For not-free iphone applications, can I use sound files from this websites?
Tintagel's Free Sound File Archive
Can I download the wav files and use/play them in my app, without getting into any problems? I just need several very short wav sounds(shorter than 1 second).
If you really want to be safe, record your own sounds - that way, you know that the copyright holder has given you permission to use them. Unless you have a blanket release of copyright on those (or other) files, or an explicit licence to use them for any purpose, you can still get into trouble.
And I don't mean something wishy-washy like:
To the best of our knowledge, blah blah blah ...
That's unlikely to hold up in a court of law :-)
The main problem with digital copies is that they're perfect reproductions, meaning the copyright holder can easily tell that you've ripped off their work.
Not that I would suggest this as an option, since it's still probably a derivative work, but if you really can't record your own sounds, you might want to think about editing the sounds somewhat to make that harder, ideally fed from the computer out through a speaker back into a microphone and into another file :-)
Or, look into sites on the web where they actually state that they own the copyright and license you to use the files as you see fit. That way, you at least have some protection if they (or someone else) comes back later to collect payment.
One example is Partners In Rhyme, which has a huge range of effects which they appear to own the copyright to, and with a generous royalty-free licence. This was found as the second entry when googling "public domain sound effects" (this first was a rather useless, content-free tutorial on how to find public domain sound effects). There are plenty of other links bought up that you may wish to check as well.
To be safe, I'd actually print out the licence and screen dump the pages where you're downloading from but that's because I'm inherently paranoid :-)
Well, the top of the website says that they are provided free of charge, so that would mean they've been release to the public domain and you're fine.
However, the second sentences says "to the best of our knowledge," which implies that whoever made the website did not create the sounds, and might not have the rights to give them away. Given the way it's worded, it sounds like someone just found those sounds and put them up online. I'd look somewhere else if you're worried about the legality; there are plenty of websites that offer media with real, proper free licenses.
The very top of the page says:
To the best of our knowledge, all wave, midi, and audio files presented here are in the public domain and are available for use without restriction.
So, yes, if you trust that.
Related
Do you know if there are unchangeable EXIF datas ?
In my case i want to know the real date of creation of a jpeg image. So I thought the EXIF's datas was the best way but I realized that with a software like XnView you can change it. So there is any way i can now the real date of the creation of an image ?
In another hand, is it possible to know if a EXIF datas has been modified ?
Thx fo all,
And sorry for my bad english
Have a good day !
:)
In principle, it is not possible to be sure the data hasn't been edited, although it may take a great deal of skill to do so indetectably. Some of the major camera makers (Canon and Nikon, possibly others) offer an "image authentication" feature in their pro model cameras which is designed to make it impossible to modify the image after it has been taken. They do this for the benefit of people doing legal work - evidence shots and the like. To use this, you have to switch it on (via the camera settings) before you take the picture. Even with these though, it is still possible to alter the data: both the Canon and Nikon authentication systems have been cracked (presumably with considerable difficulty).
As for normal pictures, yes, these are very easy to alter. However many (most?) programs which can edit EXIF data leave their own signs. For example, Adobe Photoshop always adds its own name somewhere in the EXIF, apparently whether you want it to or not. You can see this with many different EXIF viewers, especially with the more advanced ones like PhotoME. (Which, sadly, is no longer maintained.)
Short answer: yes, it is always possible to exit EXIF, and almost always possible to do it indetectably, but it may requite the right tools and quite a lot of skill. You can't ever be certain it has not been done.
I am in the process of upgrading an existing application that was written in flash to play mp3 files of phone calls. The purpose of the application is to train employees of how to work with customers. Some of the calls are "negative" calls and those are used to train employees of what NOT to do.
The reason I need to not provide a location of where the mp3s are, is that if someone were to become disgruntled and leave the company and decide to take some of the negative calls with them, that would be bad. I don't ever like to underestimate the intelligence of our users so I'm sure some could figure out a way to get them regardless.
The current implementation as I said was written in flash and it loads up all of the mp3s as the swf file loads on the client thereby mitigating the necessity to ever make a call up to the server to grab a new mp3 file. None of these mp3s are huge in file size because they're all only about 30 second phone call clips.
