[HN Gopher] Castopod - Open-source podcast hosting platform
___________________________________________________________________
Castopod - Open-source podcast hosting platform
Author : ZacnyLos
Score : 302 points
Date : 2022-10-05 06:11 UTC (16 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (castopod.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (castopod.org)
| Tao3300 wrote:
| What is a "listen-to-click" ad? I can't find a definition of what
| it actually is anywhere. Google returns either javascript click
| event stuff, suspicious youtube videos, or the vague Ad Aures
| page.
| luto wrote:
| I'd recommend Podlove instead, which is paid for by the
| European/German podcasting community instead of an advertising
| company: https://podlove.org/
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| what do you mean, https://github.com/ad-aures/castopod states
| the license as AGPL which is just as FOSS as any other project
| to the likes or mastodon or peertube. how does it matter there
| is an advertising company paying for the project as long as the
| code is open for scrutiny and is a FOSS project?
|
| the likes of amazon and amd and even adobe is funding blender
| so does that mean those projects are ruined by corporate money?
| https://fund.blender.org/
| hunterb123 wrote:
| How do you feel about Google and Manifest v3 in Chromium?
|
| Being open source isn't everything, it's also about
| predicting the future development trajectory.
| rglullis wrote:
| Or we can let the enemy's own resources contribute to their
| demise. Let Google work on Chromium, but use the browsers
| that take the engine and do the things that are in our
| interests. Brave is not implementing v3.
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| Brave isn't implementing v3 immediately, but Chromium is
| their upstream and I haven't seen them claim they will be
| able to resist indefinitely. They have their own non-
| extension adblocker for which v3/no-v3 is irrelevant.
| rglullis wrote:
| https://twitter.com/brave/status/1574822799700541446
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/153489341457924915
| 2
| hunterb123 wrote:
| GPs tweet is from a few days ago, the one you linked is
| from June and was speculation about what Google will do.
|
| Eich later in the thread you linked said this: https://tw
| itter.com/BrendanEich/status/1534905779630661633
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| The tweet you're referring to in the GP simply says
| "Brave will support Manifest V2 extensions such as uBlock
| Origin even after Chrome stops doing so". Which would be
| true statement even if that support only lasts for a day
| after Chrome stops supporting V2. That is to say, this
| does not look like a guarantee of indefinite support by
| any means, but rather extended support (for an
| undetermined amount of time).
| rglullis wrote:
| Instead of getting attached to semantics, how about
| looking at it from the perspective of business and
| economics?
|
| If your business depends on the idea that Big Tech can
| not track you, you need to do whatever it takes to keep
| it a reality. The cost of supporting a fork of Chromium
| might be too much when you are starting out, but when you
| are already a company of 100+ employees and 60M+ MAU, it
| becomes acceptable.
|
| So, yes, if I had to guess with the information currently
| available, I'd say that Brave will keep away from v2 as
| long as it possible and _as long ad the user base shows
| that this is what they want from their browser._
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| But Brave does, as mentioned before, have their own
| built-in adblocker (based in part on uBlock Origin),
| which doesn't depend on extension features. uBlock Origin
| does still have some additional functionality that the
| built-in "Shields" don't, but mostly it's not dissimilar.
| So, given that an ad-blocking experience on Brave doesn't
| depend on extensions entirely in the first place, I would
| think that would be a business/econ reason why they may
| not want to divert lots of resources into maintaining v2.
|
| (Not sure where 'semantics' came from in the first place
| here.)
