From the 10 Dollar, taxes will be deducted. Afterwards Apple or Google take their share (if you subscribe using the App). Of the remaining money the Music labels take 70 %, and Spotify keeps 30 %. The music labels pay a fraction of the 70 % to the artists, depending on the contract and the artist’s share of streams reported by Spotify.

That whole article is BS, they even say it themselves:

Rates are rarely paid at a flat rate per stream

There is no payout per stream. Instead a fixed percentage of the subscription price is shared among each streamed song. So why does Tidal pay more then? Either their subscriber numbers are still incorrect (they have a history of publishing way higher numbers than in reality), their subscriber listen to less music (which is the main reason Apple Music pays more per stream on paper, since its often bundled) or their audience focuses more on a single artist (or a genre).

They pay less than Tidal claims it pays. So far Tidal has a really bad history of publishing correct numbers.

The problem is that Spotify is losing money each year. They aren’t profitable. And if they are keep focusing on music, they never will. Their deal with the music labels says that they need to give 70 % of each subscription to the music labels. So by getting more people to signup, they only marginally increase their revenue. Same goes for raising their prices.

Thats why they tried focusing on Podcasts and Audiobooks. Those are a lot more profitable, either by adding ads (Podcasts) or by charging a premium (audiobooks).

How does this work? Spotify has a deal with the music publishers, where they give 70 % of all subscription income to the music companies. The music companies (Sony, Warner, etc) then split the money based on the share of streams.

How can Apple pay out 2.5x70 %, so 175 %? Are thes losing with every subscription?

Who needs actually good research and freedom of science, if you have enough young men willing to dive into the meat grinder with poorly developed weapons.

Don’t give me hope.

The US – like Russia and China and a couple more countries – doesnt recognize to the ICC.

Thats simply not true. Its just that Germany has rules against demanding the extinction of the state of Israel – you know – due to historical reasons and mainly against Nazis.

The claim ‘from the river to the sea’ calls for the extinction of Israel, because it calls for a Palestinian state between Jordan and Mediterranean, therefore Israel has be desolved. Therefore ‘from the river to the sea’ is a prohibited phrase in Germany and you are not allowed to chant it at demonstrations. If you do so, the demonstration might get cancelled.

Freedom of speech in Germany is just more restricted compared to the US. There are a lot of things you are not allowed to say – mainly things associated with Nazis.

And still Mercedes is the car company with the highest autonomy level of any car manufacturer. And no one talks about that.

I did say the exact opposite…

Its not even close. For example, end-to-end encryption is standard in the west. In China its heavily restricted and basically non-existant.

Its actually also a media problem. For example, the largest Tiktok account of a german politician belongs to Maximilian Krah, of the far right party AFD. Just yesterday it was revealed that his personal assistant is actually a Chinese spy. Krah himself voiced a lot of pro-Chinese opinions before, like being pro annexation of Taiwan and denying the genocide on the uigyurs.

This begs the question if his Tiktok popularity is based on a non-biased algorithm or if the CCP made a deal with him, boosting his Tiktok popularity in exchange for being pro-China.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Fast travel for example? Either I allow it or I don’t. But both decision have a huge implication on the game design.

Of course. The problem with waste is still there and you can also replace Nuclear with renewables, like Germany did. Nuclear shut down, coal also 20 % down, renewables on record heights.

Talk to families of unjustified imprisoned people or to the people itself. His ‘fixing’ was done by basically imprisoning everyone, which just happened to be close to any suspect gang member. There where even cases where a mailman was imprisoned because he just happenend to deliver a parcel during a raid.

Yes, he fixed the gang problem for now. But at a high price – the loss of a fair justice system. He imprisoned 1.2 % of the total population in just 2 years.

I know that freedom vs security is a fine balance and once security suffers significantly, you are willing to give up quiet a lot of freedom. But since he just imprisoned everyone and their relatives, its only a temporary fix – unless he wants to imprison them for life.

Also there is a difference between calling for a ceasefire and claiming that its a genocide. SA has all right to be critizied for that.