Are there any ways to prevent a direct download of an mp3 from an IIS server. Could I serve them up with c# as an aspx file that requires a specific hash or salt in order to play?
I really dont' want to have to have them all brought into a swf like the current implementation if I can avoid it.
any suggestions welcome.
TIA
Honestly, if a user is that determined to get the data, they will. I believe the balance here is at what point will said hypothetical employee feel the gain to be had by obtaining the data is not worth the effort to get it. And how much effort you have to go through vs. what it is worth to the company.
If the audio will always be played back on your application, one simple layer of security would be to encrypt the files. Keeping it simple, you can use a symmetric key, store it in the application, and decrypt the file in memory before it is played (this way it's not stored in a temporary file the user could just grab). Sure a user with 3/4 of a brain could probably fish the key out of the executable, but frankly the sound is playing on their speakers and I'm sure they have a smartphone. They could just as easily record the output with Sound Recorder as it plays too.
Simply speaking, I believe a very minimum layer of technological security mixed with a binding confidentiality agreement should give you enough recourse. The security will keep the would-be-honest honest and deter the lazy, as well as giving you a leg up in proving the employee obtained the audio through nefarious means (i.e. it wasn't just "available for the taking").
Many sites and articles on getting widescreen monitors to work on notebooks in their native resolution mention something called the "Mode Removal Table" in the Video BIOS which specifically prevents certain video modes:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=947830
http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showthread.php?t=61326
http://forum.notebookreview.com/dell-xps-studio-xps/313573-xps-m1330-hdmi-hdmi-tv-issue-2.html
http://forums.entechtaiwan.com/index.php?action=printpage;topic=3363.0
Does such a thing really exist? The fix worked for me but I wanted to find out if I can read, modify, or work around this table. However I can't find any mention of it in the various VESA standards. Perhaps it actually goes by some other more cryptic name?
“Many sites and articles”? The first couple of dozen results are from you, and most of the rest are from that Intel article you mentioned or other people linking to that article.
You could always try asking someone who talks as though they know how to do it. There's another thread that discusses it—though it too has no information on the table, only a quick mention of it.
There does not seem to be any currently known way to read the GMA video BIOS. You would have to dump the BIOS and reverse-engineer it to figure out where the table is and how to interpret it. Unfortunately, even extracting it is difficult since nobody seems to have had enough interest in creating a tool to automate it. Looks, like you’ve got even more reversing to do. (Techincally, because the GMA is an integrated graphics-adapter, you'll need to extract the video BIOS from the system BIOS, then extract the table.)
I want to code a trading bot for Magic: The Gathering Online. This bot should wait until someone offers to trade, accept, look through the cards available from the other trader (the information is shown on screen), and perform other similar functions. I have several questions:
How can it know that someone is offering a trade?
How can it know that the other trader has some card (the informaion is stored in pictures)?
I just cannot imagine right now how to do it, I have no experience with it, until now I've been coding only console programs for my physics neсessities.
First, you should note that some online games forbid bots, as they can give certain players unfair advantages. The MTGO Terms of Service do not seem to say anything about this, though they do put restrictions on anything that might negatively impact the service. They have also said that there is a possibility they will add an API in the future, so they don't seem to be against the idea of automation, but are not supporting it at the moment. Tread carefully here, but it looks like it should be OK to write a bot as long as it is not harmful or abusive. This is not legal advice, and it would be a good idea to ask the folks who run MTGO for permission. edit since I wrote this, it has been pointed out that there are lots of bots already, so there should be no problems writing bots.
Assuming that it is not forbidden by the terms of service, but they do not have an API, you will have to find a way to detect what's going on, and control the game automatically. There's a pretty good series of articles on writing poker bots (archived copy), which has some good information on how to inject a DLL into an application, scrape the screen, and control the application. That might provide you with a starting point for doing this sort of thing.
You might also want to look for tools that other people have already written for doing this. It looks like there are several existing MTGO bots, but they all seem a bit sketchy (there have been some reports of them stealing passwords), so be careful there.
