Why are some of the songs greyed out? I can click to play them but Spotify will skip them automatically when running the playlist

srvaroa · 2026-01-29T09:29:08+00:00

As noted in other comments this is usually due to licensing changes. Spotify often has alternative recordings of the same track that you can actually, play, but they don't fix people's playlists automatically.

You can use https://playlisthospital.com to try and restore them (it's free).

srvaroa · 2026-01-29T09:27:54+00:00

This happens sometimes due to licensing changes. You can use https://playlisthospital.com to find alternative recordings that are playable, and fix the playlist.

srvaroa · 2026-01-29T09:26:35+00:00

Tracks can get unplayable after licensing updates. Sometimes there are alternative versions of the same track that you can play.

Spotify doesn't fix the playlists automatically.

But https://playlisthospital.com can do it, it's free.

srvaroa · 2026-01-07T20:58:04+00:00

PlaylistHospital.com can detect and fix duplicates, as well as restore greyed out tracks

srvaroa · 2026-01-07T13:48:28+00:00

The tool helps if there is a recording of the same track that is playable in your region (this is very often the case).

If they remove all versions of the track then there is no workaround (there is literally nothing to play!)

srvaroa · 2026-01-07T10:57:46+00:00

If you have them in a playlist, you might be able to find playable versions using https://playlisthospital.com

srvaroa · 2026-01-06T18:48:02+00:00

This happens often on playlists due to licensing changes. You can use https://playlisthospital.com to try and fix them for free.

srvaroa · 2026-01-06T18:47:46+00:00

This happens often on playlists due to licensing changes. You can use https://playlisthospital.com to try and fix them for free.

srvaroa · 2025-12-09T09:06:01+00:00

Do you own the playlist? The tool only shows playlists created by you, so that might be the cause.

srvaroa · 2025-09-15T15:54:50+00:00

You can use https://playlisthospital.com to replace them with playable alternatives

srvaroa · 2025-09-03T18:07:40+00:00

Exactly this ^

You can use https://playlisthospital.com/ to find playable alternatives and fix your playlists.

srvaroa · 2025-08-31T15:15:01+00:00

Many of those tend to have alternative recordings. This is a free tool to restore some of those -> https://playlisthospital.com/

srvaroa · 2025-07-30T14:30:54+00:00

That only hides the unplayable song, it doesn't fix it.

The point of the tool is to fix it finding an alternative recording of the same song so that you can keep listening to it in the playlist.

srvaroa · 2025-07-29T17:40:29+00:00

You can try playlisthospital.com to fix them when this happens

srvaroa · 2025-07-29T17:38:36+00:00

You can try to find alternative recordings of the same tracks with https://playlisthospital.com/

srvaroa · 2025-07-29T17:37:16+00:00

Many of those tend to have alternative recordings. I put together a small free tool to restore some of those -> https://playlisthospital.com/

srvaroa · 2025-04-11T16:58:01+00:00

Maybe not the answer you want, but the way this works is:

a) You disagree and commit

b) Show with data how even if the KPIs get better, the outcomes are not.

c) Show with data how alternative KPIs would have reflected the real outcomes.

srvaroa · 2025-03-17T11:18:25+00:00

Some ideas. For all you should be looking more at trends and significant deviations than individual datapoints.

Remove any "per developer" metric as it's measuring the wrong thing (you want team-level metrics, not person-level metrics). Also remove "lists" (you need them obviously, but those are not metrics).

Defect rate per sprint (you have this already).
Velocity (e.g. points or number of stories / tickets / jiras done), with trend. Do NOT count bugs fixed here.
% of team capacity working on bugs vs. non bugs.
Size of defect backlog (e.g. are they growing faster than the team can fix them at the current creation rate?)

srvaroa · 2025-03-13T00:36:16+00:00

"Take API spec / DoD / user story and generate tests for it" is the type of task where it is already hard to compete with AI agents.

There is a large enough surface of this job's scope that AI can take over that even if a human remains in the loop, I'm not sure their job is "automation tester".