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| is brave going to maintain a fork of chromium for
| eternity?
| rglullis wrote:
| Eternity is a long time, but they have it been doing it
| for 5 years already.
| fetzu wrote:
| To be fair, I think that what we are seeing happening to
| Chromium has little to do with it being open source and
| more with the fact that it has essentially become the de
| facto web browser. If google released an entirely rewritten
| and closed-source version of Chrome tomorrow, 95% of the
| people would not bat an eye and keep using it.
|
| Corporations contributing to FOSS have agenda, but so have
| individuals. Being open source isn't everything, but it is
| a damn good start.
| hunterb123 wrote:
| So GP would be justified in preferring the FOSS solution
| if it meets their technical requirements vs the
| commercial OSS solution because at one point they could
| be the only option and abuse that network effect /
| monopoly.
|
| My point was it's who is developing the software because
| it takes effort for another maintainer to step up and it
| doesn't always happen. Also if a commercial company digs
| a big enough moat with the open source product they could
| abuse it, so do you trust them now?
|
| Similar to Google abusing Chromium, Castopod could one
| day be in that position if you don't support FOSS
| alternatives today. That would be the mindset to put
| yourself in.
|
| That being said, I don't think it matters as much as the
| browser space, but I'm not in the podcast community. I
| could see though that it could potentially be very costly
| to have a monopoly for podcast hosting, but currently
| that's Spotify right?
|
| Note: I have no preference here, just assuming what
| motivates GP's preference.
| fetzu wrote:
| I think the first paragraph captures the core of the
| issue: which solution best meets their requirements. I
| don't have a podcast (yet!), but it seems like the two
| projects don't have the exact same feature set.
|
| Isn't it the beauty of open source that you and I are
| able to take that project and make it "better"? That we
| are able to maintain it with our time and energy?
|
| The mindset of "FOSS or nothing" (FOSS in the sense of
| "not supported by corporate interests") is noble but also
| a little bit naive. Nothing is free, and even the
| greatest FOSS projects rely on corporate and individual
| contributions (monetary or otherwise). I think that
| wholesale dismissing an (F)OSS product because it is
| backed by a commercial company is just showing them that
| the alternative (closed source software) is the more
| sensible choice.
|
| Chrome-imium did not become the default because it was
| open-source and no other better "FOSS" alternatives were
| available, it did because it has relentlessly been pushed
| to users on the single most visited webpage in the world
| for years. If you and I did not use Chrome (which we
| probably both don't, I'll allow to infer from your
| stance), Chrome would still be the de facto browser
| today. Is this better than another "strictly" FOSS
| browser being the de facto default? No. Is it better than
| a closed source browser (Netscape or IE) being the de
| facto browser? Definitely, at least we could/can fork it.
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| >Castopod could one day be in that position if you don't
| support FOSS alternatives today. That would be the
| mindset to put yourself in.
|
| they can't turn an AGPL license code into proprietary
| one. Open source and FOSS are similar but ideologically
| different beasts. One gives the downstream developer to
| decide the license of their work, including the ability
| of allowing them to turn it into proprietary code while
| FOSS forces all code to be foss and never proprietary
|
| >Similar to Google abusing Chromium
|
| chromium is under BSD while this is under AGPL. there is
| a world of difference between these two licenses. One
| allows proprietary forks while another forbids it.
| Tomte wrote:
| You have idiosyncratic definitions. BSD licenses are FOSS
| licenses. Open Source is a proper subset of FOSS (Free
| and Open Source Software).
| tpush wrote:
| > Open Source is a proper subset of FOSS (Free and Open
| Source Software).
|
| Other way around.
| Tomte wrote:
| You all are confusing Free Software with FOSS.
|
| FOSS is "Open Source" and "Free Software", where "and"
| means union, not intersection.
|
| Obviously OSS cannot be a superset (more than) FOSS.
