that the limited, free-tier plan is worse than it used to be. And really, for no good reason.

When EA releases Star Wars 2: A Sense Of Pride And Accomplishment, we complain about how stupid that is, do we not?

Yes it does. You just don’t believe in supporting people.

I have the extraordinary difficulty here of explaining color to a blind man.

I don’t care about the technicalities of the ADA, dude. You can jerk off to legal documents all you want, I want lyrics to songs for deaf people, a feature that already exists.

If they don’t require it, they should. I already asked you to take my hand on this. But, you don’t care because you like it when deaf people suffer.

I’m just agreeing that Spotify isn’t a charity. They have no obligation to be good or useful, and they will continue to destroy their service, and things will continue to get worse, and there’s no point in fighting any of this, and there never will be, and so it is, and so it shall be, until you die.

It’s just, I’m learning in real time now how best to treat life, you know? It’s good stuff.

On average, we respond solely to voice pitch, tonality, body language and facial expressions, like a still developing toddler… Or a dog.

And so knowing that, the DNC should have put somebody up who appeals to those… dogs.

Like, obviously the smart decision is to vote for Biden anyway, but fuck me if they aren’t making this November win, what should be a slam dunk against a fascist, the most difficult in recent history.

If Trump wins, the DNC owes us blood.

Oh, that’s easy. I don’t think that.

I don’t think that providing a financially viable “for free” service means you get to do whatever you want. That’s why I prefaced that with “I didn’t know.” Glad I could help.

Proof of what, social good will?

If this were doable…

.

.

Shouldn’t they, though?

Like, here’s your 5 stacks of normal newspapers, here’s your 1 stack of braille newspapers. Take your pick.

Spotify isn’t a charity

Ohh, they’re trying to be a shit-hole. Now I understand.

You guys, there’s a reason we don’t clean toilets. Toilets are supposed to be dirty.

I don’t think Spotify was created with deaf people in mind.

That would be the problem.

how would they charge people who can hear, but offer the service for free to those who can’t?

This sounds like an engineering problem. Account types, customer service, some kind of medical qualification proving it, I don’t know.

They could also just… not separate lyrics from the free-tier at all.

I mean, painfully missing from this discussion is that hiding the lyrics of the song you’re listening to, which they definitely have, behind a paywall is… absolutely bizarre.

To my ears, this is like finding out Spotify’s new free-tier model limits song listens to exactly 2 minutes, and if the song is longer than that, “well, you can listen to the whole thing with a new Premium subscription!” Yeah, I guess I could, huh. God forbid we have anything nice in this country.

Why I think companies should be required to uphold certain standards of service? What, have you never left a negative review?

You obviously don’t give a shit, dude, I don’t know why it matters to you so much that people want their lyrics back. Do you own stock in Spotify or something?