Spotify Defends Facebook Sign-Up Requirement

An anonymous reader writes "Music service Spotify has got music lovers' tutus in a twist by insisting that new users have a Facebook account in order to sign up. The company has now defended the policy, stating, oddly, that the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier."

Comments

Just a shot in the dark here

[elrous0]

But might it have something to do with the fact that Sean Parker and Peter Thiel, the guys who funded Spotify's recent move to the U.S., also still happen to own a significant percentage of Facebook?

Nah, that's just cynical crazy-talk. It's just to make the sign-up easier for us consumers.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Out! Out! Damned spot!

Facebook: New 'mark of the beast?'

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[cayenne8]

Well, guess I won't be trying Spotify out then....

Facebook acct: Never had it....Never will....

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[NeutronCowboy]

If it would be just to create a seamless user experience, they would do the standard "here are the 6 most common platform sign-ins, go pick your favorite". The fact that they require FB points to either your guess, or to FB directly paying Spotify for this move. Either which way, go suck it, Spotify. I'll stick to Pandora and, for as long as Pandora isn't on Xbox, Last.fm.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Penguinisto]

Dunno how much good that will do... hordes of fake facebook accounts (or even real ones that are never seen by the users who created them) will only dilute its value to advertisers.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[alamandrax]

I have a facebook account, but that's because my company requires us to have one to test the integration app that we built. I'd be loathe to add apps to it.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Kenja]

Your company requires you to give out personal information on the internet (aka having a facebook account)? Time for a new job, but then the damage is already done since you can never really get the information back once you give it away.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Opportunist]

Hey, I have a facebook account too. Actually, a few. They're not not mine, granted, but I have the password...

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[jalefkowit]

Yeah, because asking people to choose from six options (of which at least two or three probably apply to them -- most people who have a Facebook account probably also have a Google account, a Yahoo account, etc.) is super seamless. Like the man said, the key to usability is "don't make me think."

Not that I'm a fan of Spotify going Facebook-only -- I think it's a terrible move from a business perspective, because it means they now have a middleman standing between them and their customers, which means they live or die at the middleman's pleasure -- but from a usability perspective it's hard to argue that one button is less usable than six. And if you had to pick one of those six buttons to be the only way to log in, Facebook's massive user base probably makes it the choice least likely to result in potential users not being able to get in.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Z00L00K]

You are welcome to go here .

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Chapter80]

What knowledgeable geek puts real information into Facebook?

That'd be crazy!

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[gfreeman]

Who says alamandrax has to put personal info into the account? FB doesn't know personal details if they are not entered.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[eepok]

I have a Facebook account... but only to keep in contact with a couple student organizations that don't understand the value of actual forums for discussion.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

One that actually has friends.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know that this crazy old thing called email still works? Yes.
It can actually be used to stay in touch with friends.
It's crazy i know, but hey, give it a try sometimes.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

What's this "friend" thing I keep hearing about?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[NeutronCowboy]

"Don't make me think" is fine if there's indeed only one plausible action. But FB is not the passport for the Internet, no matter how many people keep saying that. As a result, putting in one action that doesn't apply to a significant chunk of people is worse than giving them options they don't need.

Not to mention: do you REALLY want FB to be the defacto passport for the Internet? Especially as a company whose only ability to hold on to people is their user preferences, which are now shared with FB?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Sunshinerat]

What about tracking cookies?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Abstrackt]

The only real information I have in my account is my name and email address, which is my name, so it's enough for people to confirm it's me but not enough for FB to scrape anything meaningful out of it. Oddly, the fact that the rest of my profile is total BS seems to make it easier for my friends to find me.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Dog-Cow]

FB is an actual forum. Just because you're privacy-conscious and/or anti-social does not make FB a bad thing.

(I don't have an FB account, but my wife does.)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Riceballsan]

Well, having friends, is one thing but you still can completely limit the information you give to facebook. I used to have a facebook account just in case anyone wanted to look me up, details I gave it were, my name, and a single picture of myself. Everything else can be BSed, including birthday location etc... people who know you will know it's you by your picture and otherwise you have given no information out that will reach public view.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Ok, here's your project of the day: Pick a former classmate or former coworker that you haven't talked to in five or more years and email them.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[gfreeman]

Tracking cookies on a company computer is not personal info - it's company info.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

You are finding everybody else because they are providing the info.

Face facts: You are willing to trade some privacy, be it yours or of others, to connect with people you care about. It's not about smart vs dumb.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[GameboyRMH]

I hope you're right, and this isn't a new trend that other online services will follow...

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you fake your listening preferences on Spotify? Doing that seems to waste the value of the service to the end-user-product-sheeple (or whatever we're calling Regular Humans these days).

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[digitig]

What personal information do you have to give to get a Facebook account? Your first and last name (and for most people there are lots of people with the same first and last names), an email address (which can be a disposable one for this purpose), your gender (which is often guessable from your name) and your date of birth. Even if you fill them in honestly, all you are telling the world is that there's a Joe Bloggs, male, born on 20 March 1987 (or whatever) somewhere in the world. Hardly a security risk. All the risky stuff is in the optional profile and the optional postings.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[GameboyRMH]

Those are an issue regardless of whether you're on Facebook.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[RazorSharp]

FB is an actual forum. Just because you're privacy-conscious and/or anti-social does not make FB a bad thing.

Yes, because being privacy-conscious and/or anti-social are obviously bad things. And those are the choices one has if they don't like FB. They're privacy-conscious and/or anti-social.

Nice false dichotomy. Here's a better one: A person uses FB either because they lack individuality and can't think for themselves or because they have such low self-esteem they need to participate in a grand social network to develop a phony sense of worth.

Also, you're right that being privacy-conscious and/or anti-social doesn't make FB a bad thing. What makes FB a bad thing is their lack of morals as a business, most often related to their unconcern for privacy. I would also argue that they're working to mold society into something detrimental to society itself: it prioritizes social status over intellectual status, which is a devolution that has been occurring in American schools since the 50s. It encourages groupthink and ostracizes those who refuse to participate from the greater society.

So, yes, Facebook is a bad thing.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[poetmatt]

I think you forget what facebook is tracking - such as you, on every website with a facebook like button across the web.

so you give up an enormous amount to get a facebook account - you may as well give up your soc and drivers license along with every purchase you've ever made on the net in your life and every website you've ever been to, because that's about the ridiculous extent of reach here. In other wards, it's the same amount of info the ISP's monetize about every customer they have.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[HAKdragon]

What about doing Facebook in PrivateBrowsing/Incognito Mode/InPrivate Mode?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Yeah. I believe they delete the only dollar generating asset that they have.

Facebook and Google and all these crap 'services' are like a "welcome to the Hotel California".

Tracked by "+1" and "Like" buttons, forever.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Ya think? :)

I think I'll decline (on both memberships).

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[rot26]

Facebook acct: Never had it....Never will....

Mohahaha. Everybody has a facebook account. You just haven't activated yours yet. It's sitting there, waiting patiently for you to submit.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

"Just because you're privacy-conscious ... ... does not make FB a bad thing."

Was that an attempt at sarcasm or irony, I get confused.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[nschubach]

This may sound rather odd... but why would you be emailing someone you haven't talked to in over 5 years?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[nschubach]

Not to mention: do you REALLY want FB to be the defacto passport for the Internet? Especially as a company whose only ability to hold on to people is their user preferences, which are now shared with FB?

Well, for a long time it was AOL, those people had to go somewhere...

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[LainTouko]

but from a usability perspective it's hard to argue that one button is less usable than six.

It's quite easy to argue that if you can't use the button they've left you with.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Chapter80]

Ok, here's your project of the day: Pick a former classmate or former coworker that you haven't talked to in five or more years and email them.

You have that "project of the day" backwards. The right challenge, consistent with the GP, is to say:
Pick a former classmate or former coworker that you haven't talked to in five years or more that you want to hear from, and see if they can find your email address.

Frankly, anyone I want to talk to, I talk to. I really don't want people looking me up from longer than five years ago. Thanks anyway.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[digitig]

I think you forget what facebook is tracking - such as you, on every website with a facebook like button across the web.

No they don't. Of course, then Google does...

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I can give you a few examples from my own life:

- I've had a couple of people write me to tell me they just had kids. In one of those cases, back in the day when I saw them on an everyday basis, they were told that, due to health problems, they weren't likely to conceive.

- I contacted a former employer/friend because I saw his son's name in the credits of a movie. His dream came true, that was great!

- I have found a number of high school classmates I had lost touch with. A bunch found me, too.

I've lived in four different cities in the last ten years. I don't see a lot of these people every day. It's easy to miss an email address change. Etc.

There's plenty of reasons.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Rob the Bold]

This may sound rather odd... but why would you be emailing someone you haven't talked to in over 5 years?

