Norwegians with Windows98se or newer, certain other software, a broadband net connection and a library card at Deichmanske bibliotek in Oslo or at Bergen Public Library can now “borrow” music from Phonofile’s collection of music with Norwegian copyright holders. The music is streamed to you when you “borrow” it, and only one person can listen to any song at any one time. LÂtlÂn is a trial project that will last for six months. Pity it’s not open platform. (via Eirik)


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “lÂtlÂn

  1. Jan Tore

    I didn’t quite get the part about “one person at a time” – I figured it was some kind of strange license rule prohibiting more than one listener in front of the computer while streaming – but when I read it in Norwegian, i got the point:

    They lend you one song, and nobody else (in the world) can listen to it at the same time. Just as if you had borrowed the one copy of a book at the library.

    Crazy concept.

  2. Eirik

    Yep, duplicating the functionality of the analogue library is obviously the point here. Too bad they were unable to test an open, full-featured digital lending system, but it couldn’t have been done any other way as long as the musician’s rights management organization (TONO) is involved.

  3. Blogg og bibliotek

    LÂtLÂn – eller MSLÂtlÂn
    Et fantastisk tilbud har dukket opp! LÂtlÂn er musikkbibliotekenes svar p e-boken. Her kan du h¯re p favorittmusikken din s mye du vil OM… du har en Microsoft-godtatt datamaskin og nettleser. Uten Windows 98 eller nyere og Microsoft Internet Explo…

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]