A response to criticism against Anontune by Anonymous.

Since Anontune got publicity much criticism has been generated against the project. We welcome such criticism but it is only fair we have the chance to respond to it. You may not understand completely what we say here because some of it is very technical.

-------------------------------
Geek.com

- Paypal donate button.

You are correct about Paypal being a bit off. I'm not a fan of it either so we won't be using Paypal for donations. As you have observed, it's not the best approach for our project where our users highly value  their privacy.

- Java as a security issue.

Your security concerns regarding Java are valid. Anontune's networking kernel will require users who want to help the project to run a Java applet with full permissions. This applet will have the permissions required to basically do almost anything it likes to your computer. Therefore, we want this part of the project to be 100% transparent. Currently, the Javascript code which talks to the applet is visible and this can be considered an abstract representation of what the Java applet does. However, this is irrelevant as Anontune currently doesn't use any such Java applet. Wired mentioned the Java applet because we were experimenting with it at the time, and neglected to mention we decided to remove it.

If and when we make Java a part of the platform all of it's code will be 100% open. We intend to start an open source project around this and get people that aren't connected to Anontune to help maintain the project, possibly even lead it. In this way, we hope the public will trust the great open source and free software community to maintain a high standard of integrity, and also just create damn cool software.

Regarding portability: Obviously not everyone has Java, and our system won't work on some platforms even if they do. Therefore we have designed a way for users who run the networking kernel to elect to become routers for users who don't want to run the kernel. How it works is, this networking kernel allows our code to talk to arbitrary services so we can connect to any music network. When running the kernel, a user who becomes a router can route requests to and from other music networks on behalf of other users. Therefore, cross-platform support is possible. Obviously, this wouldn't be forced on any users.

"Based off some of these comments, I just spent the last two hours looking into the Java and Javascript code from this project. While - yeah - it might not be the smartest idea to run Anon code on your computer outside a VM (is a VM the digital equivalent of "having protection"?), it seems to be some kind of networking code, like they say it is in their description of netjs.

Don't take what I'm saying as conclusive by any means (considering I have only a cursory understanding of javascript and haven't touched Java since compilers several years ago) but it doesn't seem to have any glaringly harmful parts that I've found."
^ Of course, because why the hell would we harm our users? That would really be a little counter-intuitive to our cause, correct?

So please, stop crying wolf people.

- Flattr

Once again, valid observation. We will use Bitcoins exclusively.

- Google Anayltics

We use Google Anayltics so we can understand how people use Anontune. It is not about identifying users, it is about understanding them so we can build a better website. There is nothing wrong with Google Analytics and we will continue to use it. After all, it can always be blocked with plugins like no-script.

- Tomahawk

Addressed later in this document.

- Overall

The picture geek.com have painted is all just speculation, as to be expected of the media. I encourage anyone part of the discussion to actually research what Anontune is and how it will work before coming to conclusions. We aren't trying to hide anything, and as such, the important information is all documented. Thanks for your criticism, geek.
-----------------------

MetaFilter

- What's so special about Anontune, it's just a music aggregation service?

Incorrect. Music aggregation is only a small part of the project, though arguably the most important. Where Anontune differs from similar services such as Tomahawk is in it's scope: Our design allows us to tap ANY reservoir of music across the Internet, and I said INTERNET here NOT web. Have a think about what this means: It means we can combine torrents, P2P, FTP, IRC DCC bots, literally ANY music network on one platform. The technology technically also allows for even more interesting services to be created because there is currently nothing like our networking kernel in existence (real sockets for the web.)

- RE: The white paper: "music seeks to be free."

Yes, obvious logical fallacy. Who cares. Please criticize something that's substantial. This is almost as bad as deconstruction of grammar or spelling errors.

- Economics

You all assume we have no clue regarding the moral rights of artists and basic economics. How very sad. This is itself proof that none of you have read the white paper in which we discuss our ideas for business. Yes, it's obvious artists should have the potential to be paid for their music and we intend to make these options available but it will by no means be required. It is our hope that we can construct and encourage alternative revenue streams around a community of engaged listeners. We don't intend to deprive entitled parties of their revenue at any point. An example of such a contract would be allowing YouTube advertisements on our player or promoting an artist's merchandise along side their songs.

We will just have to see how things play out. This obviously isn't an issue yet with Anontune being so small and incomplete . . .

So please don't assume this is a big "fuck you" by Anonymous to all of the industry because it's not. Anontune will be very similar to radio in that it won't provide the means to download the music. It will be closed to streaming only, and this offers some protection against piracy. In a sense, it's really not so different to existing streaming services because our restrictions and revenue model are similar. It's not as if we have no intention of cooperating with the RIAA, either. I think that would be a great choice. It's also interesting to note that our involvement places us in cooperation with existing streaming services (because we will need them.) What's not to say that this won't play out to HELP rather than DISRUPT the industry?

- Money

This is the most scathing and insult criticism of all: The proposal that this is all a ploy for us to profit. Really? Don't you think if we wanted to make the most money from this we wouldn't be trying to upset a billion dollar industry, especially after all the recent lawsuits? Don't you think we would be working on something a little less saturated than online music if we just wanted to profit? It's all a little stupid. We understand more than anyone the revenue issues surrounding music . . . it can be summed up by the quote in The Social Network "there's not a lot of money in free music."

Just another note: Advertisements appear in our video because of the Hans Zimmer music we used. YouTube and hopefully the artist will profit from this, and not us. It's important for people to know we didn't actively monetize this and that it's not exploitative of Hans Zimmer who is a fucking genius, and you should buy his stuff.

In conclusion: Anontune is about the music, not the money.
Play to the last note and leave no regrets.

- Anontune looks like an anus and it gave me cancer.

What people need to understand is on Anontune we are showing you a prototype. The prototype helps demonstrate how we might organize our approach to music. It is meant to be thrown away . . . for it is a prototype, not a beta, and not a release.

Yes, it does look hideous. This observation is true but and we hope to work with some new developers to create a new intuitive and sexy player. Some of you seem very bright so why not help? It's more productive than criticizing us.

- Overall

It's not the best time to be generalizing the project based on our limited information. Most of our ideas aren't even in the white paper. Notably, how we are going to make Anontune social and the like. So I encourage this community to stop being so critical when you don't know the whole story yet.

-----------------

Anonymous

- Exploiting the name

Believe me when I say it is not our intention to exploit Anonymous for our own agenda. We are Anonymous because we are anonymous. The website is called Anontune because we intend to add anonymous features and uphold privacy/security for our users to a rigorous standard. It is also called Anontune to imply music should stand on it's own right, without hype or manipulation. Anonymous should commend this approach, regardless of whether you actively support Anontune or not.

It is also regrettable that Anonymous has so much negative press associated with it which is in fact detrimental to our project. Even so, we're Anonymous because we believe in this so we chose this approach anyway.

- Tomahawk

Comparisons to Tomahawk are unfair because our intentions and aims are completely different. Apples and oranges; (yes both are still fruit.
)

My opinion of Tomahawk is it's an absolutely genius application for music and I encourage everyone to check it out. It is in a better shape than Anontune currently is, and it deserves a mention. Great work to the coders behind this project.


--------------

That is the main criticism at this point. Thanks for reading and taking an interest in the project.
 I hope I wasn't too rude in discussing this.


This file will be updated as needed when important criticism abounds.