I guess you either understand why or you don't.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Rob the Bold]

What's this "friend" thing I keep hearing about?

Although trite, that summarizes a number of posts here.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[matrim99]

Because she lost 45 lbs and just got divorced?

Oh wait, this is Slahdot:
Because she also just dumped Windows and installed Ubuntu?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Raenex]

:)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[cayenne8]

Ok, here's your project of the day: Pick a former classmate or former coworker that you haven't talked to in five or more years and email them.

Interesting..I'd not thought to do that.

Pretty much everyone I've wanted to keep in touch with all these years....from high school on (even one or two that I've known since I was 11yrs old), I've stayed in touch with....via email, and phone. I also try to send the odd snail mail too (usually cards).

Anyone I want to know and have know me...I've always been in touch.

Anyone not on that list...I could not care less about interacting with them. They had their chance and apparently didn't impress me enough for me to want to stay with them. But I have about 25-30 close friends I've known more than decades and stay close with....travel to meet in person as often as possible too.

I've got plenty of people I've wanted to ditch over the years, and not wanting to give them a forum where they could find me.

And right now...I don't have any kids that I know of...and I'd like to keep it that way, hence...I'm not on facebook.

:)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[porges]

For one, turntable.fm requires a Facebook login as well.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a complete dolt in regards to usability if you think one button is more usable than six. I'll give you an example...

See that keyboard sitting in front of you? The one with 108 keys (assuming an English keyboard). Well, I'm going to give you key. One single button. It's now more usable. Instead of typing each individual letter, I have no assigned the letter 'a' = 1, 'b' = 2, 'c' = 3...etc and you have to press your single button the corresponding amount of times in a row in order to type that letter.

Yup...single button is more usable...

(It can be, of course, but this case isn't ABOUT usability. That is just Spotify's strawman.)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Riceballsan]

I don't look for anyone else, but anyone else can find me with just my first and last name and a picture. Maybe the john smiths will need to provide their city or something, but the bottom line is it dosn't take people long to flip through a list of people with the Firstname Lastname, they are looking for and spot the picture. They don't need my birthday, exact city, street adress or phone number work history or where I went to school. If their search narrows it down to 30 people then they can skim those 30 profile pictures. If they are just looking to add everyone who graduated from my highschool that year, I probably don't care about them.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Penguinisto]

That's not the idea.

The idea is, you create a fake FB profile you never directly use, on a throwaway email addy that you never monitor. Suddenly, those preferences won't mean squat.

While I don't know all the ins and outs of Spotify, I do know that my Pandora account is keyed to an email addy from a toss-off account at a former employer (when you're the Exchange guy, why not? the account was used to test spam filtering among other things anyway.)

If I lose it? BFD, my prefs can be quickly re-established with another account tied to yet another email addy.

As long as I'm not doing actual purchases through the thing, a fake FB profile works just as well as a real one.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Sign up for a free email address somewhere.
2. Create a facebook account using said email address. Make up a fake person.
3. Sign up for spotify using made up facebook account.
4. Add '||facebook.com' to your adblockplus rules.
5. Enjoy using spotify and still not having a facebook account.

Don't really see the problem here.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[toriver]

Yeah, because asking people to choose from six options

Works for Disqus, why not Spotify?

Oh, that's right, Spotify wants to market themselves to Facebook users "for free". They basically take the same approach as the Facebook games that incessantly want you to "share" your in-game accomplishments and requests with all your friends.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[fyngyrz]

Facebook acct: Never had it....Never will....

Same here. So too, Spotify, apparently. :)

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[brit74]

> "the guys who funded Spotify's recent move to the U.S., also still happen to own a significant percentage of Facebook?"

Heck, you don't even have to get that conspiratorial about it. Even if this connection didn't exist, Spotify wants to be able to post on your Facebook wall as free advertizing to your friends. Facebook might want to know what you're listening to (and tailor ads to that). There's plenty of benefits Spotify and Facebook could get by sharing information about you - and that requires linking your Spotify account to your Facebook account.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree that giving too many options doesn't really fit the ideal of simplicity that Spotify has, it would hardly require six buttons to include a "Don't have a Facebook account? Alternative signup here" link for legacy login.

Of course, it's quite possible if not likely that Spotify has agreed to require a Facebook account for new logins in whatever deal they've struck with Facebook. Still, the official rationale for not allowing non-Facebook signups stinks.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Cederic]

erm. Why? Why pander to an obtrusive requirement just to use a service that you'd have been happy to pay for had they not been such cunts?

How about, find an alternative to spotify that doesn't place arcane and intrusive requirements onto you in the first place. Or just listen to all your music on Youtube, which hasn't let me down yet..

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, guess I won't be trying Spotify out then....

Facebook acct: Never had it....Never will....

Ditto

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

Your photo has much more value amongst your privacy than listing the town you live in.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

No biggie. I just avoid anything that REQUIRES Facebook.

This way, owners who also own facebook stock know going in, they can require facebook, but that requirement will damage their product AND the value of their facebook stock.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[zerkon]

And if you aren't using Chrome... Ghostery for FF works great too

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Robert Zenz]

So, why'd he on facebook then?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[tehcyder]

Your company requires you to give out personal information on the internet (aka having a facebook account)? Time for a new job, but then the damage is already done since you can never really get the information back once you give it away.

If you're stupid enough to post real information to a test account, you should be getting a new job sweeping up in McDonalds after the cleverer burger flippers.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a project, come up with a reason why you would want to email an old classmate that you have contact with since high school? If I haven't contacted them in 5-20 years, I don't need to now and I sure as hell don't care what they had for dinner last night and that they "like" Campbell's® Chicken Noodle Soup and what their favorite movie is.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Already done: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2448542&cid=37529898

You excuses for refusing to get my point have been exhausted.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[tehcyder]

How about, find an alternative to spotify

Name one.

. Or just listen to all your music on Youtube,

Apart from any quality issues, if you're worried enough about privacy to refuse to have even a shell Facebook account, why the fuck would you use anyuthing belonging to Google?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[tehcyder]

Me too!

Truly, the eternal September is upon us.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[eepok]

Meh... it's more of a list of embedded threads. A proper forum allows the full separation of threads to facilitate quoting and discussions. Think phpBB.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Knuckles]

What are you, 10 years old?

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[nschubach]

Almost 34 if it matters. People I've not contacted in 5 years are generally not on my radar anymore. If you don't stay in touch with someone for that long, sending a random email to them just feels odd to me. I'm sure there's a deep psychological need for someone to feel like they should be remembered, but if someone hasn't contacted you and you haven't contacted them in 5 years... you probably didn't have much to keep talking about or much in common anyway.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[Knuckles]

I thought it mattered because in my experience most people my age (42) have made more diverse things happen in life. Maybe you were lucky or just good at it. I myself have certainly had situations come up after which I thought, "well, I don't want to talk to this person anymore" and vice versa, only to realize 10 years later that I was an idiot.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[thejynxed]

Won't matter, because then they just store the cookie someplace else other than "Temporary Internet Files".

Facebook has just had a lawsuit filed against it in Ireland (where Facebook has its EU headquarters) by the German government for violating the EU data privacy laws because of this very issue - apparently those cookies stored all sorts of information that third parties (aka not the owner of the data) might find "useful", which is what brought it all into contention with the laws. Coupled with being coded to avoid being deleted by "Clear Private Browsing Data" and the like, it made for the situation that Nik Cubrilovic discovered.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[thejynxed]

And for that very reason, turntable.fm lost me forever as a potential customer. They've been assigned to the equivalent of /dev/null on my network, along with Facebook, Zynga, and the rest of that gutter trash.

Re:Just a shot in the dark here

[alamandrax]

Yep. Am already out of there. However, I was not required to put any personal info on it. I just needed an account to login. They didn't care if I put junk info on it. I usually spend the time I'm on there closing the ads on the right and marking them all "offensive".

finish the sentence

[tverbeek]

"...the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier." ...for Spotify.

Re:finish the sentence

[omnichad]

Hey, at least Spotify won't leak user data...to anyone but Facebook.

Re:finish the sentence

[Anonymous Coward]

It's okay, your justin bieber fetish is safe with me and my 17000 facebook friends

Whats the problem?

[arcite]

Don't like it? Use another service.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Colonel Korn]

Don't like it? Use another service.

And in that short post you claimed that all criticism is pointless.

Why criticize a movie? Watch another movie. Why review a game? Play another game. You don't like this Beatles song? How dare you say so - go listen to something else!

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I figured I'd just hit up turntable.fm instead... but, oh wait... they're Facebook-only too.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Don't like open Internet, where consumers ruthlessly select the best services and content, creating a global information Renaissance? Use another service.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Strawman

Re:Whats the problem?

[rasmusbr]

Don't like this news story? Read another news story.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't like it? Use another service.

