BrikoX@lemmy.zipM to Technology@lemmy.zipEnglish · 1 month agoHacktivists scrape 86M Spotify tracks, claim their aim is to preserve culturewww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square16fedilinkarrow-up1180arrow-down14file-text
arrow-up1176arrow-down1external-linkHacktivists scrape 86M Spotify tracks, claim their aim is to preserve culturewww.theregister.comBrikoX@lemmy.zipM to Technology@lemmy.zipEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square16fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareoctoshrimpy@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up21arrow-down4·edit-21 month ago~~186 million. Not 86 million. There’s 100 million difference there. ~~ https://annas-archive.li/blog/backing-up-spotify.html This article ~~is trash and ~~did not bother reading the source blog about “why didn’t they just grab all songs then?” Edit: octo can’t read on Mondays apparently.
minus-squareBrikoX@lemmy.zipOPMlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12·1 month agoYou are confusing “186 million unique ISRCs” with “86 million music files”.
minus-squareTheTechnician27@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12·edit-21 month ago did not bother reading the source blog That’s rich given the source blog says “86 million music files” the paragraph after saying 186 million unique ISRCs. You apparently read less of it than The Register’s writer did.
~~186 million. Not 86 million. There’s 100 million difference there. ~~
https://annas-archive.li/blog/backing-up-spotify.html
This article ~~is trash and ~~did not bother reading the source blog about “why didn’t they just grab all songs then?”
Edit: octo can’t read on Mondays apparently.
You are confusing “186 million unique ISRCs” with “86 million music files”.
That’s rich given the source blog says “86 million music files” the paragraph after saying 186 million unique ISRCs. You apparently read less of it than The Register’s writer did.