Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

286 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Just a shot in the dark here (4, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527664)

But might it have something to do with the fact that Sean Parker [wikipedia.org] and Peter Thiel [wikipedia.org] , the guys who funded Spotify's recent move to the U.S., also still happen to own a significant percentage of Facebook?

Nah, that's just cynical crazy-talk. It's just to make the sign-up easier for us consumers.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527724)

Out! Out! Damned spot!

Facebook: New 'mark of the beast?'

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527768)

Well, guess I won't be trying Spotify out then....

Facebook acct: Never had it....Never will....

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

alamandrax (692121) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527864)

I have a facebook account, but that's because my company requires us to have one to test the integration app that we built. I'd be loathe to add apps to it.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527896)

Your company requires you to give out personal information on the internet (aka having a facebook account)? Time for a new job, but then the damage is already done since you can never really get the information back once you give it away.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527924)

Hey, I have a facebook account too. Actually, a few. They're not not mine, granted, but I have the password...

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527988)

What knowledgeable geek puts real information into Facebook?

That'd be crazy!

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528056)

One that actually has friends.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528132)

Do you know that this crazy old thing called email still works? Yes.
It can actually be used to stay in touch with friends.
It's crazy i know, but hey, give it a try sometimes.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (-1, Troll)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528158)

I don't have a (real) FB account, and I don't want one. But, you really need to fuck off and kill yourself.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528250)

Ok, here's your project of the day: Pick a former classmate or former coworker that you haven't talked to in five or more years and email them.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528140)

What's this "friend" thing I keep hearing about?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528174)

The only real information I have in my account is my name and email address, which is my name, so it's enough for people to confirm it's me but not enough for FB to scrape anything meaningful out of it. Oddly, the fact that the rest of my profile is total BS seems to make it easier for my friends to find me.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528228)

Well, having friends, is one thing but you still can completely limit the information you give to facebook. I used to have a facebook account just in case anyone wanted to look me up, details I gave it were, my name, and a single picture of myself. Everything else can be BSed, including birthday location etc... people who know you will know it's you by your picture and otherwise you have given no information out that will reach public view.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

gfreeman (456642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528004)

Who says alamandrax has to put personal info into the account? FB doesn't know personal details if they are not entered.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Sunshinerat (1114191) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528160)

What about tracking cookies?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

gfreeman (456642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528256)

Tracking cookies on a company computer is not personal info - it's company info.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

eepok (545733) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528014)

I have a Facebook account... but only to keep in contact with a couple student organizations that don't understand the value of actual forums for discussion.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528178)

FB is an actual forum. Just because you're privacy-conscious and/or anti-social does not make FB a bad thing.

(I don't have an FB account, but my wife does.)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527948)

You are welcome to go here [facebook.com] .

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527786)

If it would be just to create a seamless user experience, they would do the standard "here are the 6 most common platform sign-ins, go pick your favorite". The fact that they require FB points to either your guess, or to FB directly paying Spotify for this move. Either which way, go suck it, Spotify. I'll stick to Pandora and, for as long as Pandora isn't on Xbox, Last.fm.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (2)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527938)

Yeah, because asking people to choose from six options (of which at least two or three probably apply to them -- most people who have a Facebook account probably also have a Google account, a Yahoo account, etc.) is super seamless. Like the man said, the key to usability is "don't make me think." [amazon.com]

Not that I'm a fan of Spotify going Facebook-only -- I think it's a terrible move from a business perspective, because it means they now have a middleman standing between them and their customers, which means they live or die at the middleman's pleasure -- but from a usability perspective it's hard to argue that one button is less usable than six. And if you had to pick one of those six buttons to be the only way to log in, Facebook's massive user base probably makes it the choice least likely to result in potential users not being able to get in.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (4, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528146)

"Don't make me think" is fine if there's indeed only one plausible action. But FB is not the passport for the Internet, no matter how many people keep saying that. As a result, putting in one action that doesn't apply to a significant chunk of people is worse than giving them options they don't need.

Not to mention: do you REALLY want FB to be the defacto passport for the Internet? Especially as a company whose only ability to hold on to people is their user preferences, which are now shared with FB?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527802)

Dunno how much good that will do... hordes of fake facebook accounts (or even real ones that are never seen by the users who created them) will only dilute its value to advertisers.

finish the sentence (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527688)

"...the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier." ...for Spotify.

Re:finish the sentence (1)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527734)

Hey, at least Spotify won't leak user data...to anyone but Facebook.

