[Noisebridge-discuss] Objections to Airport Express for Airtunes?

[Shannon Lee]

Sorry, I misunderstood the intent: if you want the jukebox and your new
thing to co-exist, then great, i'm all for it, provided that we keep the --
or a -- jukebox.

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Rubin Abdi <rubin at starset.net> wrote:

> Replying to multiple things here as it's apparent people don't actually
> read whole emails on this list before hitting reply-all. Amazing! Initiate
> bitchy Rubin trying to not be bitchy filter, GO!
>
> Firstly it's not hard to feed the audio output from the Airport Express
> into the input on the Jukebox machine and balance the two out. We could also
> setup a cheap analog mixer, we could setup a mixer which one could access
> through a web interface or SSH, we could splice the cables together with a
> fucking knife and mad soldering^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H duct tape skillz. As it
> turns out computers and technology in most cases can coexist, go science!
>
> On Oct 13, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Jeff Keyzer wrote:
>
>> What about mpd?  I have it running on a wireless router as a portable
>> radio, it seems well suited to making an open source jukebox.
>>
>
> It's already setup, search the wiki and you'll find some info about how to
> dump music to it, etc. Airtunes provides an alternate solution to those who
> don't want to futs around with making their music library available to
> another machine.
>
> On Oct 13, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Shannon Lee wrote:
>
>> I don't want to set up my laptop every time I want to listen to music --
>> Im much more likely to be doing *something else* in the space than computer
>> work.
>>
>
> Cool, there's totally a jukebox already setup, you still need to get onto a
> machine and interact with the web interface for said jukebox,  be it your
> own computer or someone else's. Haven't you been to the space in the past
> week to check it out? It's all the rage!
>
>  Plus, this doesn't give the oportunity for me to put something into the
>> playlist after whatever's already playing, thus seamlessly taking over the
>> music or even playing with someone else.
>>
>
> This is a completely valid statement! I'm sure most of the members would
> totally be in the boat on figuring out who to do this with the already setup
> jukebox system *cough*which already plays music and is implemented and can
> remain implemented along side my Airtunes suggestion*coughcoughhackcough*.
>
> This past Saturday night / Sunday morning Ed and I were at the space, I was
> sleep depraved. pvck asked if we wanted to put some music on because the
> album he was playing started to loop. I'm like, "sure let's fucking throw on
> some Kettel". pvck directed us to the jukebox's url. Ed and I spent 5
> minutes looking at it and give up, no way in hell we were going to deal with
> getting our music libraries dumped onto that machine then have it chug for
> an hour updating its db. The argument of "Im much more likely to be doing
> *something else* in the space than computer work" can be used here too. I'm
> sure many members are completely happy dealing with this. I know at some
> point in time I will be too. That night wasn't it.
>
> Now this is how Airtunes works if you have your music library handy and are
> running iTunes (I would really love to have a count on how many of us use
> Macs for our next mailing list food fight):
> 1. Open laptop.
> 2. Start iTunes.
> 3. Select an output speaker, be it the laptop or Airtunes on the network.
> 4. Play generic pop song.
> 5. Take a shot of rum and fucking dance.
>
> This is how Airtunes works if you don't have your library handy:
> 1. Stand in the corner and cry.
>
> As you can see, both solutions work together fine and cater to different
> users. If I come in one night and nothing is playing, I'm going to start
> playing through Airtunes. If people are already in the space playing music,
> when the request for someone else to bump something comes up, I'll ask if I
> can stream to Airtunes. NOT A PROBLEM, unless I'm really drunk and am
> actually secretively looking for a fist fight, in which case I'll start
> playing the Willy Wonka sound track over whatever the jukebox is playing.
>
>  In addition to which, I have more music than can fit on my laptop's
>> harddrive, and I'd rather have it at the space where I can play it than be
>> limited to whatever I happen to have downloaded recently.
>>
>> I'm strongly in favor of a jukebox solution.
>>
>
> That's beyond great man, because guess what, there's a jukebox solution
> waiting for you at the hunting den inside 83c, just ready to get its juicy
> pawns on some fucking fresh beats!
>
>
>
> Why does it seem like every suggestion tossed into the list here is read
> off by others as a replacement to already implemented solutions and not as
> an option that can live side by side with what we've got? Overly comical
> example I illustrated in the channel in order to bring a smile to your face
> at the end of this long and terrible email...
>
> - Initial email: Hey kids, we got this totally fucking awesome playground,
> I get carpet burns on the slide, anyone mind if I add in one of those merry
> go round things were you can totally crack one of your arms off with?
> - Reply 1: Fuck horses, we want ponies.
> - Reply 2: I like the god damn slide, don't get rid of the slide.
> - Reply 3: Merry go rounds are the shit, fuck your religion.
> - Reply 4: Dude, we should install a slide, it would be great if we had a
> slide, why don't we already have a slide?
> - My reply back: I'm sorry, I didn't know I typed out the sentence, "let's
> replace the slide with the merry go round, the slide can go to hell" in my
> email with invisible ink, next time I'll be more careful with what I don't
> say or mean. Oh look a cake!
>
>
> --
> Rubin Abdi
> Rubin at Starset.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20081013/6b811c09/attachment-0003.html>