Edit
Since this answer still seems to be getting upvotes, I should probably update it with some more useful information. Since writing this, I have found a great UI automation system called Sikuli. It allows you to write programs in Python that automate a GUI. It includes image recognition features which make it very easy to recognize buttons, cards, and other UI elements; you just take a screenshot, crop it down to include just the thing you're interested in, and do fuzzy image matching (so that changing backgrounds and the like doesn't cause the match to fail). It even includes a custom IDE that allows you to embed those screenshots directly in your source code, so you can see exactly what the code is looking for. Here's an example from the documentation (apologies for the code formatting, doing images inline in code is not easy given StackOverflow's restricted subset of HTML):
def resizeApp(app, dx, dy):
switchApp(app)
corner = find(Pattern().targetOffset(3,14))
drop_point = corner.getTarget().offset(dx, dy)
dragDrop(corner, drop_point)
resizeApp("Safari", 50, 50)
This is much easier to get started with than the techniques mentioned in the article linked above, of injecting a DLL into the process you are debugging. Sikuli runs entirely at the UI level, so you never have to modify the program you are automating or worry about changes to the internals breaking your script.
One thing it is a bit poor at is handling text; it has OCR features, but they aren't all that good. If the text is selectable, however, you can select the text, copy it, and then look directly at the clipboard.
If I were to write a bot to automate something without a good API or text-based interface, Sikuli is probably the first tool I would reach for.
This answer is constructed from my comments.
What you are trying to do is hard, any way you try and do it.
Arguably the easiest way to do it is to totally mimic the user. So the application presses buttons, moves the mouse etc. The downside with this is that it is dependant on being able to recognise the screen.
This is easier if you can alter the games files as you can then just skin ( changing the image (texture)) the required cards to a single unique colour.
The major down side is you have to have the game as the top level window or have the game running in a virtual machine. Neither of which is ideal.
Another method is to read the processes memory. You may be able to find a list of memory locations, which would make things simpler, otherwise it involves a lot of hardwork, a debugger to deduce the memory addresses. It also helps (a lot) to be able to understand assembly.
The third method is to intercept the packets, and alter them. This is easier that the method above as it (at least for me) is easier to reverse engine the protocol as you have less information to deal with. It is just a matter of setting up a packet sniffer and preforming a action with one variable different (for example, the card) and comparing the differences.
The thing you need to check are that you are not breaking the EULA. I don't know how the game works, but most of the games I have come across have a EULA that prohibits (i.e. You get banned) doing any of the things I have mentioned.
I personally loathe background music on a website. My client has opposite feelings on the subject. I added music because the customer is always right, though I'd like to revisit the subject with them.
Almost everyone would agree that it is annoying and wastes precious bandwidth but are there any usability studies or a recommendation for someone esteemed in the profession that can provide a valid argument against background music?
Usability is not the only concern. Consider the following scenarios:
1 - Someone browses to the site while at work in a shared office, and now all of their co-workers think "Gee, he's wasting time".
2 - Someone browses to the site while in a room with a sleeping baby, and now they have to spend an hour getting him/her back to sleep.
3 - Someone browses to the site while they are listening to their own music, and now they hear a cacaphony of shrieks until one source is muted.
Also, consider that any benefit gained from the music on your website will be totally lost on anyone who has their speakers muted. So your audience can be divided between:
A - People who cannot hear the music
B - People who can hear it, but do not like it
C - People who can hear it, and do like it
I would not care to estimate the percentages associated with each of these groups, but keep in mind that category "B" is actively offended by your website. To take a line from the hippocratic oath, one rule of web design should be "do no harm".
Metrics. You'll never be able to convince a business person with an emotional answer.
If you investigate the situation empirically you'll be able to give them something irrefutable.
I would would try an experiment: (get google analytics)
have one site with the music as-is, measure the bounce rate,etc
have an identical site without music, measure the bounce rate,etc
Have the server randomly serve up the different pages for a couple weeks (until you get a significant data) and see what happens.
Maybe we're wrong (I hate music too). I hope your customer is wrong, but who knows.