Typical reaction from an average sheeple who wants to remain ignorant to the depth of the privacy concerns and how information can and is used against you in ways "never intended". So many are like him, ready to be marched right into to the slaughterhouse simply because others do it and he likes the shiny new doors hiding the screams of the abatoire inside. Nothing left and nowhere to run, the few of us who do will be caught and dragged in, kicking and screaming, until we are silenced and they have complete control.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Abstrackt]

Don't like it? Use another service.

And in that short post you claimed that all criticism is pointless.

Why criticize a movie? Watch another movie. Why review a game? Play another game. You don't like this Beatles song? How dare you say so - go listen to something else!

If you are bothered enough by something why wouldn't you look for an alternative? Why continue to watch a movie, play a game, listen to a song or use a service that offends you? That's not criticism, it's finding a better use for your time.

Re:Whats the problem?

[yog]

The problem is, sometimes there is no alternative. A distressing number of news sites are now switching to Facebook for their user talkback logins. My reaction is to go away. I do use Facebook, but I might say something on some random talkback that I don't necessarily want my Facebook friends and associates to see. Then don't say it, they respond. Well, ok, if they let me log in with my Google account, which allows me to designate who gets to see what, then I suppose that's somewhat better.

But even then, I'm suspicious that they'll "captcha" my Google credentials. They can't really do that, can they? They transfer you to a Google/Facebook login web service, the web service sends them back some sort of verification packet and you are good for this session.

With all the bits of my life that I'm putting onto the cloud, especially Google services, I'm a bit nervous about signing in everywhere. I'd rather use throw-away accounts for these one-off news sites and music sites. What the hell does Spotify need to have my Facebook identity cached for, anyway? Glad I don't use them, I guess.

Re:Whats the problem?

[englishknnigits]

Good point, I just cancelled my subscription to Spotify.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

if you don't like it then make a new facebook account for signing into spotify

Re:Whats the problem?

[RazorSharp]

I don't think you get it. Colonel Korn is saying that the criticism can be valid, whether Spotify has the right to make this decision or not. He's not suggesting that those who criticize Spotify for this decision should continue using the service begrudgingly - in fact, I'm sure many who are criticizing Spotify on this forum have never used it and don't intend to - but that doesn't invalidate their criticisms.

To me, "Don't like it? Use another service" seems to say, "don't make an issue of that which you disagree with unless it is forced upon you." While following this maxim may result in less whiners throughout the world, it would also result in turning a blind eye to that which is deserving of criticism. To which I have to say: "Don't like trivial criticisms? Don't visit Slashdot."

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why criticize how the dictator's treating their people, just don't go there!

Re:Whats the problem?

[mlts]

Here is something I wonder. Who the heck thought that it would be a good idea to make FB an authentication provider? MS tried this with Passport and people didn't use them. Why do businesses trust the keys to the city to someone that doesn't advertise any security assurances?

If I were contracting out keys to my city to a third party, they better vomit up a slew of certificates and third party audit passes (including random third party audits on machines, their network, and physical security.) At the minimum, they would need FISMA compliance. FB doesn't advertise they are a security provider, so it makes me wonder about businesses using them as such.

If I were doing an authentication provider, it would be designed from the ground up with security in mind, from using hardware designed for security, processes in place, random audits and intrusion attempts by tiger teams. Something up to snuff when it comes to providing adequate security on all levels, be it physical, remote, software, or social engineering.

On the user facing end, it would have multiple ways for users to authenticate (app, SMS, voice call, keyfob, OATH compliant device, separate software device, TAN list, or just a username/PW), etc.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Abstrackt]

After reading your explanation I think it's safe to agree that no, I didn't get it. Thanks for clearing it up though.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that's precisely the point of this story: TO MAKE PEOPLE AWARE OF THIS SO THEY WON'T USE THE SERVICE. Dumbass.

and fuck you lameness filter: i shout when i want to shout.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to but so far, spotify is the only service that has music I actually like to listen to. i find music there no one else has.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

um yeah welcome to the free markit my friend.

Re:Whats the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple users respond the same way when legitimate complaints are made against their products of what they can't do but other products can do.

Re:Whats the problem?

[poofmeisterp]

Don't like it? Use another service.

"But..but..but..but.buuttttt my friends are using it and I have to or I won't be cooooool anymore!"

Signed,
Typical Teen

Fair enough.. one less user for spotify

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I guess spotify doesn't want as many users as it can get, so I am glad to help by not signing up with them.

How much is facebook paying them for this blatant plug? How much is google+ going to sue em for?

Which other service?

[tepples]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.grooveshark.com

Re:Which other service?

[somersault]

What about Grooveshark?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Pirate Bay.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.last.fm/

Re:Which other service?

[cayenne8]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Pandora springs to mind....?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

rdio.com

Re:Which other service?

[cdrudge]

Don't like it? Don't use the service.

It's not as if a facebook account is required to get a drivers license, vote, be employed, whatever. It's a private company that is free to partner with another company to provide a service. Vote with your money and don't use the service. If enough people do so, then maybe Spotify will notice and change their practice. Or maybe they will feel that a pool of 800m potential subscribers is enough for them.

Re:Which other service?

[mcoffman]

2nd for rdio.com

Re:Which other service?

[edmicman]

I've checked out Spotify and still don't get it. What does Spotify offer me that a million other streaming services don't already provide, for free? If I'm looking for random background streaming music that I can use for music discovery or just don't want to think about making a playlist I can use Pandora or Shoutcast or any other Internet radio stream. If I want to listen to a song and have it available on any device then I want to "own" it so I can buy that from Amazon or iTunes or rip the CD.

Spotify just doesn't make sense. For the free version I have crappier ads than the other streaming services. I can't use it on a mobile device. And I have to *work* to think of songs I want to hear and build playlists. And theres a number of things that just aren't there unless it's a Top 40 song or album. Why do I want to use Spotify?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

mog.com

Re:Which other service?

[Eponymous Coward]

I jumped on the Spotify bandwagon and got an account as soon as they became available in the US. Since then, I've barely used it but I continue to listen to Pandora almost daily. A lot of times I don't know exactly what it is that I want to listen to and in these cases, Pandora is far, far more useful to me.

Re:Which other service?

[maxume]

It was advice, not an offer.

Trying to represent the point of view of the dimwitted caricature that you think the world needs to be fair to really isn't as interesting as you think it is.

Re:Which other service?

[houstonbofh]

Or maybe they will feel that a pool of 800m potential subscribers is enough for them.

The pool of Internet users with FaceBook is smaller than the pool of Internet users. However you put it, by requiring FaceBook, they eliminated a lot of potential customers. And I am not sure what they got by doing this...

Re:Which other service?

[Rob the Bold]

Don't like it? Use another service.

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Don't like it? Don't use the service.

Well, that takes us full circle.

Re:Which other service?

[91degrees]

Complaining is perfectly legitimate. I might want to use the service but not associate it with facebook. If I complain they'll be aware of this, and may decide to change their policy to accommodate.

They have every right not to but it's in my interest if they change, and presumably in their interest to have me as a customer. We're asking for a solution in which we both benefit. Hardly unreasonable.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about Grooveshark?

no longer available in android market. Next?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://mog.com/
http://radio.com/
http://grooveshark.com/
http://last.fm/
http://zune.net/
http://rhapsody.com/
http://youtube.com/

Re:Which other service?

[GameboyRMH]

Region-agnostic and works on all devices, no proprietary client software needed. Right now it's the best, no question.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

MOG. Works on Win, OSX, iOS, Linux, and various media boxen like the boxee box.

Re:Which other service?

[gauauu]

I've checked out Spotify and still don't get it. What does Spotify offer me that a million other streaming services don't already provide, for free?

I like it because I can listen to whole albums that I'm somewhat interested in but not so much that I actually want to buy it. Band XYZ came out with a new cd? Cool, I'll listen to it for a week and see if it's worth owning...

Re:Which other service?

[somersault]

Tinyshark is still up there, and even if it weren't, you realize that you're not limited to the official market, right? It's not like on iOS.

Re:Which other service?

[tepples]

But The Pirate Bay is also one of the most expensive: Sony v. Tenenbaum; Capital v. Thomas-Rasset.

Re:Which other service?

[mlts]

While waiting for Spotify to get to this side of the pond, I heard about rdio.com, so downloaded the app, plunked cash down for a subscription and went from there.

Finally, when Spotify got here, I gave them a try, only to find their selection was far more limited than Rdio's.

End result: Rdio kept their place on my smartphone while Spotify met the delete button.

Re:Which other service?

