On: I paid for Spotify playlist placements so you don’...

[al2o3cr]

There's an important part in that definition: "commercial radio station" - the general premise of telecommunications regulation has been that using a finite resource (radio spectrum) comes with obligations (FCC licensing, content restrictions, etc). That's also why you'll see the giant "THIS IS A PAID PROGRAM" warning on late-night infomercials.

Internet streaming doesn't fit into that "finite resource" model.

[TheSpiceIsLife → al2o3cr]

I think this widely misses my point.

Maybe I can rephrase it?

Interacting with someone comes with obligations.

This, then, allows us to peer deeper in to the problem: some people think it's okay to run roughshod over existing norms because "on a computer".

I'd argue it's not okay to exploit people's weaknesses just because "implemented using new(er) / different technology".

Other people seem to be quite happy to build an empire doing so.

I guess this is why I'm likely to remain relatively poor.

[bilbo0s → al2o3cr]

Well, internet bandwidth is a finite resource, but it's limited on the consumer side. If the consumer doesn't stream Spotify, his/her bandwidth is not used. By contrast, spectrum is consumed whether a given consumer tunes in or not. In this sense, the spectrum is a shared public resource whereas the consumer's bandwidth is a non-shared private resource.

[powvans → al2o3cr]

The finite resource in the Internet model is attention. We could redefine our regulations with that in mind. Perhaps that would helpful for addressing the filter bubble phenomenon.