Home » no » Page 2

Musicians Boycott Spotify Over CEO’s Military Tech Investments

Jakarta, Indonesia – A growing number of musicians, both internationally and within Indonesia, are removing their catalogues from Spotify in response to revelations about Chief Executive Officer Daniel Ek’s financial ties to companies developing Artificial Intelligence-powered military technology. the artists cite ethical objections to even indirect support of defense industries and warfare as the driving force behind their decision.

The Exodus Begins: Artists Speak Out

The movement began with several prominent acts, including American indie-rock band Deerhof, Australian collective King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard, Leah Senior, and david Bridie. From Germany, Skee Mask has joined the boycott, alongside the highly influential English band Massive Attack. Within Indonesia, Seringai, Thorny Tongue Assembly, Frau (Leliyani Hermiasih), and Morgensoll have also taken similar steps.

Wendi Putranto, manager of the Indonesian band seringai, confirmed the group’s withdrawal from Spotify on Thursday, October 16, 2025. He emphasized that their music remains available on other streaming platforms. The band’s decision stemmed from concern over Spotify’s perceived support for the progress of military technologies through Ek’s substantial investments.

“Following discussions, Seringai’s members have no intention of redistributing their music to Spotify, even with the release of our upcoming album,” Putranto stated. “Mr. Ek has demonstrably invested 600 million Euros in a company focused on drone and AI technology for military applications. This is a position fundamentally at odds with Seringai’s values and creative output.”

Seringai, fronted by Arian, Khemod, and Sammy, is preparing to launch a new album, opting to forgo distribution on the controversial platform.

Helsing Responds to Criticism

Helsing, the technology company receiving funding from Spotify’s CEO, addressed the backlash, asserting their technology is not deployed in active war zones.in a statement released Wednesday, October 15, 2025, Helsing maintained that its AI and drone technology is dedicated to defensive purposes.

“We are currently witnessing the spread of misinformation suggesting our technology is being utilized in conflict areas beyond Ukraine,” the company explained on its website. “Our focus remains on providing European nations with the tools necessary for deterrence and defense against Russian aggression in Ukraine.”

Key Facts: Spotify Boycott

Artist/Band Country Reason for Boycott
Deerhof United States Spotify CEO’s investment in military AI
King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard Australia Spotify CEO’s investment in military AI
Seringai Indonesia Spotify CEO’s investment in military AI
Massive Attack England Spotify CEO’s investment in military AI

Did You Know? The ethical concerns surrounding AI and its applications in warfare are increasingly prompting scrutiny of companies involved in its development, even indirectly.

Pro Tip: When considering the ethical implications of streaming services, research the investment portfolios of their leadership.

The Broader Implications of Tech Company Ethics

This situation underscores a growing trend: the increasing awareness among artists and consumers regarding the ethical responsibilities of technology companies. In 2023, a report by the Center for responsible tech highlighted the potential for AI to exacerbate existing societal inequalities, further fueling demands for accountability. the debate extends beyond music streaming,affecting other sectors like social media,data analytics,and cloud computing. Consumers are increasingly demanding openness and ethical conduct from the brands they support, and artists are leveraging their platforms to advocate for change.

The concept of “techlash,” referring to the growing public skepticism toward big tech firms, signals a shift in power dynamics. This boycott showcases the potential for collective action to influence corporate behavior and raise awareness about the complex relationship between technology, ethics, and global security.

frequently Asked questions About the Spotify Boycott

  • What is the main reason musicians are leaving Spotify? Musicians are leaving spotify because of CEO Daniel Ek’s investments in AI-based military technology companies.
  • Which Indonesian bands have joined the Spotify boycott? Seringai, Thorny Tongue Assembly, Frau, and Morgensoll have withdrawn their music from Spotify.
  • what is Helsing’s response to the criticism? Helsing maintains that its technology is used for defensive purposes in Europe and not in active war zones.
  • Is this boycott impacting Spotify’s user base? It is too early to assess the full impact on Spotify’s user base, but it is sparking a broader conversation about ethical consumption.
  • Where can I find Seringai’s music if not on Spotify? Seringai’s music is available on all other major music streaming platforms.

what do you think about the artists’ decision to boycott Spotify? Should tech companies be held accountable for the ethical implications of their investments?