[edmicman]

I admit, that part is cool. And I *can* listen to entire albums on there. But it seems very limited unless I want to pay, and I don't want to pay. I can't use it on my work PC (two strikes against since FB is blocked along with no streaming allowed!) and there's not a mobile free version. I could see it as a testing ground for new albums but if I really like the music then I'll purchase that, and I still have to search about specific artists or songs to "discover" anything.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

USE the NET. Duh

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're going there you might as well use the pirate bay, as suggested below.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

Grooveshark, Pandora, last.fm, Soundcloud, Fratmusic.com... and many more imitators

Re:Which other service?

[glwtta]

And I am not sure what they got by doing this...

My guess is "money from Facebook".

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

No privacy controls

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy cds

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

mog.com is my current and favorite. Has a larger library than rdio (12 or 13 million songs)
Also napster.com and rhapsody.com have the same kind of service and are both large libraries. I never really understood the hype towards spotify's arrival to the US, given that there's plenty of other alternatives out there that are just as good.

Re:Which other service?

[antdude]

Legally? Yeah right.

Re:Which other service?

[dbet]

What did you do before Spotify existed?

Re:Which other service?

[Ub3rG33k]

I use Slacker. It's a little bit Pandora, a little bit Spotify (w/out the FB requirement).

Re:Which other service?

[somersault]

The pirate bay doesn't do live streaming to mobile devices though, does it?

(btw, I pay for Spotify, and I already had a FB account, so I don't give a f*ck here).

Re:Which other service?

[tepples]

What did you do before the Internet existed?

Re:Which other service?

[Hatta]

Your math is wrong. You have to multiply the potential loss by the chance of loss. Sure, you might be out 600K. But that's only happened to 2 people out of 20 million or so on P2P. So your expected loss over time is $0.60. If you're sure you will gain more than $0.60 worth of value from P2P, then it's a winning bet.

Re:Which other service?

[Hatta]

They have every right not to but it's in my interest if they change, and presumably in their interest to have me as a product

FTFY. Spotify sells your ears to advertisers. It's still in their best interest to keep you, but it's worth keeping in mind on which side their bread is buttered.

Re:Which other service?

[91degrees]

Well, I get what you're saying, but there are points of view here. From a certain point of view, we are indeed the product. No disagreement. From a marketing point of view, we're still a customer since they have to attract us and sell us the service to get us as a product.

Re:Which other service?

[TheTyrannyOfForcedRe]

Spotify is the first streaming service that I've consistently used. I've tried the others but none of them "stuck" with me. The unique thing it provides is full access to albums played any way I choose.

I use it to listen to albums I already like and to discover new artists. When I'm looking for new artists, I don't want to hear one or two songs ala Pandora. I want to listen to entire albums. I usually need to listen to songs two or more times before I can decide if they're really great. Spotify lets me do that. I can queue up (via playlists) artists that I've discovered now but don't have time to listen to until later.

It's changed music's place in my life, seriously! Before Spotify I was stuck listening to the same old stuff from my collection. I thought I didn't have enough time to find new artists. With Spotify, I'm listening to new stuff all the time with little effort on my part.

When I want to listen to a mix of artists I listen to a professional DJ mix or a decent radio station. The Pandora model just doesn't do it for me.

That said, it REALLY sucks that Spotify is in bed with Facebook. I was contemplating the paid premium Spotify membership but no way in hell will I associate my billing information with a fucking Facebook profile. Fuck that!

Re:Which other service?

[TheTyrannyOfForcedRe]

I listened to the same old shit over and over again.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

agreed. Grooveshark is great AND runs in the browser. No need to install anything.

Re:Which other service?

[aix tom]

Downloaded MIDIs from Fidonet.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously they were interested in limiting future growth!

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mog is basically identical. $5 / month. Grooveshark is also pretty close.

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I absolutely love MOG. Rdio is great as well. Check those two out. MOG even recently got some sort of free version, but both of them have free trials.

Re:Which other service?

[BetterThanCaesar]

Another great Swedish product :-D

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

we7.com

Re:Which other service?

[tehcyder]

A lot of times I don't know exactly what it is that I want to listen to

So why don't you just not have any background noise for a bit?

Re:Which other service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to take you up on your offer. Which alternative to Spotify do you recommend for listeners in the United States?

Pirate Bay.

last.fm

Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

"...the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier"...for a different music service all together.

Re:Correction

[houstonbofh]

Hence why torrent use keeps going down a bit (with a nice new service like Hulu) and then right back up (when Hulu decides to delay shows for a week) and then back down, and so on.

Attention Industry! You are competing with a product that has no sign in requirements, and low (a vpn service) cost. Keep this in mind and prosper. Deny it and fail.

Facebook karma

[SoupGuru]

Facebook has been doing some questionable things lately, which is interesting considering they have an up-and-coming contender in Google+ to compete against.

There have been murmurings about the privacy stuff and general griping going on for a while now but there was no "real" alternative. Then G+ goes live and Facebook makes some pretty big interface changes. I figure a lot of people just Facebook because it's comfortable and cozy... but when you introduce a crapload of new things and push people out of their comfort zone that just makes checking out G+ that much easier.

Now they just keep doing things to dare people to leave

Re:Facebook karma

[cavtroop]

Except people won't leave Facebook. With the new changes (I call it the 'stalking update 1.0'), I've been preaching to everyone on FB to move over to Google+.

Not a single person has moved. They're too comfortable on Facebook, even with the recent UI changes. They're happy to make post after post bitching about FB, the new UI, the privacy problems, but they're too lazy to DO ANYTHING about it.

Until Google+ gets a significantly larger userbase, it's not particularly useful. *sigh*

Re:Facebook karma

[Pieroxy]

People go to facebook because that's where their friends are. What good does a social network do if your friends aren't there?

Re:Facebook karma

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone murmuring about privacy stuff won't be using a Google product as an alternative.

Re:Facebook karma

[Announcer]

Why are so many people so reluctant to leave FB? That answer is simple: A VAST MAJORITY of their family and friends (real friends) are on it. If they leave, they won't find those people on G+... so why leave? Tolerate the changes, but stay in touch with your 'peeps. Seems to be working.

Re:Facebook karma

[xaxa]

About 5 people I know have signed up to Google+ since the recent Facebook updates. However, none of them seem to be using it. I think the main problem is there's no events functionality, which is the most important feature of Facebook.

Re:Facebook karma

[blahbooboo]

Google+ should allow me to have completely non-public profile etc. Until then, Facebook is better than Google+ in terms of privacy.

Re:Facebook karma

[Chuckles08]

I agree... Facebook with the whole "follow your life" path that they seem to be taking are alarming many users who already have some concern about privacy but are on Facebook because everyone else is. I've switched to Google+ because of the way Facebook, and now its partners, are pushing people around.

Re:Facebook karma

[Opportunist]

Wait, wait, what? You mean, people have real friends on Facebook, too?

I dunno, I may be old fashioned, but ... if I need something from my friends, I call them. If they need something from me, they call me. If there's anything they need to know about me, I tell them. If they want to know something about me, they ask me. I kinda fail to see the advantage Facebook would offer.

Re:Facebook karma

[blahbooboo]

Anyone murmuring about privacy stuff won't be using a Google product as an alternative.

Exactly

Re:Facebook karma

[geminidomino]

Before facebook was MySpace. Mass migration/hemorrhaging of users is not unprecedented in recent social networking history.

Re:Facebook karma

[said213]

"I think the main problem is there's no events functionality, which is the most important feature of Facebook... to me."

I would be willing to bet that more people would complain about the removal of games than would if events were eliminated.

It seems to me that the reason no one "seems to be using" google+ has more to do with people being able to choose whether or not to pay attention to the inane posts of others, whereas they are unavoidable with facebook. No matter how few or many contact you have; you aren't guaranteed an audience with g+

That missing [forced]direct feedback channel is both the boon and the bane of g+

Of course... I don't really know, as I've stopped using both services due to the fact that they're asinine.

Re:Facebook karma

[vlm]

You can only use one or the other? I only use G+ so I donno. I suppose its technically possible for each side to intentionally screw up the other guys cookies and whatever else (keyloggers?)

Sounds like an artificial problem where you "must" only have landline or cell phone, or you "must" only use one of windoze mac or linux.

Re:Facebook karma

[houstonbofh]

Facebook has been doing some questionable things lately, which is interesting considering they have an up-and-coming contender in Google+ to compete against.

It is not intentional. But a while ago, they switched over to Google Docs, and sense then, memos and directives have changed occasionally. ;)

Re:Facebook karma

[houstonbofh]

My first thought as well. And central database of single sign on is a bad idea if you value security or privacy. I mean, FaceBook accounts never get hacked, do they?

Re:Facebook karma

[jedidiah]

On the other hand, Facebook is where all of your worthless Farmville friends are.

A new service could sell itself for being a tool to actually connect with your own social circle rather than random strangers in Thailand who's "friendship" is merely useful for playing inane Zynga games.