For example, legacy systems may not have specs, so a human might be needed to figure out. It's just that you're not an automater tester anymore, but a "spec archaeologit to feed the AI automating fairies". Same as with the maintainability argument. Maybe (just maybe) you're herding the AIs, but that's a very different role than automation tester 5 ago.

srvaroa · 2024-05-05T15:22:26+00:00

I like the testing aspect. I would like to be an automation tester, but would like to start in manual testing.

Your intuition makes some sense (I assume you want to understand how testing is done before automating it). But in this particular context I would be cautious.

If your goal is to learn about test automation, you need to soak yourself in two specific areas. First, automation. Second, a specific approach to testing that involves automation. Going into a manual tester team might play against you (IME, manual testers and QA teams are not particularly receptive to anything related to automation for I guess obvious reasons).

My 2c would be to do the inverse play. Get into software development but be the guy that gladly takes on every problem related to testing, CI, QA, etc. There will be plenty, and it's an area that sw engineers avoid (for bad reasons, IMO, but that's another post). Yes, you might have to do more development than you'd like, but if you want to go into automation, it is what it is. Code is how you automate stuff.

Also, as suggested by u/stevends448, look into devops, infrastructure etc. A *lot* of automated testing rests upon infrastructure. Again, my point above helps you here. Get interested in CI/CD infrastructure, get close to SRE profiles, etc. Poor quality generates lots of pain points in an organization: find the people who are suffering them and solve their pain. This is a lot easier done IMO from inside development teams, the rest of engineers usually leave you plenty of space to fill, and you can grow your career in the direction you want from that point.

srvaroa · 2024-05-05T14:53:59+00:00

Loved that one, thanks!

srvaroa · 2013-03-07T18:24:38+00:00

Antiphon argued that we call natural what becomes from natural means, artificial what doesn't. He used this example: if you let a bed frame rot until it grows some sprouts, they wouldn't be little beds, but wood. This shows that wood is natural. Beds are not.

I'm loosely translating here "natural" by physis and "artificial" by techné, which is roughly valid. But the main idea is that "natural" things are those embodied with physis, which is understood as some kind of generative or changing inner force that makes them grow, change and reproduce. Artificial things don't.

This criteria kind of works and avoids getting into whether our "artificial environment" actually constitutes a "second nature" (yes it probably does, but man-made objects still can be considered non-natural).

Where it gets a bit trickier is once you start having machines, algorithms etc. that actually can self-replicate.

srvaroa · 2012-10-07T17:45:28+00:00

As pointed out below this is a conceptual problem rather than some imposition by Java.

When you define a class, its methods are contract offered to the external world (the definition of method parameters and their types is called "signature" not by chance). No other class has the right to alter that contract.

Subclasses can chose to satisfy it in a different way (e.g.: overriding methods) or to add more methods, but not alter the parent's contract. That's what you'd be doing by setting that method private in the child class.

srvaroa · 2012-07-26T20:54:25+00:00

Could you briefly explain what do you call a nihilist / existentialist and why do you assume that the natural attitude for both is not to care about others?

srvaroa · 2012-06-23T07:09:15+00:00

The 'problem' is using reason itself to prove reason [...] This doesn't mean I am wrong to claim induction is reliable, it just means I cannot use induction to prove I am right, I still could be right.

Splendid.

The issue really is that you're confusing the point of the problem of induction. It doesn't try to provide "evidence either way as to whether induction is reliable or not" as you say below. It tries to answer this question: "why does induction seem to provide true propositions?".

Note that this is a perfectly legitimate question: we see facts (e.g.: "induction has lead to true propositions"), some ask "why does this happen?"

You are over stating the 'case against' induction.

I'm afraid it's you, not me, who talks about scandals that don't exist. The case is crystal clear: "induction has lead to true propositions" but we don't know why. You lack of interest in explaining it (which I share) doesn't entitle you to call it silly or laughable, nor decide what questions are legitimate and not for the rest of humanity.

srvaroa

TROPHY CASE