Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 21:52 +0100, Andy Leighton wrote: Steady on - why not Z80, OK a bit limited but the Z8 was 32bit and about the same time as some of those above? Basically some of the listed processors above are dead for general-purpose computing in the home and they are used by a dwindling core of hobbyists (and usually not as their main machine). Not main machine, true. Maybe as the media centre... some nice low-power cores in there which can be run fanless, for example :) -- dwmw2 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On 6/15/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15/06/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You've obviously not read the numerous posts explaining in some detail why it *isn't* currently feasible Must have missed that one. Can you show in detail the point at which it says you MUST use MICROSOFT DRM? I would really like to know so I can email my MEP about this matter. In case they want to add the BBC as an accessory to whatever they are prosecuting Microsoft for today. Or is it not in fact true that the rights holders would be happy with any DRM? I believe the actual facts are... 1. Rights holders insist on time limited DRM solution. 2. Only Microsoft supports a time limited DRM. 3. Therefore, in order to conform to point 1, BBC have to use Microsoft based DRM. HTH. Mike. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 15/06/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It takes people outside the media-land as you put it because the people inside are too ignorant of technology to understand it. If media people had known even the very basics of how a PC works then we would never have had DRM in the first place. snip Please be aware that your statements in this email can be read as a fairly comprehensive attempt at personally insulting most of the BBC and ex-BBC people on this list. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On 15/06/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You really are a fucking twat, aren't you? Rich. Resorting to personal insults because you can't win an argument? What is so wrong with suggesting you publish said agreements? If they are published and I missed it, then I am sorry but you could be a tad more helpful and point to them instead of sending abusive emails. Or are the agreements/contracts protected by an NDA, or trade secret etc.? The list of OSes/Chips was never meant to be complete, it is just a list of platforms. To be neutral on platform the BBC's iPlayer will need to run on every platform that has existed, that does exist, or will exist in the future. It's not neutral if you select 3 software platforms and implement it on them because you have other platforms which don't have it. Websters dictionary define neutral as meaning: 1. Not engaged on either side; not taking part with or assisting either of two or more contending parties; neuter; indifferent. Wikipedia defines platform (in the computing context) to mean: In computing, a platform describes some sort of framework, either in hardware or software, which allows software to run. Typical platforms include a computer's architecture, operating system, or programming languages and their runtime libraries. Wordnet defines platform to mean: 3: the combination of a particular computer and a particular operating system (the other definitions weren't relevant due to context). Even by implementing iPlayer on Windows, Mac and Linux you are assisting those parties and not assisting contending parties such as BSD, or any other OS that exists or could exist. So given those definitions of neutral and platform how can implementing it on a subset of platforms ever be platform neutral. And even if it is implemented on all platforms it may not be neutral as it assists existing platforms over ones that have not been created yet. If you have any suggestions about how to achieve platform neutrality I would actually be genuinely interested in hearing them (provide you can manage to do that without resorting to personal insults). Right now I can only think of an Open Source reference implementation, or a publicly defined specification. If anyone else knows of a way to achieve platform neutrality speak up! Your new law, do you want it to be Lockwood's Law or Richard's Law? I think Lockwoods law sound better, but you invented the law so you get naming privileges. I concede now the BBC has no choice at this time but to use a DRM scheme, I just disagree with _which_ scheme, and it _appears_ the BBC Trust agrees with me. @Mike: Prove axiom 2. You are also failing to take into account the possibility of using a custom or adapted DRM implementation, it shouldn't cost too much compared with the 4.5 million that the BBC have spent so far. Ian Worte: Name another DRM system which is technically capable of the same things, and exists today. The BBC iPlayer didn't exist when the BBC started the project, why does the DRM need to have existed at that time as well? I will continue looking for such a DRM scheme. Or I could try and stall this for long enough to give me time to create my own DRM scheme and point to that (but that may be cheating?) I am downloading a cross platform DRM system as we speak, the source is rather large though. I think it's bringing all the crypto libraries and media libraries with it. More news on that if it does do time restrictions. can't be sure though. Andy -- SELECT * FROM remarks WHERE witty=1 LIMIT 1 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On 16/06/07, mike chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe the actual facts are... 1. Rights holders insist on time limited DRM solution. 2. Only Microsoft supports a time limited DRM. 3. Therefore, in order to conform to point 1, BBC have to use Microsoft based DRM. I accept axiom 1. Axiom 2 is incorrect and can be proved to be so. Proof: 2a: If Microsoft's is the only scheme who support time limited DRM there can not exist a scheme such that: - scheme is not Microsoft's - scheme supports time limited DRM 2b: OpenIPMP (http://sourceforge.net/projects/openipmp/) is not Microsoft's scheme. 