[backstage] Track Playing updates, including a Radio Pop integration!

[Chris Riley]

Hi all,

I've been making some updates to Track Playing
you might be interested in.  There are
now interfaces for
iPhone , mobiles,
Wii  and
iGoogle.
I've also added a few interface tweaks, such as showing when the track
playing was last updated (to account for Radio2 being so out of date!), and
the album information is a little clearer.

A couple of features I've added in response to feedback include a link to
listen to the radio on iPlayer, and displaying "Now and Next" information,
pulled from /programmes naturally ;o)

And last but by no means least I've just put live an integration with Radio
Pop !  If you have Track Playing open and
authorised with Radio Pop it will tell Radio Pop that you're listening.
There is also a "pop" button, so you can pop from Track Playing as well.
This uses the Radio Pop API , and is
the first time I've done anything using oAuth, so let me know if the
experience of authorising Track Playing with Radio Pop is OK.

In the works are plans to add the ability to use Track Playing to track what
any Last.FM user is playing, and also to use it via IM (using imified.com).
Finally, I do still plan to add scrobbling to Last.FM, but it is just a bit
too complex to make it easy to do in a few evenings!

Hope you like the updates, all comments welcome,
Chris

Re: [backstage] Search yourself

[Jim Tonge]

Sorry to revisit a thread so old my Grandma read it, but this is a  
much better implementation of the [3D search visualisation] idea  
methinks:


http://www.viewzi.com

jim

On 19 Aug 2008, at 15:08, Ian Forrester wrote:


http://www.searchme.com

What do you guys think?

Ian Forrester

This e-mail is: [] private; [] ask first; [x] bloggable

Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
Room 1044, BBC Manchester BH, Oxford Road, M60 1SJ
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
work: +44 (0)2080083965
mob: +44 (0)7711913293

-
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/


Jim

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Matt Barber]

Dave Crossland wrote:

2008/9/11 Matt Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
  

I can't go - but will there be a pod/webcast?



I think Tim is going to bring a video camera, so hopefully, yes

  


Thanks Dave for the info, and thanks Tim in advance for bringing the 
camera! :) Hope it goes well, and look forward to watching some footage.

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Brian Butterworth]

I'd quite like to come, but can't.  I just love font internals*.
 Looking forward to the video, Dave.
* = I wrote a PostScript to RiscOS font converter a couple of decades ago.

2008/9/11 Dave Crossland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> 2008/9/11 Matt Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > I can't go - but will there be a pod/webcast?
>
> I think Tim is going to bring a video camera, so hopefully, yes
> -
> 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/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice,
since 2002

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Brian Butterworth]

I'd quite like to come, but can't.  I just love font internals*.
 Looking forward to the video, Dave.
* = I wrote a PostScript to RiscOS font converter a couple of decades ago.

2008/9/11 Dave Crossland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> 2008/9/11 Matt Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > I can't go - but will there be a pod/webcast?
>
> I think Tim is going to bring a video camera, so hopefully, yes
> -
> 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/
>



-- 

Brian Butterworth

http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice,
since 2002

Re: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Brian Butterworth]

It's quite funny, in the sense of "Caveat venditor": all the people who lost
loads of money by selling the stock in the hope that they could sell before
the buyer became aware of the business failing have lost loadsamoney.  Big
Greed=Big Loss.
For those who didn't sell, the price will recover, of course.

And for those who got "dumped on" they will make a killing.

You've got to love the Free Market!