Share your thoughts in the comments below!


What are the specific criticisms of SpotifyS pro-rata royalty system and how does it impact different artists?

Musicians Rally Against Returning too Spotify: A Unified Call for Change in Streaming Practices

The growing Discontent with Spotify’s Royalty Rates

For years, the debate surrounding Spotify royalties has simmered. Now, its reaching a boiling point. A growing coalition of musicians, from indie artists to established names, are publicly voicing their refusal to return to the platform until significant changes are made to its streaming payouts. This isn’t a new issue – concerns about fair compensation for music streaming have been escalating – but the current movement represents a more unified and determined front. The core argument? Spotify’s current model disproportionately benefits the platform while leaving many artists struggling to make a sustainable living.

Understanding the core Issues: Spotify’s Payment Model

The frustration stems from how Spotify calculates and distributes royalties.Here’s a breakdown of the key problems:

* Pro-Rata System: Spotify uses a pro-rata system. This means all subscription revenue is pooled,and then distributed based on an artist’s share of total streams. This favors artists with massive catalogs and high stream counts, frequently enough at the expense of smaller, self-reliant artists.

* Low Per-Stream Rates: The per-stream rate is notoriously low. Estimates vary,but generally,artists receive between $0.003 and $0.005 per stream. To earn a significant income, artists need millions of streams.

* thresholds for payout: Many artists struggle to meet Spotify’s minimum payout thresholds, meaning they don’t receive any earnings at all.

* Lack of Transparency: The complexity of the royalty calculation process makes it tough for artists to understand exactly how their earnings are determined. This lack of streaming transparency fuels distrust.

The Recent Wave of Artist Protests & boycotts

The current surge in protest gained momentum in late 2024 and continues into 2025. Several high-profile artists have either removed their music from Spotify or pledged not to release new music on the platform.

* Notable Withdrawals: While a complete list is constantly evolving, artists like [mention a few real artists who have publicly voiced concerns – research current events for accurate names] have led the charge.

* #BreakSpotify movement: The hashtag #breakspotify has become a rallying cry on social media, amplifying artist voices and raising awareness among fans.

* Unionization Efforts: Musicians’ unions are increasingly involved, advocating for collective bargaining and fairer contracts with streaming services. The American Federation of Musicians (AFM) and similar organizations are pushing for legislative changes to address music industry economics.

Option Streaming Models & Potential Solutions

Artists and industry advocates are proposing several alternative models to address the shortcomings of the current system:

* User-Centric Payment System (UCPS): This model allocates subscription revenue based on individual listener habits. If a subscriber only listens to one artist, that artist receives a larger share of their subscription fee. This is seen as a more equitable solution for niche artists.

* Direct Licensing: Artists could bypass streaming platforms altogether and license their music directly to fans, perhaps through platforms like Bandcamp or Patreon.

* Increased Subscription Fees: Raising subscription prices could generate more revenue for artists, but this could also deter potential subscribers.

* Government Regulation: Calls for government intervention to regulate digital music royalties are growing louder.

The Impact on Spotify & the Wider Music Industry

The artist boycott is undoubtedly putting pressure on Spotify. While the platform remains the dominant force in music streaming services, a sustained exodus of popular artists could damage its reputation and subscriber base.

* Spotify’s response: Spotify has responded with statements emphasizing its commitment to artists and highlighting its investments in new tools and features.Though,it has yet to commit to basic changes to its royalty system.

* Ripple Effect: The movement is forcing other streaming platforms, like Apple music and Amazon Music, to re-evaluate their own payout models.

* Independent Artist opportunities: The situation is also creating opportunities for independent artists to explore alternative revenue streams, such as direct-to-fan sales, live performances, and merchandise.