2c: OpenIPMP (http://sourceforge.net/projects/openipmp/) supports time limited DRM 2b and 2c contradict the hypothesis in 2a, thus axiom 2 can not be correct. Axiom 3 is incorrect. It's reasoning relied on Axiom 2 which was proved to be incorrect (see above). Ian wrote: Name another DRM system which is technically capable of the same things, and exists today. OpenIPMP Andy PS sorry about the double post but the DRM software I was taking quite a while to download. -- SELECT * FROM remarks WHERE witty=1 LIMIT 1 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On Saturday 16 June 2007 12:43, Andy wrote: To be neutral on platform the BBC's iPlayer will need to run on every platform that has existed, that does exist, or will exist in the future Picking out this one point, this is bogus, unless you are suggesting that iPlayer should run on a ZX81 (In which case I give up talking to you right here). Platform neutrality means it should not favour any one specific system. There are several ways to achieve this. You've discounted several however claiming they're not platform neutral, so I'll leave my response there. Michael. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On 16/06/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Platform neutrality means it should not favour any one specific system. That's not what platform neutral means. It means it shouldn't favour any specific system or systems. If there was a war between 4 nations, (called A, B, C, D) would you consider fighting with nations A and B as being neutral? There are several ways to achieve this. You've discounted several however claiming they're not platform neutral, so I'll leave my response there. I discounted things that did not meet defined objectives based on recognised definitions of the words platform (in the computing context) and neutral. I really don't see how you can claim choosing a few platforms is neutral. If you would like to point out how selecting a few platforms and not selecting other platforms is neutral be my guest. unless you are suggesting that iPlayer should run on a ZX81 I'm thinking lack of colour and sound support could be a problem. However if a spec was provided it wouldn't be the BBC saying no we won't allow it on the ZX81, they will be allowing it on any platform. If no one can actually get it to work on the platform then that is a problem with the platform. Unless the BBC provides specifications it can not be implemented on all platform's and would not be neutral as it is only selecting a subset of platforms. Which of the methods I discounted did you think would provide platform neutrality? I thought I provided reasons for them. Implementing it on all platforms - in practical too many platforms, BBC may not even know all the platforms. Using a Virtual Machine - the VM would be the platform, it would not be neutral as it only runs on specific platforms, namely the VM itself. Which part of which one of those do you disagree with? Or do you disagree with my definition of platform neutral? Andy -- SELECT * FROM remarks WHERE witty=1 LIMIT 1 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 10:19 +0100, mike chamberlain wrote: 1. Rights holders insist on time limited DRM solution. 2. Only Microsoft supports a time limited DRM. 3. Therefore, in order to conform to point 1, BBC have to use Microsoft based DRM. I would phrase it slightly differently. 1. Rights holders ask for a time-limited DRM solution. 2. Microsoft offer a time-limited DRM solution. 3. The BBC accepts that this is a placebo; DRM doesn't really work. 4. The BBC offers this 'solution' to the rights-holders, knowing that it will actually be broken like all the other DRM solutions and it only _really_ serves to inconvenience the consumers. When a clueless person walks into a shop and is sold a 'solution', there is a legal obligation on the part of the shop assistant not to mis-sell, on the basis that the shop assistant is presumed to be an expert in the field. I'm sure the same _law_ doesn't apply here, but the moral principle should. I am very disappointed by the BBC's actions. They have a duty to the the public, and they _also_ have a duty to help the people who have come to them with such strange ideas, rather than disingenuously _pretending_ to meet their requirements. The BBC are failing on both counts. The world didn't fall on our heads when the MPAA failed to ban the VCR in 1984. And it won't fall on our heads when we wake up and drop DRM either. By reducing the usability of the content, you effectively prohibit almost _all_ innovation and development around the platform. It's not that the DRM won't be cracked -- of course it will. But you make people live in fear of generating programs and tools for dealing with that content, just like we live in fear of shipping programs which can allow you to view your legally-purchased DVDs. I don't see how anybody can think that's a good thing. Especially anyone subscribed to this particular mailing list. -- dwmw2 I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone. -- Jack Valenti, MPAA. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, Kim Plowright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15/06/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It takes people outside the media-land as you put it because the people inside are too ignorant of technology to understand it. Please be aware that your statements in this email can be read as a fairly comprehensive attempt at personally insulting most of the BBC and ex-BBC people on this list. Many media industry professionals are on record stating their believe that DRM can work to halt unauthorised sharing, and that the problems with current DRM systems are not fundemental truths of computer science, but mere matters of implementation. I've never heard that kind of thing from anyone associated with the BBC, though :-) -- Regards, Dave - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 15/06/07, Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want to win over content creators *show* them how they can make as much money through sharing as they can make from restricting sharing. This is like arguing that a dictator will start free elections if it can be down the economy will run higher. Having free elections is simply more important than the state of the economy. It's _wrong_ to have crooked elections. Similarly, its misguided to justify freedom of speech because it will make authors more money. That may or may not be true - its irrelevant. Freedom of speech is critical for a free healthy, free society. So production companies who ask to justify software freedom and file sharing on the basis of how much money it makes are missing the point. We must not restrict sharing because it is unethical. We must not use proprietary software because it is unethical. -- Regards, Dave - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] DRM does not work... what next?
