Amazon’s quick reaction to the negative outpouring suggests they weren’t expecting it to stick but decided to float it anyway. Had they been successful, this would clearly exemplify how freedom is taken away from people - while they’re asleep. Truly disgusting.
Amazon Music is the latest streaming service to become a podcast catcher. Apple and Google both stream podcasts, while Spotify’s podcasting arm has exclusive deals with figures like Joe Rogan and Kim Kardashian West.
Unlike the other platforms mentioned, Apple doesn’t “stream podcasts”. Apple indexes submitted RSS feeds. When you subscribe to a podcast, the player polls your server directly to update the RSS feed. When you play a podcast, it is streamed directly from your server. You can add any RSS feed directly into the player and play it. Apple isn’t involved.
The difference is extremely important. The other services force you to go through their platform. In fact, Apple has provided a freely accessible API to its podcast directory that anyone can use without asking Apple’s permission.
> In fact, Apple has provided a freely accessible API to its podcast directory that anyone can use without asking Apple’s permission.
Have you tried using it? I haven’t myself but your comment made me google it quickly, and as far as I can tell, then it’s extremely limited (e.g. you can’t fetch a list of all podcasts, or newly updated podcasts, etc).
I can only go by using Overcast which uses it and listening to Marco Arment’s podcasts - the author of Overcast.
He frequently complains about Apple’s APIs and posts about technical details about they could be improved, but he has never complained about the podcast API.
What it doesn’t do I assume is give you a list of podcast episodes. That would make sense since Apple’s own player actually polls individual RSS feeds as does Overcast.
Corporations may become as great a threat to personal freedom and liberty than the government. Perhaps we need a consumer Bill of Rights that guarantees their basic freedoms, acknowledging the power akin to a "company town" that large companies can wield in our private and political lives.
Concentration of power is a threat to personal freedom. Power tries to hold on to power, it is inevitable. At least with government you can theoretically vote the bastards out.
The First Amendment doesn't mean much when all the online "public places" that reaches a majority of citizens are all controlled by corporations who don't have to follow it.
>>Corporations may become as great a threat to personal freedom and liberty than the government.
Quick rhetorical question: Who do you think is funding that government?
The corporations (and the class of people at the top of them) have always been the greatest threat to freedom, at least in America where there was never a king.
This is unrelated to the article at hand, but I've seen sites go so far as to replace entire articles[0]. I'm fairly certain this level of opaque editing is standard practice for journalists anymore, and tend to prefer archive links when I'm sharing content with friends.
[0]
Original article: Boris's new cabinet meet for the first time
New article: Boris Johnson: Premiership will be the start of a golden age
I wouldn't be surprised if they hastily retract this after PR goes AWOL. With antitrust in the works and a world of retailer hate, they shouldn't be playing Orwell cards.
HN users once again don’t understand what “antitrust” is. Amazon Music has almost no percentage of the streaming music market. Amazon has less than nothing of the podcast market. There are dozens of podcast players where you can just put the feed url in your player and subscribe directly to any podcast - including Apple Podcast.
When people use "antitrust" inaccurately in the way you're describing, I find it best to assume that they're actually arguing against "biased incentives", and just aren't being precise with their definitions, not that their points aren't valid.
