I'd hazard a guess 90% of WP instances could be replaced by static site generator + some tiny app to handle forms, and the 9/10th of remaining ones with static gen + form + some external commenting system, whether in cloud or something like commento.

the deers and boars running around in my neighbourhood seems to DGAF

Send DMCA takedown, that's only thing big companies seem to react. Without checking validity of it of course

only big companies are allowed to abuse the dmca process, unfortunately.

I want API keys with monthly and hourly quotas and RATE LIMITING.

like 50k requests per hour, above that 1/s/client up to 20 req/sec.

I don't want to shotgun my service for every user if one user is misbehaving. I want to set rate of bleeding

the topic is cost overruns. they still allow for cost overruns. What's so hard to comprehend ?

...still haven't seen single sensible use case for one that couldn't be solved easier/better/cheaper normal way

I’m reminded of the Carl Rogers therapy app that was developed in the 80s.

People would type in their problems and how they were feeling. The application had very very simple logic that would follow up with a set series of statements or questions. Things like “that sounds tough” and “how does that make you feel?”.

People reported great satisfaction, even if they knew that the application had no smarts behind it. Because of course the whole time the magic of therapy lies in verbalizing your problems, with very little actively done by the therapist.

Now you can pay an LLM subscription for a service that likely produces worse results since it is tuned to be aggressively (and insidiously) sycophantic.

The process is called Socratic questioning (or rabbinical reasoning).

You can implement the same thing in python-aiml for free.

https://github.com/paulovn/python-aiml/blob/master/aiml/botd...

Digital goods- like digital rights for movies, games, etc. only none of the big players would ever give up their walled gardens/licenses instead of ownership for content etc.

Companies Spotify rent music from

We need to split "a creation" and "a set of ideas used in creation"

You created entire book ? Sell it for 40 years, sure But that should not apply to someone taking a tiny thing from it and making their own stuff around it, 10 years maybe.

> But that should not apply to someone taking a tiny thing from it and making their own stuff around it, 10 years maybe

Totally agree with that idea.

no. if you listen only to niche musicians, all of the fee goes to most popular one regardless.

It also promotes botting, as spotify only counts listens, bot listening a ton to a fraudulent artist will siphon money away from essentially everyone.

"Money only goes to artists you listen" would be very good change

> Not sure if you're aware, but it's the labels, not Spotify:

*not only Spotify

They had plenty of problems from people abusing their system to steal listens from actual artists.

Their system is basically "one big bucket of listens" - if your song gets listens, you get money. So if you pay your sub, and listen to say 5 niche musicians only, it still all goes mostly to the most popular songs.

Now you might already notice the flaw here - if you say, make a bunch of bots that just listen to songs to boost their revenue, not only your sub doesn't pay artists you listen, but also to fraudulent ones.

Then there was problems with using fake collaboration tags, AI music to hijack artist profiles, and few others.

> Their system is basically "one big bucket of listens" - if your song gets listens, you get money. So if you pay your sub, and listen to say 5 niche musicians only, it still all goes mostly to the most popular songs.

That's basically how radio is accounted for in royalties, as well.

With Spotify knowing exactly who listened to what, it could be more precise (and arguably more susceptible to the fraud), but tbh what they do is standard (compulsory licensing) industry practice.

With radio, everyone that listens to a particular station is listening to roughly the same mix of songs, and they're "paying" (by listening to ads) on a per-hour basis.

If either of those was true with spotify, the unfairness would go away.

But when different listeners are paying very different amounts per hour, any correlation between payment amount and preferred content causes problems.