

Museum of Endangered Sounds - slaundy
http://savethesounds.info/
Wonderfully nostalgic. I had that Nokia phone until about 2009, and taught myself to read on the Speak'n'Spell.
======
keithpeter
Looks OK but I prefer

<http://www.freesound.org/>

where the licensing is clear and samples of all kinds of quality (glitch to
high end) available.

~~~
xyzzyb
A tag was created specifically to respond to Sound Museum and is already a
great collection: <http://www.freesound.org/browse/tags/sound-museum/>

------
lancefisher
The Game Boy was the best Tetris experience! I always missed that music on
other implementations.

------
lotharbot
seems a bit unnecessary to make the TV image NSFW.

~~~
enko
You have got to be kidding me. Who could possibly consider that "NSFW"? I have
literally seen more skin being flashed by clothes people are wearing _at_
work.

I get the necessity for NSFW warnings where appropriate, but anyone who has a
problem with that tiny, flickering, black and white half-body shot of a woman
in lingerie, clearly within the context of a larger collection, has got
something wrong with them.

~~~
lotharbot
How does the page suffer if instead there's a flickering Howdy Doody, Walter
Cronkite, or Emergency Broadcast System screen? How does the page benefit from
the inclusion of an image that, while not particularly erotic, is definitely
suggestive? (An image can be suggestive even if it shows little or no skin.)
Hence my point that it is _unnecessary_.

Every so often an HN discussion about "brogrammers" and latent sexism comes
up. This is a great example. That particular image serves to communicate to
the women in the audience "you are objects" (yes, really!) The inclusion of
that particular image does make some people uncomfortable and could certainly
qualify as NSFW in some work settings (I was an educator, working with mostly
9-10 year olds. "EWWW! Teacher had a dirty picture on his computer!") The only
reason to choose such an image is to signal to other bros "hey, I'm cool too",
which unfortunately signals to all the rest of us (whether intentionally or
not) "I don't respect women".

~~~
enko
Well, that's your opinion and it's your right to have it. When you make a web
page, don't put women in lingerie on it. Done.

But that's not what you said. You said it was NSFW, which I thought was a
ludicrous claim and still do.

Trying to whip up a storm of righteous outrage about sexism and misogyny out
of this is just ridiculous. Don't you have anything better to do?

And the hilarious thing is how you just assume the author of the page is a
guy. Because, y'know, only guys can make web pages, and only guys would read
hacker news! Who's sexist now?

~~~
lotharbot
> _"that's not what you said. You said it was NSFW"_

Yes, and that's what I said a second time as well: "could certainly qualify as
NSFW in some work settings". I even described such a setting, which is where I
actually worked -- in a public school classroom. You say it's ludicrous to
call it NSFW; I say it's ludicrous to think a teacher wouldn't face immediate
firing if an elementary student saw that image on his screen.

But I didn't _just_ say it was NSFW; I said it was _unnecessary_ , which is
what I clarified in the comment you now take umbrage at.

> _"Trying to whip up a storm"_

what I initially said was "seems a bit unnecessary to make the TV image NSFW";
that's hardly an attempt to whip up a storm. More like a gentle reminder that
people making webpages, as well as those linking to webpages, should carefully
consider the content, as some part of the audience may work in environments
where "women in lingerie" on your screen is a firing offense.

The only reason it got "stormy" is because you deemed it necessary to suggest
there must be something wrong with me (that is, you made a personal attack)
because I've worked in settings where that image would be NSFW, and therefore
incentivized me to clarify.

> _"you just assume the author of the page is a guy."_

There's a picture of the person who made the page at the bottom of the page,
named Brendan Charles Chilcutt. It's possible I've misidentified the gender of
that individual, but it's unlikely.

> _" Because, y'know, only guys can make web pages, and only guys would read
> hacker news!"_

This is one of those pointless cheapshots you can only get away with on HN if
you come into a thread five days after everyone else left (I wouldn't have
even seen this comment if I hadn't happened to be looking through some history
for an unrelated comment.) So, as long as we're dropping pointless cheapshots
days after everyone else has left: my wife not only reads HN, she's got 5
times as much karma as you do. Also, since you seem to think [0] time on the
site is important, we've both been here considerably longer than you. So maybe
you would do well to calm down, take a chill pill, and pay attention instead
of getting all upset over a suggestion from someone who used to work in an
elementary school that certain types of images are both _unnecessary_ and
_unsafe in certain work environments_.

[0] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4073974>

------
hartror
Don't click the game boy, it is a trap. Not going to get that song out of my
head for a week now.

------
ars
Now I want to play number munchers. I got so good at that game.

PC's should really go back to having the arrow keys all in a line (instead of
an upside down T), so you can press any of them without moving your fingers -
it's so much faster.

------
mkilling
Would look better without the dynamic shadow casting

~~~
evride
Yes, it's unnecessary and distracting.

------
cowpewter
The sound of a modem connecting will forever bring back memories of my time in
a mediumished-sized dialup ISP's tech support call center.

------
joshuahhh
Not gonna lie; the MindMaze theme brought me back in a powerful way.

------
twiceaday
This is a great premise for a Monty Python sketch.

------
duncan
Where is the dialup sound?

~~~
deno
The one with AOL logo. 1st row, 3rd column.

~~~
duncan
weird it doesn't play for me. hmm.

------
retrogradeorbit
nice low quality, noisy, sometimes clipping recordings. Just what a museum
needs! I mean there's even someone talking in the background of the rotary
telephone sound clip.

~~~
retrogradeorbit
Down voted for speaking factually. If, for instance, I were to start a museum
of sounds with a rotary telephone sound in there, I'd source an old rotary
telephone and do some nice, clear and most importantly _dry_ recordings of it.
But what would I know?

------
tallanvor
I don't understand why you'd get nostalgic about the sounds of a rotary phone,
a cassette tape, or a modem connecting, let alone most of those other sounds.
The concepts of those technologies still exist, they've just been replaced by
superior versions.

I can understand the nostalgia around the game sounds, of course, because they
more strongly evoke the memories of actually playing the game.

~~~
pessimizer
The concept of the game still exists now - why would you be nostalgic about
the sounds of the old inferior ones?