2008/9/11 Sam Mbale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> I just stumbled across this article that explains what may have actually
> happened,
> When Algorithms Attack: How Googlebot And Tribune (And Some Idiot) Killed
> United Airlines 
> Stock
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Sam Mbale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "the hard part is getting the people who write the
>> requirements to understand why they should care"
>> I would like to think they care, it may just be the case of being caught
>> off guard.
>> I have search marketing experience and I know that these vulnerabilities
>> can be exploited
>> if you can ignore ethics. Even though Google does not condone
>> googlebombing the practice is still
>> widespread. You may recall the case of the Daily Mail columnist Julie
>> Moult 
>>  .
>> If you Google Julie Moult a site very critical of her is still NO.1. This
>> is not exactly Googlebombing,
>>  but shows how search results can be influenced by individuals.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> 2008/9/11 Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> >> I'm currently trying to ensure that my current client
>>> >> builds suitable safeguards into a similar feature they're
>>> >> proposing to deliver.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Well surely it can't take much; something like SELECT * FROM
>>> > 'active_news_articles' where 'published_date' => date(today)-90days?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > (I know that's a horrible mangling of SQL syntax, but you get the idea
>>> :P )
>>> > As far as safeguards go, it can't be that much more difficult at the
>>> > simplest level to filter out the old stories. Nobody cares whether a
>>> really
>>> > old story is popular or not... because it's old. ;)
>>>
>>> I'm sure the technical implementation will end up looking very much
>>> like that. The hard part is getting the people who write the
>>> requirements to understand why they should care
>>>
>>> Peter
>>> --
>>> Peter Bowyer
>>> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
>>> -
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sam Mbale
>> Mpelembe Network
>> http://www.mpelembe.net
>>
>> Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sam Mbale
> Mpelembe Network
> http://www.mpelembe.net
>
> Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe
>
>


-- 

Brian Butterworth

http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice,
since 2002

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Dave Crossland]

2008/9/11 Matt Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I can't go - but will there be a pod/webcast?

I think Tim is going to bring a video camera, so hopefully, yes
-
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: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Sam Mbale]

I just stumbled across this article that explains what may have actually
happened,
When Algorithms Attack: How Googlebot And Tribune (And Some Idiot) Killed
United Airlines
Stock



On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Sam Mbale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> "the hard part is getting the people who write the
> requirements to understand why they should care"
> I would like to think they care, it may just be the case of being caught
> off guard.
> I have search marketing experience and I know that these vulnerabilities
> can be exploited
> if you can ignore ethics. Even though Google does not condone googlebombing
> the practice is still
> widespread. You may recall the case of the Daily Mail columnist Julie
> Moult  .
> If you Google Julie Moult a site very critical of her is still NO.1. This
> is not exactly Googlebombing,
>  but shows how search results can be influenced by individuals.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 2008/9/11 Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >> I'm currently trying to ensure that my current client
>> >> builds suitable safeguards into a similar feature they're
>> >> proposing to deliver.
>> >
>> >
>> > Well surely it can't take much; something like SELECT * FROM
>> > 'active_news_articles' where 'published_date' => date(today)-90days?
>> >
>> >
>> > (I know that's a horrible mangling of SQL syntax, but you get the idea
>> :P )
>> > As far as safeguards go, it can't be that much more difficult at the
>> > simplest level to filter out the old stories. Nobody cares whether a
>> really
>> > old story is popular or not... because it's old. ;)
>>
>> I'm sure the technical implementation will end up looking very much
>> like that. The hard part is getting the people who write the
>> requirements to understand why they should care
>>
>> Peter
>> --
>> Peter Bowyer
>> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
>> -
>> 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sam Mbale
> Mpelembe Network
> http://www.mpelembe.net
>
> Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe
>
>


-- 
Sam Mbale
Mpelembe Network
http://www.mpelembe.net

Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Matt Barber]

Michael wrote:

On Wednesday 10 September 2008 00:19:38 Ian Forrester wrote:
  

Would love to be there but I'm in London on the 16th.

 Anyone else going to go?



Sadly it's not practical for me to go either, though for other reasons :)


Michael.

  


I can't go - but will there be a pod/webcast?

Re: [backstage] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Michael]

On Wednesday 10 September 2008 00:19:38 Ian Forrester wrote:
> Would love to be there but I'm in London on the 16th.
>
>  Anyone else going to go?