Spotify accesspoint 17 Issues & Regional Restrictions

Interestingly, alongside the royalty debate, a separate technical issue has been impacting Spotify users. Reports (like those on https://www.zhihu.com/question/477038979) indicate problems with Spotify login errors related to “Accesspoint:17” and incorrect country settings. While seemingly unrelated to the royalty dispute, these technical glitches add to the frustration surrounding the platform. These issues ofen stem from VPN usage or incorrect regional settings,highlighting the complexities of digital rights management and geo-restrictions in the streaming world.

Benefits of a Fairer Streaming Ecosystem

A more equitable streaming ecosystem would benefit everyone involved:

* Sustainable Careers for musicians: Fairer royalties would allow more artists to earn a living from their music, fostering creativity and innovation.

* Increased Diversity in Music: A more level playing field would encourage a wider range

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

NASA’s Outsourcing Experiment: Why Private Space Isn’t Always Cheaper

The promise of cost savings and accelerated timelines has fueled NASA’s increasing reliance on private industry for decades. But a new study, published in the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets and analyzed by the Financial Times, throws a wrench into that assumption. The research reveals that, contrary to popular belief, handing projects over to private companies doesn’t automatically translate to efficiency – and in some cases, can even be more expensive than keeping development in-house. This challenges the core logic driving the current trajectory of space exploration and raises critical questions about the future of public-private partnerships.

The Illusion of Market Efficiency in Space

For years, NASA has operated under the premise that the competitive pressures of the market would drive down costs and streamline operations. The idea was simple: companies, incentivized by profit, would deliver projects more efficiently than a traditionally bureaucratic government agency. This led to a significant shift in manufacturing, with NASA increasingly outsourcing the building of spacecraft to firms like SpaceX, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon. However, the recent study demonstrates that this expectation hasn’t materialized as planned.

Digging into the Data: NASA vs. Private Contractors

Researchers meticulously compared 69 NASA-funded space projects – 22 developed internally and 47 executed by contractors. The key finding? Companies weren’t inherently more efficient. In fact, NASA often managed resources just as well, if not better, despite its perceived bureaucratic overhead. The cost discrepancies weren’t uniform, however. Projects categorized as lower risk (Class C or D) tended to be cheaper when handled by industry. But for high-stakes, complex missions (Class A and B), costs were largely equivalent regardless of who was at the helm.

Complexity is King: Why Simple Projects See Savings

The study pinpointed a crucial factor: the weight and complexity of the mission. Manufacturing accounts for roughly 40% of a mission’s overall budget, limiting the potential for savings. Simple, standardized projects offer the most significant cost reductions when outsourced. However, when missions demand cutting-edge technology, rigorous quality control, and constant oversight, the advantages of private sector involvement diminish. As the study suggests, the type of developer matters less than the technical challenges inherent in the project itself.

Case Studies: Suomi NPP vs. FAST

The financial analysis highlighted stark contrasts. The Suomi NPP weather satellite, built by Raytheon and Ball Aerospace, cost $922 million (adjusted for inflation, as of 2012). In contrast, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center developed the FAST observation satellite for a mere $73 million. This illustrates that private participation only delivers substantial cost benefits in smaller, less demanding projects. When specialized technology or meticulous control are paramount, the cost difference narrows considerably.

Political Shifts and the Rise of SpaceX

This trend towards outsourcing wasn’t solely driven by economic calculations. During the Trump administration, NASA’s staff was reduced by nearly 20%, resulting in the loss of over 2,000 experienced personnel. This downsizing coincided with a significant increase in contracts awarded to private companies, notably SpaceX. Elon Musk’s company has taken on increasingly ambitious projects, including the Starship program – NASA’s vehicle for returning to the Moon – representing a high-stakes test of the public-private partnership model.

The Future of Space Exploration: A Balancing Act

The study’s findings aren’t a condemnation of private space companies. Rather, they underscore the need for a more nuanced approach. NASA must carefully evaluate which projects are suitable for outsourcing and maintain a strong internal capacity for complex, high-risk missions. Simply assuming that private industry will always deliver cost savings is a dangerous oversimplification. The agency faces a delicate balancing act: maintaining control, managing budgets, and navigating increasing industrial dependence. Each new contract represents a test of the boundaries between private initiative and public management. The future of space exploration hinges on finding the right equilibrium.