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| What is an example of something which is Free but not
| Open Source?
| rakoo wrote:
| Chromium is under a BSD license, explicitly allowing Google
| to build a proprietary product on top that siphoning all
| the users' data to make money off of it and influence where
| the http world goes.
|
| The product here is under a Copyleft license. Any
| derivative is at the service of humanity at large, today
| and tomorrow. It is much harder to exploit people this way.
|
| Open Source has never served the users, it has always been
| about the editors. A Copyleft license is a good way just
| like a public institution at the helm is.
| deepstack wrote:
| also the way google dumps code is also a factor, is it
| going to be repo where we can keep track of the whole
| development process, or just a code dump every once in a
| while.
| ksala_ wrote:
| Google could build a proprietary service on top of an
| AGPL Chromium. All they would have to do is either not
| accept external contributions (they already sponsor most
| if not all of the development anyway) or require
| contributions to sign a CLA to give them the copyright to
| it (they already require you to sign that anyway)
| rakoo wrote:
| AGPL explicitly prevents this: any service provided with
| AGPL software must be AGPL. That's the whole point of the
| license.
| tpush wrote:
| The scenario the GP outlines is one where Google is the
| sole licensor of Chromium. They could then build
| proprietary (or whatever!) versions of that however they
| liked, since they'd have copyright to the whole thing.
| rakoo wrote:
| If Chromium were AGPL they couldn't build a proprietary
| service. They couldn't even build a service that earns
| them money but can't be copy pasted as-is by anyone else
| such that it would earn money to someone else. That's the
| whole point. If one benefits, everyone benefits
| pessimizer wrote:
| The point is that if you have the copyright to a project
| and you release it as AGPL, it has absolutely no affect
| on what you can do with it. You can also relicense it to
| others and tell them they don't have to follow AGPL
| either.
|
| So if Chromium were AGPL, Google could do anything they
| felt like doing with it, just like now. Google just
| wouldn't be able to keep anybody else from doing stuff
| with it for versions that they released under AGPL, as
| long as those people didn't violate it.
| [deleted]
| nabakin wrote:
| Here are some example/demo websites
| https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/tjhlyn/-/i1ruyk...
| mgoe wrote:
| An alternative using terraform and aws
|
| https://github.com/goehlemichael/terraform-podcast
| miguelmichelson wrote:
| An alternative made on Elixir/Phoenix
| https://github.com/rauversion/rauversion-phx , it's also well
| suited for music communities and event streaming.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| > automatically embed listen-to-click ads (using Ad Aures'
| contextual solution for example).
|
| eww no thanks. less dynamic ad insertion the better.
| kkirsche wrote:
| This may cause some issue with Castro Podcasts app on iOS which
| may feel the name is too similar. I know I was confused and was
| wondering why they would have open-sourced this.
|
| Great work though, don't mean to detract from any of the hard
| work on the platform, and naming things is hard.
| fevangelou wrote:
| This may not be directly apparent to "typical" HN crowd, but PHP
| _is_ having a quiet renaissance, thanks in part to a
| standardization of tools and processes, a more mature ecosystem
| (Laravel has been a huge factor here) plus the performance
| improvements since PHP 7.
|
| Kudos to the folks who built Castopod.
| lakomen wrote:
| I abandoned PHP in 2013 for Go. Never looked back. Sometimes I
| have to fix PHP code, I hate it every time. I can't take PHP
| seriously. When ever I see a project advertised that's written
| in PHP I never consider it. It's like spam mails. Performance
| matters and PHP doesn't perform, not compared to Go. That's one
| reason, the other was the absolute stupidity of the PHP crowd.
| Their new dogma and wrong paradigms applied to the language.
| Symfony is god awful, it's slow to develop with, performs
| awfully, dependency hell, overly complicated without reason. I
| had to rewrite 3 sites, 1 is still left to do, in Go because
| there is no upgrade path to current versions. Major security
| issues. Do I have to run PHP7.3 with manual fixes and Symfony
| 2.3. I can't upgrade, I have to rewrite from scratch, and
| because of that I'm doing it with Go. Worst decision ever to
| use Symfony. And the arrogance of this Stof guy, stubborn but
| full of himself. And his work had so many security issues. The
| whole OO fetish back in 2013 with Java methodology with the
| sheep crowd killed PHP for me. I actually loved the language
| for its simplicity, I came from C++ in 2001 and loved it. In
| 2010-2013 it became a monster. Clueless students repeating
| stuff they learned somewhere, stupid people really
| codegeek wrote:
| Is this project in Laravel though ? I checked composer.json and
| unless I am losing my mind, I see "Codeigniter" in there.