Sadly it's not practical for me to go either, though for other reasons :)


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] Manchester Free Software Talk: Dave Crossland - Free as in Profit

[Tim Dobson]

2008/9/10 Ian Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Would love to be there but I'm in London on the 16th.
>
> Anyone else going to go?

Well, I am. Obviously :P

-- 
www.tdobson.net

If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us
still has one object.
If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now
has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw
-
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: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Sam Mbale]

"the hard part is getting the people who write the
requirements to understand why they should care"
I would like to think they care, it may just be the case of being caught off
guard.
I have search marketing experience and I know that these vulnerabilities can
be exploited
if you can ignore ethics. Even though Google does not condone googlebombing
the practice is still
widespread. You may recall the case of the Daily Mail columnist Julie
Moult
 .
If you Google Julie Moult a site very critical of her is still NO.1. This is
not exactly Googlebombing,
 but shows how search results can be influenced by individuals.



On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 2008/9/11 Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> I'm currently trying to ensure that my current client
> >> builds suitable safeguards into a similar feature they're
> >> proposing to deliver.
> >
> >
> > Well surely it can't take much; something like SELECT * FROM
> > 'active_news_articles' where 'published_date' => date(today)-90days?
> >
> >
> > (I know that's a horrible mangling of SQL syntax, but you get the idea :P
> )
> > As far as safeguards go, it can't be that much more difficult at the
> > simplest level to filter out the old stories. Nobody cares whether a
> really
> > old story is popular or not... because it's old. ;)
>
> I'm sure the technical implementation will end up looking very much
> like that. The hard part is getting the people who write the
> requirements to understand why they should care
>
> Peter
> --
> Peter Bowyer
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
> -
> 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/
>



-- 
Sam Mbale
Mpelembe Network
http://www.mpelembe.net

Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe

Re: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Peter Bowyer]

2008/9/11 Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I'm currently trying to ensure that my current client
>> builds suitable safeguards into a similar feature they're
>> proposing to deliver.
>
>
> Well surely it can't take much; something like SELECT * FROM
> 'active_news_articles' where 'published_date' => date(today)-90days?
>
>
> (I know that's a horrible mangling of SQL syntax, but you get the idea :P )
> As far as safeguards go, it can't be that much more difficult at the
> simplest level to filter out the old stories. Nobody cares whether a really
> old story is popular or not... because it's old. ;)

I'm sure the technical implementation will end up looking very much
like that. The hard part is getting the people who write the
requirements to understand why they should care

Peter
-- 
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
-
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: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Sam Mbale]

I have a slight feeling that there is a conspiracy somewhere here. This may
be similar to Googlebombing, I suspect someone made a lot of money as a
result.

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Brian Butterworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Typical of our Yankee cousins, not only do they write their dates the wrong
> way round, but their history is so shallow they can't remember something
> they've read before. Poor dears.   No sense of history, or indeed
> chronology.
> Note to americans: If you want to put the year on something, but don't want
> people to notice it, do as Auntie does and use Roman Numerals.
>
> 2008/9/10 David Greaves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Remember this old thread... (see below)
>>
>>
>> Now, in the context of "What could *possibly* go wrong" look at this:
>>
>> Google News farce triggers Wall Street sell-off
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/10/online_news_farce_drops_united_stock/
>>
>> Note the bit at the end:
>>
>> Update
>>
>> The Tribune Company has now said that traffic to the Sun-Sentinel's
>> archive
>> pushed the old bankruptcy article onto the "most viewed" section of the
>> paper's
>> web site.
>>
>>
>> David
>> (Who's feeling rather smug)
>>
>>
>>
>> David Greaves wrote:
>> > Peter Bowyer wrote:
>> >> On 08/01/2008, Martin Belam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> Personally I would rather the most read/most emailed reflected exactly
>> >>> what the user was doing, and wasn't "most emailed stories from the
>> >>> last 7 days excluding the also in the news section because we are the
>> >>> BBC and we want our readers to look very serious all the time"
>> > Not on the front page.
>> >
>> > IMHO The front page of the BBC news should not have 4 year old stories
>> appearing
>> > on it 'by mistake'.
>> >
>> > In the entertainment section, see also section etc etc then yes. The
>> front page
>> > should be current. If it *is* now current for some bizzare reason then
>> re-report it.
>> >
>> >> That misses the point - a casual reader (and even some regular
>> >> readers) can be misled by those links pointing to old news. The 'Most
>> >> Emailed' links are presented under a headline 'Most Popular Stories
>> >> Now', and next to a section 'Around the world now' (on the page I'm
>> >> looking at) which implies that the stories are current.
>> >
>> > Indeed.
>> >
>> > It was only last week I realised that 'Most Popular Stories Now' was a
>> link and
>> > wasn't actually a section title!!!
>> >
>> >> It's a fine objective to show real data (although dubious when it
>> >> reflects 'gaming'), but it must be clear to the reader what the
>> >> context is of what you're showing.
>> >
>> > And I note that the 'See Also' stories in the sidebar *are* date
>> stamped.
>> > So is it a technology problem? (I could accept that See Also are edited
>> into the
>> > story manually and the dates are re-keyed)
>> >
>> >
>> > David
>> > -
>> > 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/
>>
>> -
>> 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> .
>
> Brian Butterworth
>
> http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
> advice, since 2002
>