On Saturday 16 June 2007 15:04, Andy wrote: Platform neutrality means it should not favour any one specific system. That's not what platform neutral means. It means it shouldn't favour any specific system or systems. Huh??? I wrote: me it should not favour any one specific system. you it shouldn't favour any specific system or systems. Care to explain how these two statements are actually different? I know you use a contraction and you didn't and you said any and I said one, but the intent/meaning is the same. I'm giving up talking to you at this point. Michael. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
There are many media people living in their London-centric bubble (a.k.amedia-land) who as Andy's email said, are totally ignorant of the basics of modern technology. That isn't an insult, but a fact simply by virtue of the fact that much of the general population couldn't tell you how a PC works either. Those working in the media are no exception. Besides, if there are meeja prima donnas and wannabe luvvies (on this list or otherwise) that believe that DRM is a long term, workable solution to this problem, then I couldn't care less if they get their egos bruised a little, and don't see why anyone else should care either. Vijay. On 16/06/07, Kim Plowright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15/06/07, Andy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It takes people outside the media-land as you put it because the people inside are too ignorant of technology to understand it. If media people had known even the very basics of how a PC works then we would never have had DRM in the first place. snip Please be aware that your statements in this email can be read as a fairly comprehensive attempt at personally insulting most of the BBC and ex-BBC people on this list. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote So production companies who ask to justify software freedom and file sharing on the basis of how much money it makes are missing the point. We must not restrict sharing because it is unethical. We must not use proprietary software because it is unethical. If you believe that there's some intrinsic ethical right to share content, then you are fundamentally opposed to copyright as a whole. In which case, there's no point in taking this conversation further, for two reasons. First, you're also ethically opposed to the existence of the BBC - an organisation which exists because copyright material exists, and secondly because you will simply break any DRM (it doesn't work anyway, remember?) and copy away anyway. If you come from the perspective that copyright should not exist, then frankly iPlayer and its ilk are irrelevant to you, and there's simply no point discussing it.
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many media industry professionals are on record stating their believe that DRM can work to halt unauthorised sharing, Many? Links please.
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are many media people living in their London-centric bubble (a.k.amedia-land) who as Andy's email said, are totally ignorant of the basics of modern technology. That isn't an insult, but a fact simply by virtue of the fact that much of the general population couldn't tell you how a PC works either. Those working in the media are no exception. It's a mistake to assume that you have to know how a PC works in order to understand the impact of technology on culture. It's rather like saying that no one can be an urban planner without being able to also construct an internal combustion engine. Besides, if there are meeja prima donnas and wannabe luvvies (on this list or otherwise) No ad hominem attacks there, then. I could, of course, start talking about arrogant techies who think they know it all - but I'll refrain.
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
In which case, there's no point in taking this conversation further, for two reasons. First, you're also ethically opposed to the existence of the BBC - an organisation which exists because copyright material exists, I thought the purpose of the BBC was to inform, educate and entertain. none of those *require* copyright. Granted, copyright makes it much easier, but your statement is misleading. I don't know about Dave, but my problem with copyright law is the length of time it lasts. IMO all works should fall into the public domain after 25 years; but that's another debate entirely Vijay.
Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday
That is some really neat stuff. The RadioPlayer data alone is making me drool. Are these feeds are a one-time only deal? Or can every day be Hack Day? Daithi On 6/16/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've got a load of new data, feeds and applications and Hackday. http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org/ Including... * The Moose 6 music discovery game * The John Peel and Top of the Pops apps and data * RadioPlayer data * Incoming SMS feeds And if you're here we're on the table in the centre next to the back stage. With the large freeview aerial in the middle of the table. Tristan - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 17:45 +0100, Ian Betteridge wrote: No ad hominem attacks there, then. I could, of course, start talking about arrogant techies who think they know it all - but I'll refrain. For the record... Ad Hominem (lit. 'against the man'¹) is the logical fallacy where you discount an argument because of (some attribute of) the person who presents it. To say You smoke crack, therefore your argument is irrelevant is classic Ad Hominem. To say Your argument makes no sense, therefore I believe you're on crack is not -- because it's based on the _argument_ not the crack intake. There's obviously a grey area in between -- especially where the cause-and-effect isn't explicitly stated, but is implied instead. Nevertheless, a lot of what people call 'Ad Hominem' isn't. If you argue that the world is flat, I'll probably call you a muppet. But that won't necessarily be Ad Hominem. -- dwmw2 ¹ or something like that. My Latin is not just poor; it's non-existent. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, Ian Betteridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16/06/07, vijay chopra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are many media people living in their London-centric bubble (a.k.amedia-land) who as Andy's email said, are totally ignorant of the basics of modern technology. That isn't an insult, but a fact simply by virtue of the fact that much of the general population couldn't tell you how a PC works either. Those working in the media are no exception. It's a mistake to assume that you have to know how a PC works in order to understand the impact of technology on culture. It's rather like saying that no one can be an urban planner without being able to also construct an internal combustion engine. They don't need to know how a PC works, but I'll bet many couldn't even pass an ECDL or CLAIT course (reflecting society as a whole); I wouldn't claim to be able to plan a city without some relevant qualifications. Besides, if there are meeja prima donnas and wannabe luvvies (on this list or otherwise) No ad hominem attacks there, then. I could, of course, start talking about arrogant techies who think they know it all - but I'll refrain. Yep, and well deserved too (you deside if I mean meeja luvvies or arrogant techies.) Vijay.
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On Saturday 16 June 2007 18:13, vijay chopra wrote: They don't need to know how a PC works, but I'll bet many couldn't even pass an ECDL or CLAIT course (reflecting society as a whole); I wouldn't claim to be able to plan a city without some relevant qualifications. Do we really have to have these kinds of insulting accusations ? Michael. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday
Most are going to persist in one form or another. But not the RadioPlayer feeds, sorry :( Tristan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Daithi O Crualaoich Sent: Sat 6/16/2007 6:09 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday That is some really neat stuff. The RadioPlayer data alone is making me drool. Are these feeds are a one-time only deal? Or can every day be Hack Day? Daithi On 6/16/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've got a load of new data, feeds and applications and Hackday. http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org/ Including... * The Moose 6 music discovery game * The John Peel and Top of the Pops apps and data * RadioPlayer data * Incoming SMS feeds And if you're here we're on the table in the centre next to the back stage. With the large freeview aerial in the middle of the table. Tristan - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ winmail.dat
Re: [backstage] www.FreeTheBBC.info
On 16/06/07, Michael Sparks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 16 June 2007 18:13, vijay chopra wrote: They don't need to know how a PC works, but I'll bet many couldn't even pass an ECDL or CLAIT course (reflecting society as a whole); I wouldn't claim to be able to plan a city without some relevant qualifications. Do we really have to have these kinds of insulting accusations ? Michael. How is saying that there are many (possibly most) people in society, could not pass an ECDL or CLAIT course and this is thus reflected into most professions and areas of life including the media an accusation of any sort. It's plain fact, go and visit your local FE college and see howmany grown adults are on basic IT literacy courses and struggling. I work in an FE college library and see these people day in, day out. Vijay.
Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday
No, that's pretty understandable about the RadioPlayer. There's far too much potential for abuse in structuring the scheduling data with direct links to the media. Pity, though, I was looking forward to making playlists in Listen Again. Daithi On 6/16/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most are going to persist in one form or another. But not the RadioPlayer feeds, sorry :( Tristan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Daithi O Crualaoich Sent: Sat 6/16/2007 6:09 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday That is some really neat stuff. The RadioPlayer data alone is making me drool. Are these feeds are a one-time only deal? Or can every day be Hack Day? Daithi On 6/16/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've got a load of new data, feeds and applications and Hackday. http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org/ Including... * The Moose 6 music discovery game * The John Peel and Top of the Pops apps and data * RadioPlayer data * Incoming SMS feeds And if you're here we're on the table in the centre next to the back stage. With the large freeview aerial in the middle of the table. Tristan - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday
Hi Tristan Would the Hackday be recorded and streamed? L On 16/06/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most are going to persist in one form or another. But not the RadioPlayer feeds, sorry :( Tristan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Daithi O Crualaoich Sent: Sat 6/16/2007 6:09 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Audio Music at Hackday That is some really neat stuff. The RadioPlayer data alone is making me drool. Are these feeds are a one-time only deal? Or can every day be Hack Day? Daithi On 6/16/07, Tristan Ferne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've got a load of new data, feeds and applications and Hackday. http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org/ Including... * The Moose 6 music discovery game * The John Peel and Top of the Pops apps and data * RadioPlayer data * Incoming SMS feeds And if you're here we're on the table in the centre next to the back stage. With the large freeview aerial in the middle of the table. Tristan - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