Re:finish the sentence (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527794)

It's okay, your justin bieber fetish is safe with me and my 17000 facebook friends

Re:finish the sentence (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527898)

my facebook friends already know about my collection of nude photoshop fakes of justin

Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527758)

"...the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier"...for a different music service all together.

Re:Correction (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528072)

Hence why torrent use keeps going down a bit (with a nice new service like Hulu) and then right back up (when Hulu decides to delay shows for a week) and then back down, and so on.

Attention Industry! You are competing with a product that has no sign in requirements, and low (a vpn service) cost. Keep this in mind and prosper. Deny it and fail.

Whats the problem? (1, Insightful)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527726)

Don't like it? Use another service.

Which other service? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527756)

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Re:Which other service? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527774)

http://www.grooveshark.com

Re:Which other service? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527776)

What about Grooveshark?

Re:Which other service? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527790)

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Pirate Bay.

Re:Which other service? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527800)

http://www.last.fm/

Re:Which other service? (2)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527804)

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Pandora springs to mind....?

Re:Which other service? (2)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528052)

I jumped on the Spotify bandwagon and got an account as soon as they became available in the US. Since then, I've barely used it but I continue to listen to Pandora almost daily. A lot of times I don't know exactly what it is that I want to listen to and in these cases, Pandora is far, far more useful to me.

Re:Which other service? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527870)

rdio.com

Re:Which other service? (1)

mcoffman (252443) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527998)

2nd for rdio.com

Re:Which other service? (1)

cdrudge (68377) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527934)

Don't like it? Don't use the service.

It's not as if a facebook account is required to get a drivers license, vote, be employed, whatever. It's a private company that is free to partner with another company to provide a service. Vote with your money and don't use the service. If enough people do so, then maybe Spotify will notice and change their practice. Or maybe they will feel that a pool of 800m potential subscribers is enough for them.

Re:Which other service? (4, Insightful)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528128)

Or maybe they will feel that a pool of 800m potential subscribers is enough for them.

The pool of Internet users with FaceBook is smaller than the pool of Internet users. However you put it, by requiring FaceBook, they eliminated a lot of potential customers. And I am not sure what they got by doing this...

Re:Which other service? (1)

edmicman (830206) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528020)

I've checked out Spotify and still don't get it. What does Spotify offer me that a million other streaming services don't already provide, for free? If I'm looking for random background streaming music that I can use for music discovery or just don't want to think about making a playlist I can use Pandora or Shoutcast or any other Internet radio stream. If I want to listen to a song and have it available on any device then I want to "own" it so I can buy that from Amazon or iTunes or rip the CD.

Spotify just doesn't make sense. For the free version I have crappier ads than the other streaming services. I can't use it on a mobile device. And I have to *work* to think of songs I want to hear and build playlists. And theres a number of things that just aren't there unless it's a Top 40 song or album. Why do I want to use Spotify?

Re:Which other service? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528050)

mog.com

Re:Which other service? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528114)

It was advice, not an offer.

Trying to represent the point of view of the dimwitted caricature that you think the world needs to be fair to really isn't as interesting as you think it is.

Re:Whats the problem? (5, Insightful)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527856)

Don't like it? Use another service.

And in that short post you claimed that all criticism is pointless.

Why criticize a movie? Watch another movie. Why review a game? Play another game. You don't like this Beatles song? How dare you say so - go listen to something else!

Re:Whats the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528094)

Strawman

Piracy forever (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527908)

Piracy forever man. Accept no substitute!
Always a superior product. Always in the format the market wants. Even with a negligible price point, these dumb companies are just not agile enough.

No weird-ass, windows only client to download. No signup, lock-in and DRM.
The piracy scene has all the web 2.0 social crap like the commercial sites now, so you can talk about the shit you're pirating.

Pure win.

Re:Whats the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528046)

Yeah I figured I'd just hit up turntable.fm instead... but, oh wait... they're Facebook-only too.

Re:Whats the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528090)

> Don't like open Internet, where consumers ruthlessly select the best services and content, creating a global information Renaissance? Use another service.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Whats the problem? (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528112)

Don't like this news story? Read another news story.

Re:Whats the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528244)

Don't like it? Use another service.

Typical reaction from an average sheeple who wants to remain ignorant to the depth of the privacy concerns and how information can and is used against you in ways "never intended". So many are like him, ready to be marched right into to the slaughterhouse simply because others do it and he likes the shiny new doors hiding the screams of the abatoire inside. Nothing left and nowhere to run, the few of us who do will be caught and dragged in, kicking and screaming, until we are silenced and they have complete control.

Fair enough.. one less user for spotify (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527740)

Well, I guess spotify doesn't want as many users as it can get, so I am glad to help by not signing up with them.