-- 
Sam Mbale
Mpelembe Network
http://www.mpelembe.net

Follow me on http://twitter.com/mpelembe

Re: Old thread, new News... Re: [backstage] BBC News : site feedback.... [Fwd: RE: Feedback [NewsWatch]]

[Brian Butterworth]

Typical of our Yankee cousins, not only do they write their dates the wrong
way round, but their history is so shallow they can't remember something
they've read before. Poor dears.   No sense of history, or indeed
chronology.
Note to americans: If you want to put the year on something, but don't want
people to notice it, do as Auntie does and use Roman Numerals.

2008/9/10 David Greaves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Remember this old thread... (see below)
>
> Now, in the context of "What could *possibly* go wrong" look at this:
>
> Google News farce triggers Wall Street sell-off
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/10/online_news_farce_drops_united_stock/
>
> Note the bit at the end:
>
> Update
>
> The Tribune Company has now said that traffic to the Sun-Sentinel's archive
> pushed the old bankruptcy article onto the "most viewed" section of the
> paper's
> web site.
>
>
> David
> (Who's feeling rather smug)
>
>
>
> David Greaves wrote:
> > Peter Bowyer wrote:
> >> On 08/01/2008, Martin Belam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Personally I would rather the most read/most emailed reflected exactly
> >>> what the user was doing, and wasn't "most emailed stories from the
> >>> last 7 days excluding the also in the news section because we are the
> >>> BBC and we want our readers to look very serious all the time"
> > Not on the front page.
> >
> > IMHO The front page of the BBC news should not have 4 year old stories
> appearing
> > on it 'by mistake'.
> >
> > In the entertainment section, see also section etc etc then yes. The
> front page
> > should be current. If it *is* now current for some bizzare reason then
> re-report it.
> >
> >> That misses the point - a casual reader (and even some regular
> >> readers) can be misled by those links pointing to old news. The 'Most
> >> Emailed' links are presented under a headline 'Most Popular Stories
> >> Now', and next to a section 'Around the world now' (on the page I'm
> >> looking at) which implies that the stories are current.
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> > It was only last week I realised that 'Most Popular Stories Now' was a
> link and
> > wasn't actually a section title!!!
> >
> >> It's a fine objective to show real data (although dubious when it
> >> reflects 'gaming'), but it must be clear to the reader what the
> >> context is of what you're showing.
> >
> > And I note that the 'See Also' stories in the sidebar *are* date stamped.
> > So is it a technology problem? (I could accept that See Also are edited
> into the
> > story manually and the dates are re-keyed)
> >
> >
> > David
> > -
> > 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/
>
> -
> 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/
>



-- 
.

Brian Butterworth

http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice,
since 2002