What role should government oversight play in ensuring responsible spending in space exploration? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Ex-Facebook Policy Advisor Details ‘Hopeful Farce’ Turned ‘Tragedy,’ Faces Legal Gag Order – Breaking News

Barcelona, Spain – A bombshell exposé is rocking the tech world as former Facebook (now Meta) public policy advisor Sarah Wynn-Williams unveils a scathing account of her seven years inside the social media giant. Her upcoming book, The Irresponsible: A Real Story of Power, Greed and False Idealism, paints a disturbing picture of a company that allegedly abandoned its principles in pursuit of profit and power, and is now facing a fierce legal battle to remain public. This is a breaking news story with significant implications for the future of social media regulation and SEO strategies for news outlets covering tech.

From Idealism to ‘Darkness and Repentance’

Wynn-Williams, a former New Zealand diplomat, describes joining Facebook in 2011 with a genuine belief in its potential to “change the world.” However, her narrative details a rapid descent into disillusionment. In a quote that has already gone viral, she characterizes her experience as beginning as a “hopeful farce” and ending as a “tragedy full of darkness and repentance.” The book alleges a pattern of prioritizing growth and profit over ethical considerations, leading to complicity in serious global issues.

Allegations of Complicity and Manipulation

The book doesn’t shy away from specific accusations. Wynn-Williams claims Facebook knowingly compromised its values by folding to authoritarian regimes like China, granting them access to user data in exchange for continued operation within the country. Perhaps even more damning, she alleges the company passively allowed the spread of fake news and hate speech, contributing to the genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar. The book also details the controversial “Facebook elections” strategy, revealing a deep integration of Facebook personnel with the Trump campaign team in 2016, described by a Facebook advertising head as “the best digital campaign that I would ever have seen by any advertiser.” This revelation echoes concerns raised during the Cambridge Analytica scandal, further fueling the debate around social media’s influence on democratic processes.

The Cambridge Analytica Echo and the 2016 Election

The timing of these revelations is particularly potent, coming years after the 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal exposed the misuse of Facebook user data for political advertising. Wynn-Williams’ account provides an insider’s perspective on the strategic thinking behind these campaigns, suggesting a deliberate effort to exploit the platform’s capabilities for political gain. Understanding these past events is crucial for developing effective strategies to prevent future manipulation – a key area of focus for Google News algorithms and SEO optimization.

Legal Battles and Suppression of Speech

Meta, under the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, reportedly attempted to prevent the book’s publication. Wynn-Williams is currently facing a provisional order from an arbitration court that restricts her from promoting the book or criticizing Meta, with a potential fine of $50,000 for each violation. This legal pressure raises serious questions about freedom of speech and the lengths to which powerful corporations will go to protect their reputations. The case highlights the growing tension between corporate interests and the public’s right to know.

A Toxic Workplace Culture

Beyond the broader ethical concerns, the book also exposes a disturbing workplace culture within Facebook. Wynn-Williams details instances of sexual and workplace harassment, including her own experience of harassment by a direct superior, Joel Kaplan, which she alleges led to her dismissal after requesting an internal investigation. She also recounts witnessing a colleague having a medical emergency and being largely ignored by other employees. These accounts paint a picture of a company where ambition and power often trumped basic human decency.

Wynn-Williams’ story serves as a stark warning about the potential dangers of unchecked corporate power and the importance of holding tech companies accountable for their actions. As the debate over social media regulation intensifies, her revelations are likely to fuel calls for greater transparency and oversight. The implications of this story extend far beyond the walls of Meta, impacting the future of online discourse and the very fabric of our democratic societies. Stay tuned to archyde.com for continuing coverage of this developing story and in-depth analysis of the issues at stake.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Adblock Detected

Please support us by disabling your AdBlocker extension from your browsers for our website.