Technology

if it's not available via RSS then it's not a podcast, it's an audio show.

They're investing heavily in podcasts because podcasts are far, far more profitable than music. If they can get people used to (and hooked) on listening to podcasts (any podcasts) through Spotify then all that money spent on popular podcasters will be worth it (in the end).

I'm sure Spotify would love it if they could stop streaming music entirely and just focus on podcasts. Streaming music costs them a ton of money and overhead (bureaucracy associated with keeping track of and paying artists globally with bazillions of laws and regulations and fees to navigate) whereas podcasts just cost bandwidth.

And I'm very much not a fan of fucking up podcasts as a simple medium delivered by RSS. I have a futile hope that that decision will burn them.

This was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. When they started locking up shows to their app, I cancelled my subscription and dropped Spotify entirely. I don't even listen to any of the shows they bought but I do listen to a lot of podcasts through Pocket Casts and take umbrage when anybody fucks with the standards.

My buddy works there now, as the audiobook company he worked for got acquired by them.

You would be shocked how stupid and manual the content acquisition process is. Book publishers might as well still be operating back in the 90s, it's all phone calls and spreadsheets attached to the emails and manual FTP uploads.

If the music business is anything like the audiobook business they likely need so many non IT just to keep the machine fed with content.

Probably data-analysis/AI type stuff to track users and advertise "better," making the backend more efficient to reduce costs, and adding support for new hardware. A lot of big, very profitable companies also have skunkworks-like projects for exploring new ideas and prototypes, most of which never make it into production.

Tbh most employees at a company this size become risk mitigation more than anything else. Once you've reached a certain level of success, you're looking at what doesn't move the needle as much as what makes it move positively. There could be a feature that is a major QoL improvement, but because in a test segment it performed 1% worse than base then it won't be implemented.

Spotify, I believe, still works in the tribe and guild model that they created.

Chapter = people with the same skill set, squad = a group of people from different chapters focused on a single project, tribe = a group of squads focused on a large business goal, guild = a collective of folks who have a shared interest like Data Privacy.

Suffice to say, Agile is an imperfect tool and as you try to scale it, you need an increasing number of people to support it and make it run. Coders and Designers are likely just a fraction of their head count.

I've worked places that don't have that support structure in place and they've stagnated for years struggling to get the most basic of decisions made. Decisions is what it is about too. Rarely do you get actual leadership from the c-level and especially from a CEO. So you end up with a lot of cooks trying to work out why the broth doesn't taste quite right and lacking confidence to just add a bit of salt.

It's both amazing and annoying that Google is perfectly able to create useful apps for iOS (despite the huge limitations the OS imposes) but Apple can't figure out how to make any Android app that isn't utter crap with fewer restrictions imposed on them.

@d3Xt3r
@hesusingthespiritbomb

Wow essentially like any other company

You say that like it's a defense though.

Yeah they're paying the people who make the product we sell so little that they don't even get enough money in a paycheck to have it be worth sending them a paycheck!!