The biggest issue here for me is that you're charging for this app. You're basically asking me to pay you for your hard work of removing ads from someone else's hard work of creating content.

It's not removing the ads. The ads are still in there. It skips over them. I think that many people are already pressing the 30 second forward button to skip. This app skips for you automatically, at exactly the right place. It saves the user from having to do it manually.

It's an automation tool, and I would argue you were clever to do it that way because later maintenance is easier, but because of that... The real question is: Why are you charging for this ?

It really would have been an attractive project to play with. But it looks like you just wanted a 'snatch and grab'.

Again, well done: You did the work but I wont be participating.

They made an LLC

You're welcome to pay someone else making the content, aren't you? And then throw this developer another $1.99 so that the other creator doesn't have to put in more hard work to make a special ad-free stream for you.

I would happily pay some of the non spotify / subscription based podcasts I enjoy, infact I do through patreon etc.

If the content provider offers it, and I want to give it, cool.

But paying for this, has nothing to do with the provider.. At all actually. All money goes to someone who filtered out Adverts, if you wanna have a better argument you could say : can't anyone do this: And yes, but its the time and effort that goes into it, maybe release it open source and free so others can build a network of methods to remove more ads and even support the content provider without them needing to invest in a 'special ad-free' streaming service.

Nobody is telling you not to use this, just their own reasons for not.

If it was free, you would be fine with it?

Pretty much, yeah. While obviously not nearly as severe, I view this basically as war profiteering. Consumers are waged in battle against a broken industry and you're offering some help, but only for a cost.

I would. As is, it seems pretty immoral.

This is a massive stretch - anyone who hates adverts enough to risk crashing a car shouldn't be driving one. They're annoying - but this is childish behaviour.

Honest question: were you expecting this backlash - I would assume you wouldn't have used a throwaway account otherwise.

I don't view it as backlash. It's interesting and necessary conversation. I want to hear what the HN community thinks.

Podcast ads are a dream compared to the web - this will damage that if your product is even half successful.

If the same was done for TV on a mass scale then you'd sure as shit see invasive DRM in TVs ready to stop you from altering the stream during an ad break.

Come on, safety is a huge stretch. You built this because you want to profit off of other peoples' work.

"safety is a huge stretch" : Millions of people listen to podcasts while driving. It's probably the most common time to listen. People skip the ads. Are you sure that's a stretch?

An ad-supported internet is not an open internet. It is an internet of content that caters to the sponsors with the deepest pockets, for fear of losing their attention.