> The bonus with this model is once advertisers are removed free speech is no longer a problem.
How is it a problem now? RSS feeds already can't be taken down by angry third-parties, and offer perfectly usable decentralization. Advertising is entirely an at-will process for podcast hosts, so they can choose whether or not they want to shackle themselves to a third-party that might object to the content they spread. Connecting your podcast to a crypto wallet doesn't fix that, and it's nothing you couldn't do with preexisting XML syntax.
Even if Spotify adopted Podcasting 2.0, why would users care? Even as a technical guy, I want nothing to do with a crypto-adjacent monetization model. Podcasting 1.0 already solved these problems years ago, there's a good reason the major podcast players are wary of this "upgrade".
If you accept money from an advertiser and say something they don't like they can threaten to pull funding. Sort of like how none of the us "news" media will say anything against pharma, sponsored by phizer!
Direct support of shows by listeners is a much more honest relationship and liberating for podcasters but there is nothing in PC2.0 saying you have to use these features, it is simply enabling an alternate funding model. If you don't get the value for value principal in the first place it's not going to make sense though.
How is direct support limited in a traditional podcasting model, though? Nobody is forced to accept advertisements for their podcast. If you do, that comes with a risk that someone will stop paying you. With traditional podcasts you can still embed Paypal accounts/Bitcoin wallets if that's what you want.
I just fail to see how Podcasting 2.0 is a significant change over Podcasting 1.0. Everything you've listed already exists in RSS.
Paypal deplatforms people. They also don't have a way to stream revenue as you play.
I'm not a great ambassador for it but they are building the infrastructure to accomplish the streaming payments, boosts, cross platform chat, podping to get immediate notifications and reduce wasted polling, and a whole bunch of standardized metadata.
By the way the streaming payments also have value splits to support the show hosts, app used to play it, hosting platform, a guest that happens to be on that episode, etc, etc. Whatever they want. It's really impressive and no way can paypal match this.
> Paypal deplatforms people. They also don't have a way to stream revenue as you play.
Then don't use them. PayPal is not intrinsically linked to Podcast 1.0, it's just an example of how you can use any payment (including crypto) without upgrading to Podcasting 2.0 or whatever. Adding YouTube style feature is something, but personally seems like a lot of hubbub for little payoff.
None of this strikes me as an upgrade over RSS, even still. XML trumps the Blockchain for this sorta stuff.
How is it a problem now? RSS feeds already can't be taken down by angry third-parties, and offer perfectly usable decentralization. Advertising is entirely an at-will process for podcast hosts, so they can choose whether or not they want to shackle themselves to a third-party that might object to the content they spread. Connecting your podcast to a crypto wallet doesn't fix that, and it's nothing you couldn't do with preexisting XML syntax.
Even if Spotify adopted Podcasting 2.0, why would users care? Even as a technical guy, I want nothing to do with a crypto-adjacent monetization model. Podcasting 1.0 already solved these problems years ago, there's a good reason the major podcast players are wary of this "upgrade".