How much is facebook paying them for this blatant plug? How much is google+ going to sue em for?

Facebook karma (3, Interesting)

SoupGuru (723634) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527778)

Facebook has been doing some questionable things lately, which is interesting considering they have an up-and-coming contender in Google+ to compete against.

There have been murmurings about the privacy stuff and general griping going on for a while now but there was no "real" alternative. Then G+ goes live and Facebook makes some pretty big interface changes. I figure a lot of people just Facebook because it's comfortable and cozy... but when you introduce a crapload of new things and push people out of their comfort zone that just makes checking out G+ that much easier.

Now they just keep doing things to dare people to leave

Re:Facebook karma (2)

cavtroop (859432) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527858)

Except people won't leave Facebook. With the new changes (I call it the 'stalking update 1.0'), I've been preaching to everyone on FB to move over to Google+.

Not a single person has moved. They're too comfortable on Facebook, even with the recent UI changes. They're happy to make post after post bitching about FB, the new UI, the privacy problems, but they're too lazy to DO ANYTHING about it.

Until Google+ gets a significantly larger userbase, it's not particularly useful. *sigh*

Re:Facebook karma (1)

Announcer (816755) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527928)

Why are so many people so reluctant to leave FB? That answer is simple: A VAST MAJORITY of their family and friends (real friends) are on it. If they leave, they won't find those people on G+... so why leave? Tolerate the changes, but stay in touch with your 'peeps. Seems to be working.

Re:Facebook karma (3, Insightful)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528098)

Before facebook was MySpace. Mass migration/hemorrhaging of users is not unprecedented in recent social networking history.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527940)

About 5 people I know have signed up to Google+ since the recent Facebook updates. However, none of them seem to be using it. I think the main problem is there's no events functionality, which is the most important feature of Facebook.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

said213 (72685) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528126)

"I think the main problem is there's no events functionality, which is the most important feature of Facebook... to me."

I would be willing to bet that more people would complain about the removal of games than would if events were eliminated.

It seems to me that the reason no one "seems to be using" google+ has more to do with people being able to choose whether or not to pay attention to the inane posts of others, whereas they are unavoidable with facebook. No matter how few or many contact you have; you aren't guaranteed an audience with g+

That missing [forced]direct feedback channel is both the boon and the bane of g+

Of course... I don't really know, as I've stopped using both services due to the fact that they're asinine.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

blahbooboo (839709) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527950)

Google+ should allow me to have completely non-public profile etc. Until then, Facebook is better than Google+ in terms of privacy.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528136)

You can only use one or the other? I only use G+ so I donno. I suppose its technically possible for each side to intentionally screw up the other guys cookies and whatever else (keyloggers?)

Sounds like an artificial problem where you "must" only have landline or cell phone, or you "must" only use one of windoze mac or linux.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527884)

People go to facebook because that's where their friends are. What good does a social network do if your friends aren't there?

Re:Facebook karma (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527966)

Wait, wait, what? You mean, people have real friends on Facebook, too?

I dunno, I may be old fashioned, but ... if I need something from my friends, I call them. If they need something from me, they call me. If there's anything they need to know about me, I tell them. If they want to know something about me, they ask me. I kinda fail to see the advantage Facebook would offer.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528230)

On the other hand, Facebook is where all of your worthless Farmville friends are.

A new service could sell itself for being a tool to actually connect with your own social circle rather than random strangers in Thailand who's "friendship" is merely useful for playing inane Zynga games.

The S/N ratio on Facebook (driven by it's design and business model) tends to make it less and less useful. Constant mindless spamming from the likes of Spotify might be just what the 'danes need in order to start fleeing to another service.

Re:Facebook karma (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527892)

Anyone murmuring about privacy stuff won't be using a Google product as an alternative.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

blahbooboo (839709) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528076)

Anyone murmuring about privacy stuff won't be using a Google product as an alternative.

Exactly

Re:Facebook karma (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528176)

My first thought as well. And central database of single sign on is a bad idea if you value security or privacy. I mean, FaceBook accounts never get hacked, do they?

Re:Facebook karma (2)

Chuckles08 (1277062) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527962)

I agree... Facebook with the whole "follow your life" path that they seem to be taking are alarming many users who already have some concern about privacy but are on Facebook because everyone else is. I've switched to Google+ because of the way Facebook, and now its partners, are pushing people around.

Re:Facebook karma (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528152)

Facebook has been doing some questionable things lately, which is interesting considering they have an up-and-coming contender in Google+ to compete against.