The S/N ratio on Facebook (driven by it's design and business model) tends to make it less and less useful. Constant mindless spamming from the likes of Spotify might be just what the 'danes need in order to start fleeing to another service.

Re:Facebook karma

[amicusNYCL]

I guess it might be non-obvious to people who never use it, but the vast majority of the value I get from Facebook is the things that my friends post that I may not otherwise hear about. I'm talking about things like concert announcements, parties, etc that I see posted there that someone may not have remembered to call me about. The rest of the value is from family updates. My sister isn't going to personally email me every picture or video she takes of her son, and I wouldn't necessarily want her to. But I can go to her photo albums and look at all of the pictures that I want to of my nephew. And before you say it, yeah some other photo sharing service would fill that role also, but neither my sister nor myself has any use for an account on a dedicated photo sharing site.

That being said, the amount of inane posts I see from my female friends is staggering. At any given point, probably 90% of the communication I see is coming from females, and most of it is pointless. The few updates I see from guys are usually links to funny stories or videos, plus the announcements I mentioned.

Also, nice sig.

Re:Facebook karma

[Mr. Slippery]

With the new changes (I call it the 'stalking update 1.0'), I've been preaching to everyone on FB to move over to Google+. Not a single person has moved.

If you've concerned about privacy, why would you want Google to be able to add your social graph to what it already knows about you from your searches? FB only knows what I tell FB; Google knows what I tell Google Search, Google Maps, Google +, and is trying hard to know everything on my Android phone. (I set up a separate account for the phone which I don't use for anything else.)

Re:Facebook karma

[xaxa]

I use Facebook for events, and pretty much nothing else. Plenty of people do this. Friends invite me to stuff, so the invite is either an easy way to give 15 people an time and address (and in many cases have it appear on smartphone calendars), or else it lets me see who else is going to a gig/concert/etc that I'm interested in.

It's easy enough to ignore inane posts. There are two options:
1) Don't have inane friends.
2) Don't bother reading the latest newsfeed (whatever it's called)
I do both, but there are some exceptions. (About two people, plus I sometimes read the newsfeed on the train home after an evening out.)

If it wasn't for the events I wouldn't have much reason to use Facebook.

Re:Facebook karma

[rasmusbr]

Migration is not even a useful metaphor since most everyone has time to be active (to a minimal degree) at two or more communities at a time.

When someone becomes active at a community or at a service and starts spending some of his or her limited time there that someone is going to spend less time at his or her least favorite community, which is most likely not Facebook. It's more likely that G+ will drain web forums, wikis, cooking communities and the likes than that it will drain Facebook.

Facebook did not kill MySpace on it's own. It was the unified force of Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Gmail and various country-specific communities like QQ that killed MySpace.

Re:Facebook karma

[Anonymous Coward]

And google+ doesn't have who's hot/not, farmville, mafia, give-a-drink, kissing, and all the other stupid time-wasting games that people use to beg for more friends and attention.

Re:Facebook karma

[Anonymous Coward]

That was different. Myspace was open to everyone, Facebook gained a foothold in one demographic and then expanded into others. Facebook gained usage, Myspace waned, but it wasn't a mass migration, merely changing fashions.

Before, facebook was all about keeping in touch with a small set of people - college friends and such, which made it useful as a service for niche appeal and it did the job very well. Then it metastasized.

Google+ is, however, competing against the entire platform for all users. What's more, despite the whole "do no evil" thing, with all the recent personal information scandals, the last thing many want to do is directly input such information to a company whose flagship product is a SEARCH ENGINE.

Also, what function does Google+ do more efficiently than facebook? Facebook was a clean interface that allowed for efficient communication without the clutter Myspace had (such as finding the hidden audio player with the most annoying song possible, fun times). Google+ needs more than just being "not Facebook" to gain a foothold, especially to offset the inconvenience to all involved of setting up and using a new account.

If Facebook can manage to not alienate its users (and barring some catastrophic database corruption), it's not just going to go away.

Re:Facebook karma

[Bucky24]

Or the ability of people to send posts only to a select people. I'm sure according to a few people I know on G+, I never use it, because I never include them in my posts.

Re:Facebook karma

[Zebedeu]

Wow, I just checked my feed and you're so right.
It's like 80~90% female domination in there. I don't usually spend much time in Facebook, so I never really noticed it.

Most of it is, as you say, pointless, but the few interesting posts are enough for me to keep the account :-)

Re:Facebook karma

[Anonymous Coward]

If people could some how migrate data from one service to another...hmm...Problem is Information Paraboia

Re:Facebook karma

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats what they said about MySpace. Nobody was moving to Facebook because they were all on Myspace.

Facebook is doomed, they all are and always will be. Fads come and go. Teens move on easily. Facebook is on its last legs.

Re:Facebook karma

[Macrat]

Everyone is on Orkut.

Re:Facebook karma

[geminidomino]

I'm not saying G+ is the facebook killer. I was just pointing out the flaw in the logic of the post I was responding to, in that no one would move to a new service if their friends didn't. Simply put, they have in the past, and if my simple wall is any indication, facebook is currently not doing to well on the 'not alienating its users' metric. Even the Aunt Sallies in my family are frothing over the ever-shittier UI changes.

Well it makes NOT signing up easier...

[Kenja]

which is close to what they're saying I guess.

Oh well

[Nethemas the Great]

I guess they didn't want my business.

to heck with them

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I'm not going to link Facebook to anything. Facebook is lame and has no good intentions. I recently deleted it off my phone and don't miss it a bit. The company sells out their users at every turn with regard to privacy. It's a festering stinkhole of risk to the individuals who use it. And I'm completely bored of all the meaningless crap people post all day.

Good luck, Spotify. I will happily live without you. In fact, my life will likely be richer as a result. Instead of wasing my life on Facebook and Spotify, I will go outdoors and spend time with my family. Ah, I feel healthier already.

Already "uncool"

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't look now, but facebook is already "uncool" with the users who made it "cool" in the first place. Might want to look at the next big thing -- that is, until it gets displaced by its own successor.

These people must have a horribly inflated vision of what facebook actually is: a private sign-up website with nothing but its own interests in mind. Gee, how many billions of those are in existence today?

Sad day for Spotify founders

[realmojo]

How embarrassing to spend all that time building up a company only to effectively "resign" from the internet and cede your entire company to become just a feature of another company. Facebook is the king of getting people to work for them gratis. Spotify did the heavy lifting with the labels and Facebook eats their lunch.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders

[jalefkowit]

Indeed. If Facebook wanted Spotify to become Facebook Music, you would have thought that they could have at least had the class to buy Spotify and give the owners a payout. I suppose there's a reason why "Facebook" and "class" aren't words you think of together too often, though.

Part of me wonders if Facebook didn't give them the old Offer You Can't Refuse, the way Microsoft used to do in the old days. Back when Windows was the monoculture, Microsoft could extract enormous concessions from potential partners simply by threatening to dump a competing product into Windows and give it away for free if they didn't play ball. One could certainly see Facebook having similar leverage over any social service; so many people are on Facebook now that if FB picked up a Spotify competitor (say, rdio), rebranded it as Facebook Music, and gave it away 100% free, Spotify's business model would be in serious jeopardy. That gives Facebook a pretty big hammer to wield over Spotify at the negotiating table.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders

[vlm]

How embarrassing to spend all that time building up a company only to effectively "resign" from the internet and cede your entire company to become just a feature of another company. Facebook is the king of getting people to work for them gratis. Spotify did the heavy lifting with the labels and Facebook eats their lunch.

Maybe its a very public display of affection for FB... they really wanna get purchased...

Either FB is going to purchase spotify or spotify is going to be really embarrassed when FB rejects their advances.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders

[Anonymous Coward]

One could certainly see Facebook having similar leverage over any social service;

I disagree, Facebook Places intended to compete with Foursquare and Facebook Deals intending to compete with Groupon have been shutdown. Facebook Questions, which was launched as a competitor to Quora has already failed considerably. The only success of Facebook Questions is the viral poll, which is mostly annoying. Also if Facebook tries to offer something for free which costs some money, they'll be reducing their own profit margins which is not good considering their IPO dreams.

Re:Sad day for Spotify founders

[Anonymous Coward]

Rdio is now free. No reason to use spotify.

epic

[Anonymous Coward]

wait, there is a term for this.... ah, yes, here: EPIC FAIL!!!

NEVER!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Any service or website that requires a Facebook account will NEVER get any of my business. This is a very troubling trend. I'm seeeing more and more websites that are requiring it.

Re:NEVER!!!!

[houstonbofh]

Any service or website that requires a Facebook account will NEVER get any of my business. This is a very troubling trend. I'm seeeing more and more websites that are requiring it.

I'm not. At least not twice...

Piracy forever

[Anonymous Coward]

Piracy forever man. Accept no substitute!
Always a superior product. Always in the format the market wants. Even with a negligible price point, these dumb companies are just not agile enough.