|
| https://code.castopod.org/adaures/castopod/-/blob/develop/co...
| jayknight wrote:
| I think the parent is just saying that Laravel has a lot to
| do with PHP's renaissance. Codeigniter 4 was a complete
| rewrite to bring it up to modern PHP standards. I haven't
| used it, but I hear it's quite good.
| rodrigodlu wrote:
| Definitely. I ran away years ago (before the facebook boom)
| from PHP because of Ruby on Rails. I was a happy camper for
| several years using RoR.
|
| Now seeing Laravel rebuilding the entire PHP ecosystem with a
| highly collaborative community, standard practices and tools is
| amazing!
|
| Too bad I'm not investing in web dev anymore.
| 9dev wrote:
| It's just a pity it has to be Laravel, which is riddled with
| magic, bad practices, hardly - if at all - typed code, and
| little inefficiencies everywhere you care to take a look.
| Compared to Symfony, it's a dirty, steaming, mess.
|
| That's not to say you can't build great things on Laravel, and
| it's undeniably sparking lots of creativity - I just wish the
| better competitor had won. Betamax all over again.
| codegeek wrote:
| Symfony may be technically better but Laravel won because
| Taylor is a genius at creating a community and I personally
| feel that the "magic" of Laravel is what made it easier for
| devs that needed lower barrier to entry. Then an entire
| ecosystem was created like "laravel Forge" (to manage
| servers) and many others including even serverless PHP using
| Laravel Vapor.
|
| Lately though, I am beginning to get annoyed with Laravel due
| to way too many breaking changes with major releases
| literally within months and definitely a bit exhausted trying
| to keep up. I understand they are going full scale modernized
| approach but after Laravel 6, it has been too many major
| releases.
| tomschwiha wrote:
| Did Laravel really win? If you use Laravel you will install
| Symfony components: https://symfony.com/projects/laravel
| https://github.com/laravel/framework/blob/9.x/composer.json
| codegeek wrote:
| I am aware of that as we use Laravel heavily at my
| company. It depends on how you define "win". Laravel won
| as in getting the adoption by developers due to its
| ecosystem and low barrier to entry. Symfony is more
| component based (powerful) but you need to put it all
| together which is a bit more work.
|
| I personally love Symfony even though it was a lot easier
| to start and go to market with Laravel.
| tomschwiha wrote:
| It is probably a win-win as I assume Symfony gets
| contributions back from Laravel experience and Laravel
| can rely in powerful components.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| I think the sticking power of languages like PHP, Java and the
| like are chronically underestimated. They may not be growing as
| fast as ${LANGUAGE}, but they sure aren't going away either.
| The benefit of having a stable and mature ecosystem to can't be
| overstated.
|
| You can probably in general estimate the expected lifetime of a
| language to be at twice as long as it has currently existed.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| as an ASP Classic then ASP.Net developer of nearly 20 years,
| I know I've never wanted for a job/gig/contract/whatever. C#
| and ASP.Net aren't sexy, but they are staples in the
| corporate world.
| urbandw311er wrote:
| I came here to say exactly the same. They've survived,
| they're dependable, increasingly portable and likely to
| still be here in another 20 years.
| dubcanada wrote:
| I think Symfony has contributed more (HTTP Framework, etc), but
| Laravel is certainly a massive part.
| danielvaughn wrote:
| I didn't know about this until a while back, I was at a meetup.
| Casually talking to other JS developers, I mentioned off-hand
| how I had written PHP was back in like 2010-2012. Started
| talking shit about the language and a guy behind me called me
| out and went on a long spiel about how great it has become.
|
| Now that file-based routing is making a comeback
| (https://enhance.dev), it would be interesting (and hilarious)
| to see it come full circle and we all go back to writing SSR
| with PHP.