It is not intentional. But a while ago, they switched over to Google Docs, and sense then, memos and directives have changed occasionally. ;)

Well it makes NOT signing up easier... (5, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527784)

which is close to what they're saying I guess.

Oh well (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527816)

I guess they didn't want my business.

to heck with them (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527822)

No, I'm not going to link Facebook to anything. Facebook is lame and has no good intentions. I recently deleted it off my phone and don't miss it a bit. The company sells out their users at every turn with regard to privacy. It's a festering stinkhole of risk to the individuals who use it. And I'm completely bored of all the meaningless crap people post all day.

Good luck, Spotify. I will happily live without you. In fact, my life will likely be richer as a result. Instead of wasing my life on Facebook and Spotify, I will go outdoors and spend time with my family. Ah, I feel healthier already.

Already "uncool" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527824)

Don't look now, but facebook is already "uncool" with the users who made it "cool" in the first place. Might want to look at the next big thing -- that is, until it gets displaced by its own successor.

These people must have a horribly inflated vision of what facebook actually is: a private sign-up website with nothing but its own interests in mind. Gee, how many billions of those are in existence today?

Sad day for Spotify founders (2)

realmojo (62898) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527830)

How embarrassing to spend all that time building up a company only to effectively "resign" from the internet and cede your entire company to become just a feature of another company. Facebook is the king of getting people to work for them gratis. Spotify did the heavy lifting with the labels and Facebook eats their lunch.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders (5, Interesting)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528036)

Indeed. If Facebook wanted Spotify to become Facebook Music, you would have thought that they could have at least had the class to buy Spotify and give the owners a payout. I suppose there's a reason why "Facebook" and "class" aren't words you think of together too often, though.

Part of me wonders if Facebook didn't give them the old Offer You Can't Refuse, the way Microsoft used to do in the old days. Back when Windows was the monoculture, Microsoft could extract enormous concessions from potential partners simply by threatening to dump a competing product into Windows and give it away for free if they didn't play ball. One could certainly see Facebook having similar leverage over any social service; so many people are on Facebook now that if FB picked up a Spotify competitor (say, rdio [rdio.com] ), rebranded it as Facebook Music, and gave it away 100% free, Spotify's business model would be in serious jeopardy. That gives Facebook a pretty big hammer to wield over Spotify at the negotiating table.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528154)

How embarrassing to spend all that time building up a company only to effectively "resign" from the internet and cede your entire company to become just a feature of another company. Facebook is the king of getting people to work for them gratis. Spotify did the heavy lifting with the labels and Facebook eats their lunch.

Maybe its a very public display of affection for FB... they really wanna get purchased...

Either FB is going to purchase spotify or spotify is going to be really embarrassed when FB rejects their advances.

epic (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527844)

wait, there is a term for this.... ah, yes, here: EPIC FAIL!!!

NEVER!!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527846)

Any service or website that requires a Facebook account will NEVER get any of my business. This is a very troubling trend. I'm seeeing more and more websites that are requiring it.

Re:NEVER!!!! (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528192)

Any service or website that requires a Facebook account will NEVER get any of my business. This is a very troubling trend. I'm seeeing more and more websites that are requiring it.

I'm not. At least not twice...

Venn Diagram (3, Funny)

basilisk12 (622742) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527926)

I would love to see a Venn Diagram of "People who object to using Facebook for privacy reasons" and "People who would actually pay for Spotify accounts"

Re:Venn Diagram (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37527992)

Yep. My guess is there is no intersection between the two sets or that the percentage of users who fall into that category is so small that Spotify has made the decision that they can provide a higher quality lower hassle service to the vast majority of their customer base by choosing not to care about the small, but very whiny and vocal minority.

If I was running their company I would do exactly the same thing. Why waste time trying to satisfy the 1% who will be pissed by this? They are much better off replacing them with people who actually fit their business model.

Re:Venn Diagram (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528064)

Add me in there. I just upgraded to an unlimited account on my free account yesterday. I've never had a facebook account, and don't want one.

Re:Venn Diagram (4, Insightful)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528214)

Not applicable. How about people who would not like the link FaceBook to a service with access to bank or credit card information? Even if you have FaceBook, that does not mean you want them to have more information about you.

Everybody knows. (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527930)

If you want a good relationship with your customers you force them to do something against their will.

I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites... (3, Interesting)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527946)

"...The company has now defended the policy, stating, oddly, that the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier."

I guess the questions are:

1: Why not let me the user determine that?"

2: Why not pitch the idea that I might find Facebook signing easier?

The end result will be easier and better for Spotify but guess what, I am gone!

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528000)

Guess what? No one misses you!
 