No weird-ass, windows only client to download. No signup, lock-in and DRM.
The piracy scene has all the web 2.0 social crap like the commercial sites now, so you can talk about the shit you're pirating.

Pure win.

Re:Piracy forever

[brit74]

... And best of all, you don't have to pay those poor saps doing all that hard work for you. If you're lucky, maybe you can make them all go bankrupt. Then you'll really be living the high life.

See related topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goose_That_Laid_the_Golden_Eggs

Re:Piracy forever

[iroll]

I'm listening to spotify on my mac right now, so I'm getting a kick, etc.

Re:Piracy forever

[Anonymous Coward]

... And best of all, you don't have to pay those poor saps doing all that hard work for you. If you're lucky, maybe you can make them all go bankrupt. Then you'll really be living the high life.

LOL.
I hope that was a joke, because it is pretty damn hilarious.

You do know how the RIAA labels do business, right? That an artist can "legitimately" sell 1mil albums ($10mil+ at $10 each) and end up still owing the label money despite only receiving a $50k initial loan. The faster the RIAA companies go bankrupt, the better for everyone, especially artists.

Re:Piracy forever

[Bucky24]

As much as I agree with most of what you say, I disagree that it's always a superior product. Sometimes it is, but not always (I define superior by quality, if you define it by cost then yes, it is superior).

Re:Piracy forever

[St.Creed]

I'm pretty sure I can cover the penny they'd otherwise get by donating to the Salvation Army.

Or they could do the same things other people do, and go on a tour, sell merchandise, etc.: if extortion was the sole option they had, how come Chinese artists (in a market where piracy is much more rampant than in the Western world) do quite well?

Re:Piracy forever

[Anonymous Coward]

Only, spotify is much, much nicer than piracy. Ive been a "pirate" for very long, and I almost exclusively use spotify. Spotify premium, at that.

Show me a piracy solution that offers the same usability as Spotify and I will cancel my subscription in a heartbeat!

Venn Diagram

[basilisk12]

I would love to see a Venn Diagram of "People who object to using Facebook for privacy reasons" and "People who would actually pay for Spotify accounts"

Re:Venn Diagram

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. My guess is there is no intersection between the two sets or that the percentage of users who fall into that category is so small that Spotify has made the decision that they can provide a higher quality lower hassle service to the vast majority of their customer base by choosing not to care about the small, but very whiny and vocal minority.

If I was running their company I would do exactly the same thing. Why waste time trying to satisfy the 1% who will be pissed by this? They are much better off replacing them with people who actually fit their business model.

Re:Venn Diagram

[Anonymous Coward]

Add me in there. I just upgraded to an unlimited account on my free account yesterday. I've never had a facebook account, and don't want one.

Re:Venn Diagram

[houstonbofh]

Not applicable. How about people who would not like the link FaceBook to a service with access to bank or credit card information? Even if you have FaceBook, that does not mean you want them to have more information about you.

Re:Venn Diagram

[amicusNYCL]

Yeah seriously, who needs customers anyway? They should also push their chosen political agendas, and screw everyone who thinks differently. Might as well make it religious also, and screw anyone with different beliefs. Everyone should just stick to their own. Business don't really need customers anyway. My local bar took the same tactic. New owners came in and kicked out all of the regulars. Granted, today it's just an empty building, but at least they stuck to their business model and didn't have to deal with those pesky customers.

Re:Venn Diagram

[Anonymous Coward]

Mmh, there are a few of us. I guess the commonality is that both groups are above average interested in technology?

Re:Venn Diagram

[rasmusbr]

Or even people who just don't want Facebook to know what they listen to because they don't want to get targeted ads for their guilty pleasures, or for their partner's favorite bands.

Re:Venn Diagram

[Anonymous Coward]

That would either be 'two Venn Diagrams' or 'the intersection'. Why do you not use the english language correctly?

Everybody knows.

[sgt scrub]

If you want a good relationship with your customers you force them to do something against their will.

Re:Everybody knows.

[poofmeisterp]

If you want a good relationship with your customers you force them to do something against their will.

Modification: If you want an addiction from your customers you force them to do something against their will, repetitively.

I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites...

[bogaboga]

"...The company has now defended the policy, stating, oddly, that the Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier."

I guess the questions are:

1: Why not let me the user determine that?"

2: Why not pitch the idea that I might find Facebook signing easier?

The end result will be easier and better for Spotify but guess what, I am gone!

well fuck spotify then

[e3m4n]

because I'll be damned if I'll ever join one of those brainless twit websites that completely invade your privacy. Hell if it ever gets to a point where i'm somehow legally or financially required to surrender my privacy to facebook my page is going to be a big white banner that says "FUCK YOU FOR BOTHERING TO LOOK HERE!". I've seen presumably 'personal' sites like this used all the time to discriminate against job applicants. Several times they got teachers fired because someone ELSE posted a picture of a teacher with a glass of wine (no big deal right?); yet because of their districts strict policy, not about drinking but about advertising drinking, they were fired. They can all go fuck themselves as far as I am concerned. and to Spotify, here is hoping you lose your ass on your decision to sell your soul to facebook.

Sad. :(

[Max Romantschuk]

I really used to Love Spotify.

I'm a premium subscriber and still like it, but this trend is depressing... I noticed a few days ago that I can't play Spotify links off Facebook. "Your platform is not supported." even though I run the native Linux client, and now this?

Gotta hate it when mainstream corporate pressure slowly eats away what once was a Good Thing. :/

Re:Sad. :(

[Anonymous Coward]

So switch to a real operating system instead of some hobbled-together enthusiasts'-hobby OS.

Problem solved.

No more privacy...

[MaWeiTao]

The funny thing is how Spotify spams Facebook's life stream with what you're listening to. I'm sure the music industry loves that, constant free advertising. And most people will just go along with that because it's a fun new feature. Privacy doesn't even enter into the equation.

Unfortunately, there's no viable competitor to Facebook out there. Facebook has stolen a lot of Google+'s thunder. They've introduced a bunch of new features, including matching a lot of what Google+ offered. Google could prove me wrong but I think Google+ is another one of these things that will linger for a few years before they finally kill it like so many other things they've done. And it's not like Google is a paragon of privacy.

And whatever happened to Diaspora?

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Based on their twitter account, Diaspora's still around and they're "working on sending me my invite." At this point I don't need another social network, but if Disaspora ties into multiple networks well, I might move to that to make posting more straight forward.

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Current three generations: Privacy? what's privacy? You mean people actually used to live their lives without everyone else knowing everything you did every second?!

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

try Friendika, I guess...

Re:No more privacy...

[RazorSharp]

And whatever happened to Diaspora?

They were dumb enough to name it "Diaspora." Cornering the vast Jewish market, a surefire strategy for success. The analogy is actually a pretty good one, but you can't market a product with such an odd-ball, non-catchy name. Other product names that make me shudder from their ineptitude: LibreOffice, Gimp, and duckduckgo.

Re:No more privacy...

[glwtta]

Unfortunately, there's no viable competitor to Facebook out there.

I don't care about Facebook, it's that there is no good alternative to Spotify that bothers me here.

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

Diaspora has been sending emails to those who requested and supposedly invites are going out by end of October.

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

And whatever happened to Diaspora?

I actually registered with Diaspora just to see how it was coming along. They recently sent an e-mail taking credit for Google+, basically. "See? We showed how much people wanted better privacy, and other companies took up the charge as well!"

Re:No more privacy...

[Xacid]

They really just waited too damned long to finish the project and now a lot of the hype is gone... :(

Re:No more privacy...

[Anonymous Coward]

And whatever happened to Diaspora?

Diaspora is in closed beta atm. Got an invite some weeks ago.

Bill Joy was slightly wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

The "Grey Goo" is Facebook, turning the entire content of the web into "Like" buttons.

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites.

[spire3661]

Dear Pot,

YOU ARE BLACK

Sincerely,

The Kettle

Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[Eponymous Coward]

My big gripe with Spotify is that you can subscribe for $5 / month and listen all you want on your desktop machine. If, however, your end point is your phone, they charge $10 / month. I really don't understand what difference it makes to them if the stream end point is my phone or a computer.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[RogerWilco]

I don't know, but for me it's well worth it, I use it on my phone all the time, while on my desktop I sometimes don't log in for more than a month.

I have a lot of long trips in the car with friends, and being able to select and play songs on the fly has been very entertaining.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[0123456]

I really don't understand what difference it makes to them if the stream end point is my phone or a computer.

