Of course, this was possible in various ways before expanding TLDs, but I think the problem, and thus the ease of phishing, is greater now.
Same here, I was ready to let my mind explode with the implementation details.
This is why I feel the new TLD's are entirely a racket.
ICANN builds a system which is favorable to squatters - and when all the "good" domains are taken for com/net, they start to release new TLD's (instead of clawing back unused squatted domains) which corporations and celebrities must rush out to purchase or risk someone else using their brand name.
There's the infamous story of Taylor Swift having to purchase her name on the .xxx, .adult, and .porn TLDs
And now presumably GitHub will feel compelled to purchase GitHub.academy, GitHub.technology, GitHub.build, GitHub.buzz, GitHub.careers, GitHub.codes, and many many more!
So now ICANN can kick back and enjoy all those extra fees, and Registrars can kick back and enjoy all their new registrations... meanwhile squatters buy up a bunch of new domain names on the new TLDs, putting everyone right back where we were before the new TLDs were released.
I think popular software vendors should seriously reconsider their file formats in the 21st century, including graphical and audio ones.
Very true, but it's not just about vendors and formats. Making semantic changes a first-class, user-facing construct has profound implications for how you think about what you're modeling and what kinds of interactions (not to mention collaborations) are possible. Even Git is not "21st century" in that respect: textual diffs are not semantic.
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.
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 then sat vacant after they got their standard pushed through, and couldn't meet quorums on other standards being voted on.
There were also many complaints about the Microsoft standards themselves. Particularly, that you couldn't implement support for the documents based solely on their standard.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Recording 16 tracks at 96/24 is 4.6MB/sec.
A typical 3 minute pop song is almost 1GB.
If you're keeping multiple takes that will obviously balloon tremendously.
My bandmate often works on our project while it's in a Dropbox folder, so I get a steady stream of notifications about impulse responses and undo files being changed; not very useful. I can tell when he's tracking because the new .aif files come over but that's about it.
"Non-commercial use cannot be prevented, except if that use harms the distinctiveness of the trademark."
There may well be an argument that the confusion about who's behind this and that it actually deals with the company holding the trademark, I would think GitHub has a case. I'm not sure it would be worth pursuing, unless not doing so threatens the enforce-ability of trademark.
What's the rational behind that though? If you had a charity, a free web game, a free book etc. concerning something people find offensive with the name "Super Mario" in it, many people would be legitimately confused if Nintendo was behind it which could cause harm.
The other issue might be one of "initial interest confusion", which is exactly what happened with some people here: they clicked because they thought it was something other than what it was. Apparently that is actionable but inconsistently so, and the doctrine is controversial.
Source: my dad is an IP lawyer and I asked him about it.
I think there might be different considerations involved if Github actually wanted to use the "github.audio" domain name.
Why? You can edit other people's music. Watch this magic: https://www.audiotool.com/app/soundlab/
$ whois github.audio
whois: audio.whois-servers.net: nodename nor servname
provided, or not known
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 primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
(iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.
> (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.
From there you can get the URLs for the audio files used. Uses Howler for audio, web sockets to talk to the server, SVG to render the animations.
The above is all easy enough to get from the source, but it might save someone else some time.
This  was the first performance of it at CCRMA at Stanford. We spruced it up a bit before we did the performance in Korea.
They had a demo of Github realtime activity and I hooked it into a bunch of different events around the org - Salesforce/Yammer/Github/JIRA - was neat to have a "pulse" of daily activity in the background.
inspired by hatnote
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.
Thank you for all the clarifications anyway. I actually complained knowing that achieving the correct mix of fairness, having-good-stories, and overposting prevention is a kind of impossible task (and HN seems to be doing well), so I was a kind of a troll, we may say. I'm sorry.
I've seen other cases of overposting in the recent past, so I became suspicious of everything.
which has a limit of 30 items, requesting every 2 seconds
And then limits to 3 pushes, 5 issue comments, and 3 issue events:
There are definitely situations where you'd be losing events, though I don't know what percentage that represents.
I actually worked on building this before but nothing came of it. The main problem was a 'diff' for audio files.
Or, do some filtering on
(if you want to know what this is about, the service is under development, you can read about it here http://eventdata.crossref.org/guide/ )
Some folks killed the comment of the author with that Link.
He said "...with photos?"
"No.. some sound thing."
You have to check all three of these to be sure. I have mine set to only "Alarms" and occasionnally allow "Media" when listening to music or podcasts, but after listening you have to reset "Media" to zero. (I don't have any kind of notifications alerts, sound or vibration)
This isn't musical at all! It's some lazy shit a high-schooler with free time and a vague understanding of the Web Audio API could do. Moreover, there's no value in it. The abstract "sonificiation of real data" is such a low bar, there's so much room for creativity, and there are so many brilliant artists who (rightfully) don't want to wade in the depths of the hacky web-tech garbage necessary to make something like this work that it's a wonder anyone gives a fuck about this. To find any value in this, one would have to have tuned out somewhere between having an abstract understanding of the project and actually listening to the darn thing.
Now, do you really want to discuss the merit of the thing, or would you rather Get Offended on the Internet?
If the input was a stream of random bytes you could immediately list an infinite number of different ways to turn that into sound of some kind. Most of those would probably be as interesting as listening to random tones.
In this case, it would be interesting if the music communicated something meaningful about the github pull requests rather than just using github as a random number generator to make pleasant bell tones.
One example might be that a pull request that solved some long-standing much discussed bug would stand out musically by being loud, introducing a new sound, or resolving a tension present in the music. To contrast, a PR that changed some documentation might generate hardly any change in the music.