Wow, this sounds really beautiful. They've done a great job and taking random signals and stringing them into beautiful and pleasant-to-hear music!
GitHub Audio
111–120 of 133 posts
Re: GitHub Audio
#112ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ... b. Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith: (i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name p…
So what's your conclusion?
Re: GitHub Audio
#113ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ... b. Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith: (i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name p…
You skipped part a which includes:
> (i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights
Guthub can take this down fast. And if you believe everybody with a trademark lawyer, they might have to in order to preserve their trademark.
Re: GitHub Audio
#114Not what I was expecting. Very soothing to have running in the background
What I find soothing about it is when there are long pauses. It makes me wonder... what's making people take long breaks?
Well people aren't taking breaks, it's just a natural random variation. It's the sound of a Poisson distribution.
Re: GitHub Audio
#115For some reason, this is the fifth posting of this site in the past two days, and the only one to make it to the front page.
It seems that HN is encouraging people to post the same Show HN projects multiple times until they get traction. I have been restraining myself from doing that with my own projects because I care a little about this community, but since moderators and the majority of users don't, I will not restrain myself anymore.
I don't see anything wrong with that. If something failed to get traction then barely anyone would have seen it. So posting it again will cause very little annoyance.
Re: GitHub Audio
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
For all of the things you can point fingers at Microsoft for doing wrong, opening up their second-generation document formats (docx, pptx, xlsx, etc) was a wonderful, positive move. It's a shame that the music industry hasn't had a similar revelation. I'm tempted to be cynical and accuse them of fear and greed, but more likely "open data" just isn't something they think about.
I was under the impression their hand was forced. I vaguely recall various nation governments insisting on open standards or they would no longer use Office. The OpenOffice formats were going through standardization and Microsoft quickly bought their way through the standards process (this part I remember). There was a lot of complaining of how they exploited the particular standards' body. They bought seats, that th…
Yeah, pretty much everyone agreed that the ISO standard for docx was nearly impossible to completely implement for anyone outside of Microsoft and that it should have never been accepted as a standard.
Re: GitHub Audio
#117For some reason, this is the fifth posting of this site in the past two days, and the only one to make it to the front page.
It seems that HN is encouraging people to post the same Show HN projects multiple times until they get traction. I have been restraining myself from doing that with my own projects because I care a little about this community, but since moderators and the majority of users don't, I will not restrain myself anymore.
It's great that you care about the community. People caring about HN is what makes it good.
The repost thing is in the FAQ: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html. It's a well-known weakness of HN's structure that many good stories get posted to /newest and then fail to get noticed before they get washed out to see. There are just so many submissions here.
Over the last couple of years we've developed techniques for rescuing good stories and giving them second chances at attention. The simplest was just to let people know that a small number of reposts is ok. Reposts aren't great, of course, but missing good stories is worse. Think of it as allowing multiple pitches before striking out.
Another thing we did is build a system for story reviewing—initially by moderators only, now by us plus some users, with the plan of opening it to the whole community as soon as we figure out how—under which stories that get picked as good by reviewers get a random placement somewhere on the bottom half of the front page. These are stories that would otherwise have fallen through the cracks completely.
For example, your Show HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12635722 looks good, so I just put it in the second-chance queue, and it's on the front page now. You should also have gotten an email saying we did this. Btw you might want to add a comment to that thread introducing yourself and explaining the background to the project—readers like that, and it tends to seed better discussions.
Re: GitHub Audio
#118The name Github Audio reminds me of something I've been searching for: Version control for Musicians. A lot of music is now made over the internet. When I'm working on a track with a remote bandmate my workflow consists of recording, exporting the track, uploading it to dropbox, and then he needs to download, and import the track into his DAW. Surely there must be a better way. Is there a way for musicians to work together on songs the same way programmers can write software together?
I actually worked on building this before but nothing came of it. The main problem was a 'diff' for audio files.
Re: GitHub Audio
#119...bing, bong, chim, pluck..and my Chrome is frozen.
Re: GitHub Audio
#120ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ... b. Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith: (i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name p…
So what's your conclusion?
Maybe they concluded that this is fair to use and that's why they didn't have any argument beyond posting the ICANN rules for us.