They know that people who'll spend $600 on an iPhone won't notice that they're also spending twice as much for their music as someone with a computer.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[Jay L]

Isn't Spotify P2P-based on desktops? It probably can't do that (or can't do it as well) on mobile, so you pay to leech.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[Attila Dimedici]

My big gripe with Spotify is that you can subscribe for $5 / month and listen all you want on your desktop machine. If, however, your end point is your phone, they charge $10 / month. I really don't understand what difference it makes to them if the stream end point is my phone or a computer.

That is easy. Those who get Spotify accounts for streaming to thier phone are willing to pay more than those who get it to thier desktop machine. To phrase that slightly differently, the number of people who will not get a Spotify account to stream to thier phone at $10, but would at $5 is less than the number to make up for the decreased revenue per customer from that price reduction. On the other hand, the number of additional subscribers for desktop machines who will pay $5 a month but not $10 a month more than makes up for the decreased revenue per customer.

Re:Desktop vs Mobile Listening

[Eponymous Coward]

I tether my laptop to my phone all the time and use Spotify that way with absolutely no problems. I really am not sure though if the mobile version uses P2P in the same way as their desktop program does.

Makes sense to me

[supersloshy]

1) Almost everybody I know has a Facebook account
2) Spotify is basically the equivalent of Netflix around the world but for music
3) If my friends sign up they don't have to spend a lot of time making a new account (the biggest complain any normal user has about signing up for *anything* is the act of signing up itself).
4) I get to share my favorite music with all of my FB friends.

Sounds like a win/win to me. You can always make a throwaway FB account if you don't want or need one anyways.

Spotify, tried it. It is no big deal.

[Anonymous Coward]

I got one of those accounts when they came over to the states. I have repeatedly loaded it up at small get-togethers at my house. Folks usually say, why cant you search? Where are the good versions of these songs? Why cant you find certain musicians? Then they go back to my Win Amp or Itunes or You Tube.

Spotify, MEH.

One of the two things is going to happen.

[Oswald McWeany]

1) Spotify is not going to get my business.
2) Facebook is going to get a bogus account against their terms-of-service with a fake name.

Multiply this by every other person who wanted to try Spotify but refuses to sign up for Facebook.

For me- I'm leaning towards #1. I've got Sirius, MP3s, CDs, Cassettes, Pandora, and FM. If I have to live without Spotify because of their rediculous sign-up requirements... so be it.

I just cancelled

[Anonymous Coward]

I liked it but I cancelled, never will I support such a stupid idea.

No brainer

[spottedkangaroo]

Make fake facebook user with 0 friends, 0 info, 0 statuses, and 0 pictures. Use a fake name too if it suits you. John Bimblethorpenheimer. Problem solved. They can't invade your privacy if they don't know anything about you.

Re:No brainer

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes they can. Facebook continues to track your browsing habits even after you log out. That lets them easily build a profile for you, and your silly little alias name isn't going to be a significant barrier to that.

Facebook WANTS you to think your idea is effective, because it isn't.

Re:No brainer

[Anonymous Coward]

> They can't invade your privacy if they don't know anything about you.

Except the town in which your connection terminates, the music to which you listen, the websites that you visit ( thanks to those Like tags ), the comments that you leave on Facebook-federated blogs and, from all that, pretty much your precise demographic and interest.

But other than that yes, they would know nothing about you...

Feature failure

[sjwest]

I had this 'issue' with another social site in document sharing. I did not login and did not spend any money with the theatre who's document i could not read.

Quite how a website cannot serve a public pdf file without a facebook login seemed odd.

Well, good to know

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't be using Spotify at any time in the near future since I am very leery of FB's new concept of sharing everything (aka "Give us more marketing info and spew out more useless garbage to your feed")...

How do I handled straw man?

[tepples]

The most relevant response to a straw man argument isn't simply pointing out the straw man as much as explaining the difference between the original argument and the straw man argument and how this difference is relevant. Otherwise, you risk the fallacy fallacy.

Yep

[koan]

Everyone will have an FB login, it's going to be the hub of the Net (that's the plan quasi Internet Log-in) sharing and selling your data, and, can you imagine the psych profile they can do on you with all your different Web items authenticating thru FB?

Never get a good job again.

There is an away

[tepples]

The problem is, sometimes there is no alternative. A distressing number of news sites are now switching to Facebook for their user talkback logins. My reaction is to go away.

As long as there are other news sites, there is an alternative.

I'd rather use throw-away accounts for these one-off news sites and music sites. What the hell does Spotify need to have my Facebook identity cached for, anyway?

To take advantage of enforcement of a Facebook TOS provision against having multiple accounts. Spotify limits the amount of free service per account, and it needs some measure against people creating alt/mule/plz accounts to work around this.

Sunk cost + caveat emptor

[tepples]

Why continue to watch a movie, play a game, listen to a song or use a service that offends you?

Sunk cost + caveat emptor. Sometimes one doesn't discover that a product is unsatisfactory until having purchased it. This hurts especially if standard practice in the industry is not to offer a satisfaction guarantee. Or perhaps someone else is enjoying the work and is unwilling to offer one a ride home until after it is over. Songs have an additional complication in that they're more commonly played to a captive audience, such as people in a home, a vehicle, a restaurant, or a grocery store. But the relevance of that complication is a bit off-topic, so I won't go into it.

Naive much?

[digitalcoup]

That's right, Virginia. Facebook can only track and collect information about those who have a Facebook account. Good luck with that.

Does Facebook take a 30% cut?

[Animats]

Do you have to pay in Facebook Credits, where Facebook takes a 30% cut? If Spotify works through a "Facebook app", the App terms require that.

The Real Reason Is...

[Nom du Keyboard]

The real reason to tie into Facebook is that FB is the leader in DEMANDING that you put in your REAL information. They delete your accounts if they catch you doing otherwise. Only Paypal is worse. FB gets away with it - for now - in ways Spotify could never manage on their own. This tie-in makes identifying you for every possible making money opportunity is as high is it is possible to be on the Internet.

Have you ever noticed that when a business says that "We're doing this in order to make it easier for our customers," that it never is that at all?

Customer filtering

[alispguru]

By requiring a Facebook account for registration, Spotify ensures their future customer base is already on board with having their demographic information sold in return for "free" services.

Re:Customer filtering

[gsslay]

There is only one way to respond;

Create a Facebook account purely for use with Spotify. Populate the profile with misinformation and nonsense. Log into Spotify with it. 'Like' anything and everything you can see at random.

If commerce on the internet continues to increasingly demand my life story before I can be their customer, (all the better to profile and sell things to me) then I am going to increasingly tell them lies about my life.

I only wish more people would do the same. Mass poisoning of the information stream until it becomes worthless will make them quit trying to pull this crap.

Spotify sucks

[Charliemopps]

Spotify is terrible.. even without the Facebook garbage it's the worst music service I've used. Just use another service, all 3 of these are superior:
http://www.slacker.com/
http://grooveshark.com/
http://www.pandora.com/

Re:Spotify sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

Pandora has recently added a tie-in with Facebook. I'm not sure how deep the tendrils are, but I do know that it's [default-on, opt out via settings]. Depending on what data is grabbed, and how it is stored, the damage may already be done.

In the spirit of positive thinking, I will also proffer alternatives... Creative Commons released music, free and legal to download for noncommercial use.

http://www.jamendo.com/ Global and diverse, over 52,000 releases across all genres.
http://www.ektoplazm.com/ Psytrance, techno, and related genres.

Re:Spotify sucks

[TheTyrannyOfForcedRe]

To each his own I guess. I've tried those and think they suck. I think Spotify is awesome.

Re:Spotify sucks

[chrismcb]

Pandora has recently added a tie-in with Facebook. I

As far as I can tell Pandora will import your profile photo, music favorites and friends list FROM facebook. I don't see anything that goes the other way.

Disable the application?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe my account is glitched, but Spotify is working fine for me after I disabled the Facebook application. I was a better user, before it required Facebook, but they required Facebook for me to send out invitations to my friends, so I gave them access for about 10 minutes and then disabled the application. Spotify still works fine on my end, but maybe it's because I was a beta user.

I'm not saying it's a good policy, but it's an option. Of course, you can always just setup a fake Facebook account and then everyone wins.

Re:Disable the application?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe my account is glitched, but Spotify is working fine for me after I disabled the Facebook application. I was a better user, before it required Facebook, but they required Facebook for me to send out invitations to my friends, so I gave them access for about 10 minutes and then disabled the application. Spotify still works fine on my end, but maybe it's because I was a beta user.

I'm not saying it's a good policy, but it's an option. Of course, you can always just setup a fake Facebook account and then everyone wins.

If you set a fake account on facebook you already lose.
You lose because by doing so you are legitimising facebooks'/spotifys' behaviour. Its a losing proposition.
The solution is not to have to use facebook to join a website that has nothing to do with facebook. How is that difficult to understand ?

