Maybe it is overlooked, but is that unexpected when it seems to cater to such a specific niche? I'm struggling to see why I would use it. If I want to play my own music, I can just use my local setup that uses better apps and has my playlists already. If I want discovery, I can use last.fm, YouTube Music, and other venues. If I want to share music with other people, I start to see a point, but would rather direct people to use Soulseek or a different self-hosted solution that allows downloads. Speaking of, why is there no download link on the files? The website is sharing copyrighted content either way, what difference does it make whether it's saved or streamed to my PC? At least with a download option I could see it as a Soulseek alternative.

And personally, it seems like a lot of effort to upload and reorganise my collection when I can't trust the server and my effort to still be there a few years down the line. After all, storage costs money and who knows when the server host will get bored, run out of spare cash, or get taken down for hosting licensed music. This is before we get into the fact that even the shitty opus re-encodes I keep are over 60gb (the instance I found only supports 50). Of course you'll tell me to host my own instance, but that is narrowing the niche once again as I would have to move my music to a server and learn how to host Funkwhale and would be opening myself up to legal problems.

Excuse my skepticism but I can only really see the use for either:

• Music collectors that want to share music with each other but for some reason don't want to expand their library via downloading.
• Users with a tiny or non-existent library that don't mind locking themselves into another website they don't control and can lose their data from at any moment.