| Cyberdog wrote:
| > go back to writing SSR with PHP.
|
| Hello. I'm someone that never stopped.
|
| Been paying my bills with PHP for fifteen years, and as PHP
| has gotten better and better I haven't regretted a minute of
| it.
| danielvaughn wrote:
| I mean en masse, to the point that a significant percentage
| of new projects decide to go with that tech stack.
| fevangelou wrote:
| Sure, spaghetti React/JSX code coupled with SSR is the new
| hotness :D
|
| For Node/JS folks, we've had "PSX" for decades in PHP:
| <?php function render($html) { return
| <<< PSXRULEZ Look ma, it's pure $html!
| PSXRULEZ;
| jjice wrote:
| It is having quite the renaissance. Unfortunately, a lot of
| long standing PHP code bases remain vanilla with globals
| everywhere are bad practices. Nothing wrong with vanilla PHP,
| but it really starts to limit what you can get done when you
| have a very transaction script[1] oriented code base and there
| are no good abstractions and layers.
|
| I'd say the issue isn't PHP (8.1 is actually packing a ton of
| awesome features), but more so old PHP programming practices
| that are still very prevalent.
|
| [1] https://martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/transactionScript.html
| actuallymaybe wrote:
| Any good summaries of what's been happening or background on
| the renaissance, I used to do some PHP. Mainly Python now, but
| PHP even in its old incarnation I had a sort of love for its
| idiosyncrasies
|
| Also likewise to the team, kudos to the people who built
| Castopod
| deepstack wrote:
| Being use PHP when it was Personal Home Page, also dropped
| out since PHP5 to node and now deno. Wonder what changed in 7
| that makes it worth at look again now days.
| jacobyoder wrote:
| 7 brought a huge speed boost. (typically 100% or more
| without any code change required).
|
| Not specific to 7, but 2 things I think have helped a lot
| are:
|
| * PSR standards * composer packaging
|
| Initial PSR work helped define some package interop
| standards. I'm not sure how useful ongoing PSR work today
| is (no doubt there's some incremental benefits?).
|
| Composer is a great package manager, and helped usher in a
| lot more sharing/reusability of common components.
|
| Laravel bundles a number of Symfony components, for example
| (many frameworks do).
|
| The speed alone in 7 was big, and we've seen some more
| incremental improvments in 8 and 8.1 and 8.2. It's hard to
| find current benchmarking tools that compare the 5 series
| with 7 and 8. I found one showing 5->7 on a mandelbrot run.
|
| * PHP 5.0 was 251s
|
| * PHP 5.1 was 87s
|
| * PHP 5.6 was 29s
|
| * PHP 7.0 was 15s
|
| * PHP 7.1 was 9s
|
| The 'experimental JIT' work (at that time) yielded 4s.
|
| That benchmark was from 2016, so... way out of date now,
| but other numbers I've seen were 7.1->7.4 was another ...
| 10% improvement on average, and depending on workload, you
| might see another 10-20% improvement from 7.4->8.0.
|
| Kinsta has some interesting useful benchmarks on 'real
| world' apps
|
| https://kinsta.com/blog/php-benchmarks
|
| Been using PHP since 1996, and ecosystem, community,
| performance all continuously improve year over year.
| obituary_latte wrote:
| Wow, that's pretty impressive especially with no code
| changes! Thanks for the breakdown and for sharing!
| fevangelou wrote:
| OTOH, I'd say language changes/improvements, PSR, the tooling
| of course (Composer/Packagist, tons of CLI tools), the
| frameworks (Laravel or Symfony, with CakePHP & CodeIgniter
| still rocking, also micro-frameworks like Slim/Lumen), the
| libraries (Symfony components, FriendsOfPHP,
| thephpleague.com), debugging (PHPStan, Phan, Psalm, PHP
| Insights), refactoring (PHP CS Fixer, PHP_CodeSniffer,
| Rector), async/event driven (Open Swoole, ReactPHP).