You could also add a survey link and try to get people to answer that as well (but without an incentive that might not work)
Stats can be your friend here :)
I would also:
(calculate the size of the audio file(s)*the number of hits*months)/cost of GB per month
Then tell them how much money they are wasting.
Basically, it boils down to this:
Audio on websites is a bad idea. No one likes it.
Try to educate your client that it is a bad idea. (It's annoying, different levels of sound can cause problems, yadda yadda) Mention that most users don't take sites seriously if they use sound. It's a very '99 thing to do.
If you client does not budge, (politely) remind him/her that they are paying you for your expertise as an internet professional. You are the expert on the web, and they have hired you to give your expertise.
If they still won't budge, keep the sound and make sure they are happy. The bottom line is keeping the client happy.
Music also interferes with screen reader users. I'm a blind computer user and nothing annoys me more then having music start playing and drowned out my speech program that's trying to read the site. Nothing will make me close a website quicker then unwanted audio.
It took a bit but I found a site that talks about usability on web sites.
They have a video on the right hand side of this page:
http://www.ciaromano.com/evaluating/testing.php
It shows why audio ads are not a good idea on websites.
Hope this helps.
G-Man
Just make sure that there is a way to turn it off. It really depends on the type of Website, because multimedia-heavy sites (i.e. sites for Movies or Games) can benefit from it, but if I'm listening to some of my own music, I definitely want a way to turn it off.
Oh and please, no crappy MIDI-Files that people already hated in 1993 when they were novel.
This is a tough one -- and what's amazing is that at the moment, I have a client who's demanding the exact same thing.
Personally I don't know of any usability studies addressing this topic specifically, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence out there from users complaining about the intrusiveness or outright corniness of unrequested background music. * That said, clients still ask for it. Best you can do is try to explain the situation to them, try to gather a few good examples of people complaining about it from the Web at large, build a case, and hope the client goes for it.
In my case, she completely agrees that it's potentially annoying, understands it cuts against the grain of user expectations and politeness, but wants it anyway. So I'm building it. Whaddyagonnado.
* Indeed, you could probably use this thread as evidence! Good luck.
Consider taking a different path with the client.
Ask them what the purpose for the music is...
If it is to install a particular feeling or mood with the visitor of the site, consider taking them through all the points mentioned in answers here and discuss how that may violate the intended for the music.
Then you will be able to talk to the client about different ways to instill the same "ambience" to the website without resorting to music. This is really a design issue and not usability.
If the background music/sound was to convey some information, then it is a usability issue as people who for technological or biological reasons cannot hear the sound at the correct volume will miss out on that. Therefore the site is not as usable as it should be.
Unfortunately, as a service provider of sorts, all we can do is cringe and give the customer what they want - after documenting your disapproval both commented in the code and in writing to the client, of course.
Pardon me, but i have a different opinion about loading music in the website. With all due respect I have for the answer posters of this thread.
I see visits to e-commerce websites like going to a shopping complex. Where you have a cart, varieties of products, checkout counters and background music to make your stay as comfortable and interesting as possible.
There's a whole psychological reason as to what certain slow paced music can do to certain parts of the brain. Some studies even suggested that certain music play a role in motivating customers to purchase more items. Check this site
This can definitely be a plus point in a website. Of course it depends on what kind of website it is. However, a slow and non-vocal music shouldn't necessarily disrupt one's attention; rather it might have the opposite effect.
My justification is that when a potential customer visits a site, he is only using one of his senses while browsing through the pages. His eyes! I'm saying why not allow him (if he wants) to use his sense of hearing that would encourage him (not only through the means of displaying fancy texts, design and animations that looks nice to the eyes) but also to capture his attention through music (allowing him to be more in touch with the site).
Its obviously not possible to trigger his sense of smell and taste. But why limit it to only the eyes. Why not use the ears too!
Whether you choose to put music into your site or not, MichaelStum's post about having an option to turn off the music is highly essential.
Of course in the end its all about the amount of traffic that comes to your website. For this matter, #Cbrulak's idea of using Google Analytics would be a realistic approach for different individuals.