|
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by footpad (Abbot) on Mar 28, 2001 at 22:47 UTC
|
I'll say this; it's an, er, creative idea. That said; I'm against it:
High amount of bandwidth for little more than entertainment purposes. It would be seriously annoying if Super Search took longer because someone started Napstering us. Entertainment is not the point; distribution of technical (preferably Perl-related) information is. (Okay, we're sometimes entertained while sharing, but that's slightly different.) Let's not stray from our mission. Why reinvent the wheel? There are existing Internet radio stations broadcasting all sorts of stuff. I'm sure if you look hard enough, you can find a station already broadcasting this type of music. Licensing questions. Given the current rhubarb between RIAA and Napster, it's clear that there are open questions regarding equitable ways to reimburse artists for their work. Let's wait to see how that little snit plays out before getting into the broadcasting business. Given the broad range of musical tastes in the Monastery, I really don't think this would entertain many monks. It might be fun for awhile, but the novelty would probably wear off soon. Therefore, the investment in time, resources, licensing, and so forth, would be ill spent. I can think of other ways (this, for instance) to focus the limited resources/energies of The Fearless Leader. Some monasterial orders include vows of silence. And so on...
Points for creativity, but I just don't see how this truly helps us.
--f
| [reply] |
Re: This is a monastery after all.
by OeufMayo (Curate) on Mar 28, 2001 at 22:43 UTC
|
Hell yeah, Great Idea™!
Let's have all kinds of plugins needed to see the site: The more XP you have, the more ultra-cool-funky-features you get!
I'm growing tired of not seeing *at least* one mandatory plugin (Flash, ActiveX anyone?) needed to conveniently browse the site.
More seriously, such system would require a lot of work for vroom and I don't think it would add depth to what's going on here. But on the other hand, nothing stops you from listing the music you're listening to on your homenode and invite the other monks to do so, or set up a ShoutCast server or something like that, call it RadioMonk and spread the word!
Cheers, OeufMayo
<kbd>--
my $OeufMayo = new PerlMonger::Paris({http => 'paris.mongueurs.net'});</kbd>
| [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by Chady (Priest) on Mar 28, 2001 at 22:39 UTC
|
I'm not sure why.... but if you want to listen to music, turn the radio on.
I don't find it useful to stuff some JavaScript or ActiveX control on the pages to start a music file, this might make the navigation hard; already I think that I'm not the only one connecting with a dial-up
I'm not with that
He who asks will be a fool for five minutes, but he who doesn't ask will remain a fool for life.
| [reply] |
Re: (OT) (marius) This IS a monastery after all.
by marius (Hermit) on Mar 28, 2001 at 23:24 UTC
|
Just go buy some chanting CD's. Anything called "Gregorian Chant" is what you're looking for.. Here are some of my other favorites:
- Harmony of the Soul
- Maitri Vihar Monastery
- Sacred Ceremonies: The Ritual Orchestra and Chant
- The Benedictine Monks of Santo
All good relaxing chanting stuff. If you're looking for other relaxing stuff, I would also highly recommend anything by Kitaro.
-marius | [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by darobin (Monk) on Mar 28, 2001 at 23:31 UTC
|
To set the record straight: adding music wouldn't require a plugin or js from anyone, unless done really stupidly. That doesn't keep me from not supporting this idea, but facts are facts.
One thing in this area that may be fun and perlish though, would be to start something like a musical JAPH contest. Short pieces of (obfuscated) Perl that generate characters to be fed for instance to Midi::Realtime.
It might not be very popular, but I guess that had Perlians founded monasteries, that's how they would have chanted ;-)
-- darobin
| [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by scottstef (Curate) on Mar 29, 2001 at 19:31 UTC
|
While I like your idea for attempting to add to the monestary, knowing the stress cgi intensive servers like this one are under, i have to disagree with the idea.
There are a couple of ways we could have an opportunity for others to see what our favorite "internet music" is (personally radiomargaritaville/napster its a toss up for me).
Perhaps we could have that be the subject of the next poll.
Perhaps- and I know this is a long shot there would be a place on a person's home node for favorite "internet music"
Having this music offerred from the monestary would probably crush the monestary's bandwidth. This could cause unbearable delays using the site.
I have seen this delay when there were 40+ people logged into pm.
I consider myself fortunate to have at minimal a cable modem for a connection- not everyone is so fortunate. Are we going to penalize those with a slower connection so we can stream in music?
Another concern would be the disk space and processing time wasted on such an practice.
Looking at past threads regarding chatterbox clients, I have seen several commented against due to the stress it places on the server.
As an aside- think of all the flame wars that COULD be started
Why won't anyone include my (some people would consider this music offensive) style of music in the monestary?
| [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by jepri (Parson) on Mar 29, 2001 at 18:08 UTC
|
I wouldn't mind seeing people's tastes in music, if they feel the need to post them. We don't have to post the original songs, just a reference to them.
I only found out about internet radio live 365 from the last thread discussing favourite coding music.
____________________
Jeremy
I didn't believe in evil until I dated it. | [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by royalanjr (Chaplain) on Mar 29, 2001 at 01:36 UTC
|
I'll have to agree completely with some comments previously made. The idea would just waste resources without really being any value.
Roy Alan
| [reply] |
Re: This IS a monastery after all.
by gregor42 (Parson) on Apr 03, 2001 at 18:16 UTC
|
| [reply] |