|
| On Linux, production multi-PHP deployment is dead-simple
| thanks to the excellent DEB.SURY.ORG (for DEB based distros)
| and REMI (for RPM based distros) repos. It's also more common
| to deploy PHP via PHP-FPM and Nginx nowadays. Homebrew does a
| decent job on macOS too, multi-PHP deployment is also easy
| when coupled with Nginx/PHP-FPM. For Windows I have no idea
| but as long as you got XAMPP and MAMP, well :) Lots of Docker
| based solutions too like LocalWP (not just for WP), Lando,
| Laragon, DDEV to name a few.
|
| There's also excellent support in editors/IDEs, either by
| default (in JetBrain's PHPStorm, Nova, KDevelop or Kate
| Editor) or via plugins for VSCode, Sublime Text, Atom and
| others.
| _-_-__-_-_- wrote:
| I've been using Castopod for over a year. I deployed it for my
| podcast using https://linode.com on Debian after my last web host
| lost my data in some sort of internal mistake (or rogue-employee
| deletion). I used the experience as a chance to learn some server
| administration and to "self-host" our own show.
|
| It's been a great experience. The developers and community is
| active on Discord (before that, I had only used irc and webchat)
| and they are always willing to help. The software is always
| getting new podcasting 2.0 features and actually feels exiting
| again, similar to podcasting circa 2004.
| xd1936 wrote:
| This is the first that I've heard of publishing podcasts to the
| fediverse, as well as the term "Podcasting 2.0". Where did this
| term originate?
| bastawhiz wrote:
| Adam Curry seems to have coined it. He pushed out a bunch of
| RSS extensions in recent years and called it "Podcasting 2.0"
| but they are very "we had a podcasting wishlist and wrote a
| spec" and not very "we wanted to make something with a high
| chance of adoption". 99% or more of podcast listens are made
| through an app which supports zero "Podcasting 2.0" features,
| and listeners are not clamoring for the ability to use them.
| zubairq wrote:
| We may try this with castoshi.net, thanks!
| husainfazel wrote:
| The code is horrible:
|
| https://github.com/ad-aures/castopod/blob/develop/app/Views/...
|
| Tight coupling of the HTML/PHP and JS.
|
| If they were going to use PHP, at least they could have used
| Laravel or Symfony and had standardized libraries for
| authentication, views etc.
|
| I just checked their Composer.json, looks like it uses
| CodeIgniter ... so maybe there is a framework in there but still
| the code quality is atrocious: https://github.com/ad-
| aures/castopod/blob/develop/composer.j...
| hk1337 wrote:
| And when did public properties become acceptable for classes?
|
| I'm skeptical about setting the property values directly like
| that, I've seen weird issues show up from doing that.
| lakomen wrote:
| People like you are why I abandoned PHP
| jraph wrote:
| Looks fine to me.
|
| Returning HTML code in a render function is even pretty
| standard, I've seen this in Python / Flask too.
|
| Judging code quality is hard, it seems to me the best clue is
| how it is easy to add new features / do refactors without
| breaking things, not how you feel about PHP and HTML being
| mixed.
| tinus_hn wrote:
| Looks like a mess with code cutting and pasting HTML
| together, escaping things without a clear plan. That's a sign
| of a million security problems waiting to happen.
| sschueller wrote:
| I am not a fan of tight coupling PHP with HTML but here they
| are using a components style of code which is very similar to
| the way it's done in VueJs.
| yann63 wrote:
| Which client do you use to subscribe and listen to podcasts? I am
| a fan of BeyondPod which has a great automatic sorting feature,
| but dev seems stalled. Thanks!
| aembleton wrote:
| I use Podcast Republic
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.itunestopp...
| KoftaBob wrote:
| My two favorites are Podverse (iOS + Android) and AntennaPod
| (Android only), both free + open source.
