What's new
By:
Guest viewing is limited

Where does Chartbuster stand ?

JoeChartreuse said:
I'm disc based, and not only do I have no problems competing with PC shows, ( and have been doing so quite successfully), but have found being disc based to be an excellent selling point....

Also, as an electronics design engineer, I am usually acquainted with "new" technology well before the general population.

Unfortunately, there hasn't been any actual NEW technology produced in the U.S. since the early '90s....only modifications of the old.
Click to expand...

I wasn't commenting about you but there are disc based KJ's who feel the way I stated.
 
DannyGKaraoke said:
Your definition and my definition of pirate are two different things.
Pirate, in context of karaoke, is one who does not have receipts for downloads from manufacturers or the discs to back them up. I.E. a loaded hard drive with nothing to show that they legally got the music. also refers to disc based hosts that have burnt copies of discs but no originals to back them up.
Click to expand...


Agreed, but with an addendum. Hosts that run shows based on downloads that they paid for may not be pirates, but they ARE illegal.
 
Thunder said:
Moon,

I sure hope we aren't talking about the same KJ, who claims the suit was dropped against him (because it couldn't be served), who went on a buying rampage after he found out he was named, who started a multi-op business on copied hard drives (claiming he had a new online library system where his KJs "check out" a song), who is now selling his disc and equipment including his vehicle (to get the money to fight SC), the same KJ who Kurt has already told publicly he is the one person they have no interest in settling with!

Please tell me it isn't him!
Click to expand...

Nope, not that one. That "online library" bafflegab was hilarious though. One of the funniest things I've seen in this whole mess.

Thunder said:
So how many have dropped karaoke in Richmond because of the lawsuits so far?
Click to expand...

Beats me. No matter what I plug into the computing engine it keeps telling me 42.

:yahdork:
 
Moonrider said:
Nope, not that one. That "online library" bafflegab was hilarious though. One of the funniest things I've seen in this whole mess.
Click to expand...

Except for a couple minor details, it IS very possible to run a single library to several locations. The error in the plan that was described was the "checkout process" and the "honor system" that other KJ's would promise not to keep what they downloaded.

But, the concept is valid because I've created one and it does work.
 
c. staley said:
Except for a couple minor details, it IS very possible to run a single library to several locations. The error in the plan that was described was the "checkout process" and the "honor system" that other KJ's would promise not to keep what they downloaded.

But, the concept is valid because I've created one and it does work.
Click to expand...

The bafflegab part was the error you noted. That would entail some pretty sophisticated security programming, and some excellent UI work to allow a hired monkey to operate it with little to no training.
 
JoeChartreuse said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunder
So how many have dropped karaoke in Richmond because of the lawsuits so far?
Venues?
Click to expand...

Joe, I made the computation engine run the program again, and requested more detail. Im still baffled about the answer, because THIS time the answer tape read, "42 hitchhikers.":yahalien:
 
Moonrider said:
The bafflegab part was the error you noted. That would entail some pretty sophisticated security programming, and some excellent UI work to allow a hired monkey to operate it with little to no training.
Click to expand...

Well, you could add some security programming so on that note you are correct. However, there is another way to do this which is simply a log-process of the files that are requested. It's like hiding files on what would be a remote hard drive if there are no more copies allowed of a single song.

Otherwise, the KJ doesn't have access to the file directly to be able to keep it anyway. Since the file is not stored locally in a que and is only accessed from the remote when it is needed, the server needs do nothing more than time the duration of the song (plus about 30 seconds to be sure) before it allows that song to be available again.

Since the song is in a memory buffer and not stored locally on disc as a file, the KJ is hard-pressed to find any way of trapping or keeping the file.

And it really doesn't matter which hosting program they use it all operates the same.

If the KJ doesn't uphold any part of their agreement (moolah-wise), then the operator of the server simply blocks their access to the library... literally a couple of clicks.

So, other than the logging-timer software which would need to be written (and not difficult), the system is out there in component parts and most of it is...... (that magic word) "FREE."
 
Moonrider said:
Joe, I made the computation engine run the program again, and requested more detail. Im still baffled about the answer, because THIS time the answer tape read, "42 hitchhikers.":yahalien:
Click to expand...

This is like the Jeopardy game right?
Where you state the answer and then buzz-in with the question like:


ANSWER: 42 hitchhikers

QUESTION: "What is the number of fleas in Santa Claus's beard at any one time?"
 
c. staley said:
This is like the Jeopardy game right?
Where you state the answer and then buzz-in with the question like:


ANSWER: 42 hitchhikers

QUESTION: "What is the number of fleas in Santa Claus's beard at any one time?"
Click to expand...

The computational matrix I used was called Deep Thought. I'm glad that the upgrades sped it up so much. It used to take 7.5 million years for complex computations.

I ran it one more time and the answer tape read: "I've given you the Ultimate Answer twice."

I seem to be the only true nerd on this forum! :nerdpill:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top