Dithering and Open versus Free
stratechery.com
stratechery.com
How'd that work out?
I'm really glad to see smart Publishers like Ben Thompson looking to head the Aggregators off at the pass.
It didn't destroy them. It turned them static and can also create a `Firefox feeds backup.opml` that can be imported by feed readers.
Sure this may not be the best situation but they didn't simply destroy live bookmarks.
This isn't the whole story, certainly, but it's probably the biggest story of what happened. While I'm excited about shifts to membership, I do think fundamentally the advertising landscape also needs to change.
The beauty of RSS and RSS client is that I choose my own source. And RSS client compared to FB tends to be much higher information density, Command Click to open everything I like in new Tab and I have lots ( and too many ) to read.
I think twitter replaces some form of blog post more than anything.
Not necessarily. Not all podcasts apps support "manually" adding feeds.
https://transistor.fm/add-podcast
> You can't currently manually add podcast RSS feeds to these apps: Spotify, Stitcher, Castbox, Google Play, Google Podcasts, iHeartRadio App
That index could come from search/crawl or publishers. The big apps require publishers to manually register their podcast:
Apple: https://podcastsconnect.apple.com/my-podcasts/new-feed
Google: https://play.google.com/music/podcasts/portal
Sticher: https://partners.stitcher.com/join#signup
Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/submit
I think the main reason for this requirement is licensing. By default apps cannot safely redistribute copyrighted podcast content. You have to specifically approve Stitcher etc. to handle your material.
Also, private podcasts exist, where you need to put in an RSS feed that isn't in any public listing.
If you didn't read the article, you really should, along with this one[0]. Spotify and Stitcher really are special (bad) cases.
[0]: https://stratechery.com/2019/shopify-and-the-power-of-platfo...
In addition to jtbayly's comment about Google not hosting anything, there's the small point of iTunes not distributing podcasts, either. It's a glorified index of RSS feeds, described in detail here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16724635
Apple, Google, and other traditional aggregators no more need permission to operate their services than TV Guide needed permission to list broadcast schedules. (Or to run a search engine, for that matter...)
On the topic of URLs, see this discussion from several months ago:
How Castbox can claim to be a podcast app but not let you put in RSS feeds is beyond me.
Google Podcasts deserves its own special writeup. It's infuriating.
I dream of a world where lot of indie open source developers are actually paid for their work by something else than Google or Facebook!
In my vision people pay for packaged software, such as a packaged deb or rpm or whatever format consumers want to buy. They get access to the sources too, and can build themselves if that’s what they want.
I would really like to be able to buy services for my raspberry pi for example, knowing that I will get a packaged software that is maintained and tested. I have no issues to setup stuff myself, but if I can have for example a media player that I can buy and install via an APT equivalent, I would be quite happy. I find it really weird that I never had to pay for VLC given the amount of time I spent using it (I list it in my top 3 softwares of all time).
Also I want to be able to spend my time creating and selling tools and services that people can easily shop for and install.
Basically steam, but not for command line and services.
I find it really strange that we expect open source software to be free and have developers asking for donations instead of having more standard market dynamics. We don’t have this for games, or arts, or anything else that I’m aware of.
I know I can donate, I’ve done it multiple time. But I don’t think that make sense.
Of course, it's still essential that we fund creative work. But we need to stop presuming that the only options are paywalls or ads. If paywalls or ads bring enough funding, then the money exists. We just need to work out how to distribute it to the creative workers by means that aren't so compromised.
- private grants
- crowdfunding patronage (without paywalls, actual donations)
- business support of commons / ecosystem that is shared among businesses
in the crowdfunding domain, it's still rare but not unheard of to have pure uncompromised patronage, e.g. https://www.peppercarrot.com/ having no paywalls, FLO licensing, and no ads
among efforts to build more effective mass patronage, there's Snowdrift.coop (not yet fully launched)
When you think of music and the big picture, bands should be giving music away for free (Radiohead!). This is done so as to create new fans and reach more people who might come to concerts in the future. Or (gasp!) actually pay for an album to support their favorite music performer.
Musicians should be thinking about creating a relationship with their intended audience. They should tap into the networked age, and bring music out of the low space it occupied in the past between the producer and consumer. Bring music into the wide multi-national and multi-lingual community.
To understand and to make meaning of it all - is the key of the 21st century. Not to monetize.