| Cyberdog wrote:
| Just the normal Podcasts app on iOS. It was good and then they
| broke it and it sucked but they've made it usable again...
| though the UI is still a confusing mess. I don't think anyone
| who develops that app at Apple is dogfooding it, at least not
| anyone in charge of its UI.
|
| I've considered trying others now and then, but since they
| usually came down to paying a fee to find and resubscribe to
| all of the podcasts I'm already subscribed to, I could never
| get over the hump and switch to one full time.
| patrickserrano wrote:
| I've been using Overcast (iOS) since it launched. Marco has
| done a lot of work with his Smart Speed and Voice Boost
| features over the years and they're a core part of what keeps
| me using the app.
| ommz wrote:
| AntennaPod serves me well
| mikece wrote:
| I really want to rely solely on Podverse on Android but I end
| up using AntennaPod because of the feature to use a local
| folder as a pseudo podcast feed. That combined with NewPipe's
| ability to pull down just the audio track from a YouTube
| video means that for content published to YouTube where the
| video provides nothing of value I can pull that down directly
| into a podcast client and listen as though the content were
| published as a podcast (like it should have been in the first
| place). If Podverse has this ability I don't know about it...
| I should ping Mitch and find out/put in a feature request!
| neves wrote:
| Pocket Cast
|
| Started using it when other tools didn't have all the features
| that I need. I settled down and never compared tools any more.
|
| My only problem with it is that some podcasts take a little to
| appear in its platform and nobody makes links for it. I'd like
| a single source of all podcasts.
| mdrachuk wrote:
| Pocket Casts for iOS https://pocketcasts.com/
| https://apps.apple.com/app/id414834813
| jdoconnor wrote:
| and android - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=a
| u.com.shiftyj...
| mminer237 wrote:
| I like Podcast Addict. It seems to have the most features on
| Android.
| weberer wrote:
| There's an app on iOS called 'Sodes which is pretty good. Its
| the first one I found while browsing that supports 2x playback
| and actually lets you add podcasts by RSS feed rather than
| being limited to their curated list of podcasts.
| beshrkayali wrote:
| Happy to see Podcasting 2.0 (and The Podcast Index) gaining more
| traction.
| projektfu wrote:
| Looks great, but it bothers me that the mascot has no feet. The
| name sounds like a type of footed animal.
| Tao3300 wrote:
| I was thinking it sounds like "gastropod", which doesn't really
| have much of what you'd call feet.
| mikece wrote:
| I'm a little surprised that Podcasting 2.0 isn't more well known
| here on HN. It includes a lot of the popular concepts like
| decentralization, cryptocurrency, alternative uses of
| distribution (IPFS) and Dave Jones seems to be writing all of his
| new sub-projects in Rust... what buzzwords am I missing?
| Cyberdog wrote:
| In plain words, what is it and how is it different from normal
| podcasting?
| b3nji wrote:
| In the morning!
|
| Awesome to see Podcasting 2.0 gain this traction. Hats off to
| Adam.
| mikece wrote:
| The odd are 33 to 1 that very few at HN get the "ITM"
| reference. :-)
| gldnspud wrote:
| I'm sure there are quite a few Dudes Named Ben who frequent
| HN.
| knewter wrote:
| I've got information, man. New shit has come to light.
|
| I'm for tbpitu
| qwertyuiop_ wrote:
| I have been a d* bag since Daily Source Code.
| lbbenjohnston wrote:
| An alternative built with Django/Wagtail (have not used it
| though).
|
| https://github.com/RentFreeMedia/rentfreemedia
| fuddle wrote:
| This is great to see. I always thought shows that are restricted
| to one platform shouldn't be called podcasts. e.g Joe Rogan
| langsoul-com wrote:
| I have my own podcast, The Language of My Soul hosted on anchor.
| I'm a dev as well.
|
| Main thing about self hosted podcasts is the ongoing costs, not
| the RSS, stats or the like.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-05 23:02 UTC)