We really don't care. You're probably just a basement dwelling troll anyway so we're actually better off without you.

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites. (0)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528116)

Dear Pot,

YOU ARE BLACK

Sincerely,

The Kettle

well fuck spotify then (2)

e3m4n (947977) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527952)

because I'll be damned if I'll ever join one of those brainless twit websites that completely invade your privacy. Hell if it ever gets to a point where i'm somehow legally or financially required to surrender my privacy to facebook my page is going to be a big white banner that says "FUCK YOU FOR BOTHERING TO LOOK HERE!". I've seen presumably 'personal' sites like this used all the time to discriminate against job applicants. Several times they got teachers fired because someone ELSE posted a picture of a teacher with a glass of wine (no big deal right?); yet because of their districts strict policy, not about drinking but about advertising drinking, they were fired. They can all go fuck themselves as far as I am concerned. and to Spotify, here is hoping you lose your ass on your decision to sell your soul to facebook.

Sad. :( (4, Informative)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 2 years ago | (#37527960)

I really used to Love Spotify.

I'm a premium subscriber and still like it, but this trend is depressing... I noticed a few days ago that I can't play Spotify links off Facebook. "Your platform is not supported." even though I run the native Linux client, and now this?

Gotta hate it when mainstream corporate pressure slowly eats away what once was a Good Thing. :/

No more privacy... (3, Interesting)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528026)

The funny thing is how Spotify spams Facebook's life stream with what you're listening to. I'm sure the music industry loves that, constant free advertising. And most people will just go along with that because it's a fun new feature. Privacy doesn't even enter into the equation.

Unfortunately, there's no viable competitor to Facebook out there. Facebook has stolen a lot of Google+'s thunder. They've introduced a bunch of new features, including matching a lot of what Google+ offered. Google could prove me wrong but I think Google+ is another one of these things that will linger for a few years before they finally kill it like so many other things they've done. And it's not like Google is a paragon of privacy.

And whatever happened to Diaspora?

Bill Joy was slightly wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528032)

The "Grey Goo" is Facebook, turning the entire content of the web into "Like" buttons.

Desktop vs Mobile Listening (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528122)

My big gripe with Spotify is that you can subscribe for $5 / month and listen all you want on your desktop machine. If, however, your end point is your phone, they charge $10 / month. I really don't understand what difference it makes to them if the stream end point is my phone or a computer.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening (0)

RogerWilco (99615) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528208)

I don't know, but for me it's well worth it, I use it on my phone all the time, while on my desktop I sometimes don't log in for more than a month.

I have a lot of long trips in the car with friends, and being able to select and play songs on the fly has been very entertaining.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening (4, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528216)

I really don't understand what difference it makes to them if the stream end point is my phone or a computer.

They know that people who'll spend $600 on an iPhone won't notice that they're also spending twice as much for their music as someone with a computer.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening (2)

Jay L (74152) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528218)

Isn't Spotify P2P-based on desktops? It probably can't do that (or can't do it as well) on mobile, so you pay to leech.

Makes sense to me (0)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528194)

1) Almost everybody I know has a Facebook account
2) Spotify is basically the equivalent of Netflix around the world but for music
3) If my friends sign up they don't have to spend a lot of time making a new account (the biggest complain any normal user has about signing up for *anything* is the act of signing up itself).
4) I get to share my favorite music with all of my FB friends.

Sounds like a win/win to me. You can always make a throwaway FB account if you don't want or need one anyways.

Spotify, tried it. It is no big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528200)

I got one of those accounts when they came over to the states. I have repeatedly loaded it up at small get-togethers at my house. Folks usually say, why cant you search? Where are the good versions of these songs? Why cant you find certain musicians? Then they go back to my Win Amp or Itunes or You Tube.

Spotify, MEH.

One of the two things is going to happen. (2)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528202)

1) Spotify is not going to get my business.
2) Facebook is going to get a bogus account against their terms-of-service with a fake name.

Multiply this by every other person who wanted to try Spotify but refuses to sign up for Facebook.

For me- I'm leaning towards #1. I've got Sirius, MP3s, CDs, Cassettes, Pandora, and FM. If I have to live without Spotify because of their rediculous sign-up requirements... so be it.

I just cancelled (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37528258)

I liked it but I cancelled, never will I support such a stupid idea.

No brainer (1)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | more than 2 years ago | (#37528272)

Make fake facebook user with 0 friends, 0 info, 0 statuses, and 0 pictures. Use a fake name too if it suits you. John Bimblethorpenheimer. Problem solved. They can't invade your privacy if they don't know anything about you.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>