Facebook & Yahoo is worse

[XxtraLarGe]

Almost every time I go to read an article on Yahoo, I get pestered to add my Facebook account. An iFrame pops up in the middle of my screen, and there's no way for me to tell it to stop pestering me. All it does is make me want to not use Yahoo anymore.

Ok sure... next.....

[Anonymous Coward]

simple answer to this problem... don't use spotify... they may consider their value to us to be more than it actually is

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites.

[Anonymous Coward]

How is sharing all your customer information with Facebook "better for Spotify"? If FB is paying for it, then yeah I guess so.

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites.

[Anonymous Coward]

Witty! Did you come up with that yourself or did you read it somewhere?

Easier to what?

[rickb928]

"Facebook obligation would make sign-up easier."

To market you. And to you.

Grooveshark Anywhere

[tepples]

no longer available in android market.

Grooveshark Anywhere states: "currently supported on phones running Android, Blackberry, Palm, Symbian". There are ways to obtain applications for an Android-powered device other than Google's market.

Why they did it

[Anonymous Coward]

Money. Odds are Spotify has cut a deal with Facebook that gets them money, or better advertising by forcing users to use Facebook

I'll be happy to

[gearloos]

I'll be happy to use my facebook page. In fact, I'll sign right up for spotify in a minute. As soon as I finish signing up for EA, oh but first I have to sign this agreement on my PS3. Oh dang also forgot I have to sign this other agreement for my new ONSTAR. Wait, come to think of it, why should I even have to sign up? With the amount of info passed around about me already they should know what I'm thinking and it's only a matter of time until they sign me up saying I was going to do it anyway.

Facebook Data Warehousing

[Anonymous Coward]

I am sure many Slashdoters know this already but for those that don't or haven't worked with this.

Facebook is much like Google they make money of advertising. The thing that makes Facebook a marketing machine is it has the identities along with these application owners data that is now integrated into Facebook which enables amazing data warehousing so they can pull very specific reports for advertising or marketing campaigns. So basically they can manage the identities as well as the contents from all of these other applications on their site so they get the best of both worlds. Also by adding more applications like Netflix or Spotify they are adding validation to your Facebook profile to know John Doe is who he says because you can look at the data from the apps.

Google does the same thing but they do it based on search trends in Google which also links to your Google profile but Facebook profiles are more complete than Google was before G+ .

if you want to know more look up Data warehousing with facebook and Identity management.

solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Just create a Spotify facebook user if you really want a separate user for Spotify. It's really not that hard folks and it is only barely more effort than if you were to create a new Spotify account.

My response

[Anonymous Coward]

Spotify and Facebook: fuck off.

Stability of Facebook vs E-mail in da demographic?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a fan of Facebook, but does anyone have stats on how often people in the age 20-30 demographic change e-mail address?

Does Spotify find it more reliable to contact (advertise) to users via Facebook than via e-mail?

Not going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Facebook account and there is no way I'm linking that to any other service. FB is fine in its own little, buggy, tracking sandbox, but I'm not going to mix things like real contact information or a credit card with my Facebook account.

Gerbilation

[Anonymous Coward]

My GERBILS have facebook accounts. What's the problem?!

If you lose your Facebook account...

[PhilHibbs]

Two of my friends had to create new Facebook accounts because they lost control of their original ones to scammers - one of them is fairly well known, I'm guessing 10% of Slashdotters know his name and 99% know the computer game that he is most famous for. One of my friends is on his second account due to having set up the first with a fake email address and forgetting the password. Another friend is on at least his third, maybe his fourth account due to being such a towel.

If I lose my Facebook account, do I lose my Spotify as well, along with any other services that use Facebook as single sign on?

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites.

[dbet]

The best part of this - since when have you ever had a hard time signing up to a web site. I probably have account on 30+ software sites alone, that I visited once. Singing up took all of 2 minutes.

Not doin it

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly enough I just tried to sign up for Spotify, and oddly enough I just closed my Facebook account last week. I guess that is that. Sorry Spotify.

Cancelled Premium subscription

[Anonymous Coward]

The minute I heard this I cancelled my premium Spotify subscription. I HATE FACEBOOK.

I will Never join facebook

[Anonymous Coward]

Another service that I will never use.

Cancelled my account today.

[miffo.swe]

Im a very long time customer but this made me cancel my account at the spot. I wont tolerate being sheparded towards Facebook, in any way shape or form. I really dont care if they noticed, i just wont accept Facebook at any price.

Turntable.fm

[Anonymous Coward]

For those who are unaware, there is a great website called turntable.fm where you get to DJ with your friends and share music with eachother. Very simple idea yet very addicting. check it out!

Glad I got in before they started this

[Anonymous Coward]

I cancelled my Facebook account ages ago and never looked back. I got in on the Spotify beta and I love it. I use it all the time. It is a wonderful, wonderful service. But if I had to sign up for Facebook again just to get in to Spotify, I would have missed out on this great service. They only want you to use Facebook so you can spam your so-called friends.

Re:I have quit all these Facebook requiring sites.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats sort of the problem, isn't it? I mean, its not hard to sign up...but with 30+ or 50+ or 100+ accounts on various websites, just tracking all the passwords is a pain in the ass.
.
I use strong passwords that I absolutely can't remember. Currently, I use Keepass to track (and generate) all of my passwords. I store the db file on Dropbox and all of my devices can read dropbox and have a Keepass application (except the iPad, it has one but uses an older db format so I don't worry about it on the iPad). This works but its a much larger pain in the ass than I would prefer.

As unsettling as the idea of having a one-stop login authority for multiple websites is, something is going to have to be developed to make this easier. I certainly don't want Facebook being the gatekeeper, but I can see the reason companies are moving this way.

I'd really like something like Google's 2-step authentication to be available for more things.

Why am I posting as AC? Because I can't remember my password for /., don't have Keepass installed on my work laptop, and can't be buggered to call up the app on my phone and type in a 25+ character password.

I hope this trend, and its supporters go away

[Skynyrd]

Gawker Media requires a FB or twitter account to post.
Spotify requires a FB login?

Screw you.
Change your ways, or go away.

The rep that FB has is getting worse. My own mother killed her FB account when I shared some of their sleazy marketing/privacy tricks.

iheartradio

[Anonymous Coward]

Just did the same thing with their app. Nobody noticed because it is just Clear Channel stations but if you want to make a "custom station" you have to give them your FB login.

It is a plot!

Not Bittorent

[Anonymous Coward]

Pirate Bay.

Great organization, but not a safe download method anymore.

Downloading (and therefore uploading) a file from The Pirate Bay is 100% ILLEGAL in the USA and many other countries.

Download a file from one of the modern file hosting services is 100% LEGAL in the USA and many other countries.

Quick Start Guide:
get this program: JDownloader.org
start at this site: filestube.com

Re:Not Bittorent

[Anonymous Coward]

Downloading (and therefore uploading) a file from The Pirate Bay is 100% ILLEGAL in the USA and many other countries.

First, you don't download (nor upload) anything but metadata from (to) The Pirate Bay. Second, most files described by said metadata are quite fine. Finally, you need to learn more about what you make such statements regarding, in order to look less like a tool.

The Trend Has Begun to Concern Me

[sarbonn]

I have no desire for Spotify, so this isn't really in response to that, other than a recognition that I don't like having to use one service in order to do something else I might want to do. However, what I have noticed is that other services have a tendency to want to be linked with Facebook, and that drives me nuts. Goodreads is an example. When I sign onto it, it usually wants to do so by accessing my Facebook profile, and then spams my Facebook account. Yeah, I could configure it not to do that, but who wants to go through that kind of trouble for something so mundane? Recently, I have been writing articles on Viewshound, which ONLY gives me the choice to sign in through Facebook. I really dislike this, but I have no choice as part of my revenue steam somewhat relies on services like Viewshound. I worry that more and more companies are going to go this route. Where it really bothers me is that my workplace has put Facebook off limits, so I have difficulty connecting to a lot of other services I use on a daily basis because I have to sign onto Facebook FIRST in order to use them. Sure, I could be a good soldier and not goof off during the day, but this isn't about being an employee who has no free time at work but about some of the complications for those of us who do have some free time at work.

If that were true, then they could just use OpenID

[MCRocker]

If that were true, then they could just use OpenID to accomplish the same goal.

Many sites that use OpenID for logins make it easy by providing pre-configured FaceBook, Google, and Yahoo buttons along with an 'Other' button for those who want to provide their own OpenID URL. For example, StackExchange sites provide five buttons and a more link on their login page. This makes it trivially easy for most people, possible for most of the rest and provides alternatives for geeks and contrarians.

Their Google move begins!

[poofmeisterp]

<tinfoilhat>
In a year, 10% of the sites on the web will have no such thing as a "sign in". Facebook will provide your identity and "login" information as a "service" with slight monetary cuts to those who use it as an encouragement.
</tinfoilhat>