Ford learned, as everyone does in manufacturing, that the “1,000 things” an intrinsically motivated, long term employee does are not interchangeable.
It was Taylor (of Taylorism) who proposed companies should work this way. It has never been proven to work & often disproven.
In every org, that I’ve personally seen the inside of, the concept of interchangeable talent has been an utter fiction.
Even at franchises, one key employee is often the difference between success & disaster.
However, our leadership class has both a social and educated POV that is articulated in this post.
While I don’t disagree that a shareholder-return driven entity can never properly appreciate the value of individual team members, Henry Ford took the case all the way to the Supreme Court to fight against that. He lost.
The preternatural rise of the entrepreneurial spirit - wherever it occurs - rarely devalues loyal, thoughtful team members. Those that do are sending up a flare gun that they are pushing to an exit with little concern for what happens after they cash out.
Unfortunately we’ve hit the zenith where finance philosophies (which is what they are, not facts) have become so ubiquitous it’s career suicide to say otherwise.
I’m so grateful founding is still a viable alternative path.
If I am looking for a co-founder, who that person and their very unique combination of skills, perspectives, etc, matters a ton. If I am looking for SRE #20,000 for a FAANG, I need them to do the basic SRE role in a way that aligns with how we think about our caliber and culture. Obviously the person can do that in their own way to an extent, but we're not really looking for them to have insights like "actually, I don't think reliability matter - I am gonna stop doing it"
I've frustrated just about every manager I've had because of this. On the flip side, my spirit has allowed me to pursue paths others had dismissed. This has led to many situations where I've accomplished something that was thought to be impossible, or made significant improvements that compound and would not have been prioritized otherwise.
Everyone does their job with love and belief until they get punched in the face with a pink slip.
After learning about the layoff and the role that the person behind it had at Spotify (namely that of 'crazy scientist', as far as I could tell), it suddenly made sense... but hearing that, even if you've impacted so many people's lives positively, you seemingly still can't escape the 'rules of the game' indefinitely also just made it all the more sad.
But still, I've found so many cool genres through Every Noise (my bachelor's thesis was largely written to The Sound of Neurofunk), and I've introduced so many people to the site... I'm really grateful it existed in the first place!
The discovery algorithm in general has never been as good as say Pandora, but I guess I agree that it's felt worse recently.
Most annoying to me recently is how there seem to be three different ways to indicate I like a song, depending on which device I'm listening on (desktop app on my laptop or desktop, or mobile app on my Android phone) - I swear I've seen hearts, plus signs and thumbs-up symbols, without any clear indication of any differences. I know a sibling comment mentioned this change, but they made it sound recent - I _feel_ like I've had that point of confusion for over a year...
In part out of frustration with Spotify, and in part to hedge against streaming disappearing one day, I'm in the process of ripping my exiting CD collection to FLAC, and buying either digital or physical copies of my favourite albums.
I've found it pretty refreshing to open my music app (Finamp) and only see exactly what I want to.
I've been generally very happy with the Spotify app for years and it's disappointing to see the quality slipping.
To add, I think I’m seeing less discovery and more popularity bias. I used to discover a lot more.
There is a limit to "delightful serendipity". At some point, you will have heard everything you could potentially be interested in but not normally listen to. After that, it will be either not your thing or more of the same.
Also, algorithms don't read your mind, they just match your usage patterns (mostly what you are already listening to) to other people usage patterns and give you what they have and you don't. For example you may listen to psy trance, and the algorithm notices that many people who listen to psy trance also listen to folk metal, so it will give you some of that. And there is a good chance for you to like that even though it is a completely different genre you may not be aware of.
But once all the matches are done, that's the end. There may be a few paths left for you to explore, because you are an individual and not an average, and tastes change, but there is no easy way for any algorithm to find that. The only solution is to go with stuff you probably won't like, so, not so delightful serendipity. Or just give you more of the same.
I never like spotify's "for you" playlists.
Everything is owned by the same tiny group of people and they need the number to always go up.
More and more frequently, as the blood is squeezed out of the stone, that means laying everyone off and dumping the work on fewer and fewer people.
I can choose pretty much any "song radio" and the same set of artists shows up. I mean, I like Alice in Chains, but not in every play list.
Need to show growth > Hire more and more people > A lot of them have nothing to do because companies always over hire > Change parts that work in the name of improvements because they have to show they are working > enshitification
- https://everynoise.com/cities.html
- https://everynoise.com/countries.html
There are also features for "hyper local" discovery, i.e. finding the individual tracks that are most popular in your city. For music lovers, this site provides the initial breadcrumb for many fascinating rabbit holes.
Spotify’s astrology-like Daylists go viral, but the company’s micro-genre mastermind was let go last month
https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/18/spotifys-astrology-like-da...
In a casual manner, I allot myself ~$15/mo (or more) to buy new stuff on Bandcamp. As you can see, it's going nicely and I have a ton of music from my favorite artists, also stored permanently on my NAS in mp3 and FLAC formats.
"I went back to torrenting" is a Reddit/HN thing. Regular people are still using streaming services for the vast majority of content.
The website was maintained by jlarome. Who, i suspect, is a spotify employee.
The website was abruptly abandonned, some years ago. And i have always wondered the reason why.
Was he allowed to use that? I mean for this use case and publishing
That's a great insight. It will spare people a lot of frustration.