373
Peak organization
(startrek.website)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
373 points (97.5% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26814 readers
1779 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Apparently back in the covered wagon days when shuffle features were truly random, the listener would occasionally be burdened by hearing two songs by the same artist in a row. Literally no one complained about this, so of course upper management decided that this must be "fixed" immediately, so that's what led to shuffle features becoming noticeably worse than when they were simply random, which is all anyone ever wanted them to be.
Actually, and I don't mean to be that guy, but people did complain about it.
True random means that you could end up with songs by the same artist being played four or five times in a row, which makes people think it's not random at all. Humans are really bad at understanding randomness, so a little help to make it feel more random improves satisfaction.
But at this point, it's gone too far and I'm almost certain that shuffling involves always playing the most popular songs by an artist first, then random covers and remixes, then the back-catalog of works.
On a side note, I wish I could exclude remixes and covers when shuffling through an artist's stuff.
All I want is shuffle not to repeat until I've heard (or skipped) every song.
I mean really what they should do is provide some degree of control over the shuffle parameters... But hey ho, back to listen to whatever Spotify thinks is my favourite song.
Not all of us. I can't imagine not understanding that if something's random, there's a possibility that something like playing the same artist five times in a row might happen. It's cute when that happens, it's a thing that should be possible and one of the things that was so much fun about shuffle.
I don't want to be that guy either, but do you have a source showing that people really did complain about this? I've heard it said so many times that they did, but I don't believe it. I think it's just an excuse for big corporations like Spotify and Apple to manipulate algorithms to deliberately promote certain artists. I don't believe it was ever well intentioned, and I resent that there's no feature for people who want "shuffle" to work like it should work -- in a completely random fashion. Or at least give us the option. The fact that there's not even a randomization option at all should make clear that this was not development that was done in good faith or for the benefit of the listener. They actually removed a feature in order to promote their corporate crap.
It's so obvious that Spotify is promoting certain artists. As soon as I launch the app, it's always the same shit on the front page. At this point, I could pretty well predict what major-label crap is in all those "recommended" playlists they create for me. It's so bad. Honestly, if it weren't so damn inconvenient to do so, I'd just rip songs from the CDs I buy from independent labels and put them on my phone. I'm pretty sure there are some apps that have a genuinely random shuffle. Just got to find one.
https://engineering.atspotify.com/2014/02/how-to-shuffle-songs/
Spotify themselves got that feedback that their truly random shuffle didn't feel random, so they changed it to an algorithm. And this is from 2014 when they made the switch, so they were only just diving into algorithmic promotion.
I don't disagree that Spotify now promotes certain artists and has really messed with their shuffle algorithms, but they left the true random behind because people complained about it.