Someone must be using the site!

Milestone Baby!

Update Since posting (~1 month) we generated 30 000 songs. Awesome!

I’ve only told few people (not that many read my blog) about Metahypem, largely because it is still a huge WIP and a learning experience. Nevertheless, the few that have been checked it out seem to be using it quite extensively.
I haven’t managed to grep the logs yet to see some interesting statistics, however we’ve recently passed the milestone of over 10 000 songs liberated.

That’s a pretty awesome number! That many times someone wanted to hear a particular song while not at their computer or over an internet connection and we aided them in that! I’ll follow up with some interesting tidbits from the request logs when I get a chance.
Thanks <3

9 Replies to “Someone must be using the site!”

  1. the website has been running really slow lately. it will take like 2 minutes to start downloading the song. clicking the download button does nothing but if i do the right click save link it works that way just have to wait a couple minutes

    1. Hey Mitchell,

      The site should be running faster now.
      As per the issue you mentioned i tracked down the root cause and opened up an issue to myself.

      The fix shouldn’t be that hard and I will look into it ASAP.

      1. The question about, who is the true asnichrat seems worthless. Both want to eliminate the use of force, but have different systems to do so. We can all agree that either system is better than the current. I say we can ignore our difference of minutes and worry about true philosophical differences.

  2. Hey there,

    Yeah i’ve been having the same problem. Clicking download seems to have no response, until a few minutes later we get “The webpage at http://metahypem.com/download/1s2qg might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.” – sad face.

    However, right clicking, & save-link-as-ing is working fine.

    Other than this, this page is easily one of my favourite things on the internet.

    1. Hey Amy!

      I’ve definitely found the source of the problem.
      HypeMachine is eventually loading the tracks on soundcloud and having their old links be ‘redirects’.
      I have to either expire the download URLs I have or follow the redirect.

      I will update it hopefully soon. Xmas time is busy though 🙂

      Glad you love it!

      1. (I’m not sure if I’m posting this in the corcert place as I was unable to post it from the Dashboard.)The type of physician I would like to work with is a gerontologist. A gerontologist specializes in caring for the elderly. I have a fondness for our older population. They built out society and lived in a time that many of us can learn from. I would take great pride in caring for them as they age. In my opinion, working with a doctor that shares my passion and excitement would be the ideal work environment.The type of physician I would not be as excited to work with would be a proctologist. To be completely honest, I just don’t think I have what it takes to be in that environment. It’s important to be professional in any medical environment. I believe my sense of humor would not allow me to be as professional as I would need to be. I would also prefer not to work with ophthalmologist. Several years ago I spent a week with my grandfather at a specialist to have cataracts removed. I found it very difficult to watch the videos of my grandfather’s up coming procedures. It wasn’t difficult caring for my grandfather after surgery, but I must admit the pre-op was an experience that I would not want to assist in on a daily bases.

    2. that institution which posessses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state.Even if we all accept Rothbard’s definition of the State, this does not change the discussion much. I don’t think anyone denies that state functions of any kind depend upon these two attributes. You concede as much for at least coercion in the example you give in the prior post referring to the ancient Celtic Irish: Generally, disputes were settled through freely administered law (see Brehon Law) and those who chose not to play by the rules were ostracized. Do you not agree that ostracism is a form of coercion? Does it not follow that your own example of an ancient success story for anarchism (what happened, by the way?) employs the same coercion as that to which you object in the hands of the state? At least in this one of the two criteria, your precious Celtic Irish anarchists qualify as state actors.As to taxation, I do not know enough about Celtic Irish history to give a credible example, but I would be surprised if nothing of the kind ever existed, at least in concept. Again, it depends much on how you define “tax”, doesn’t it?We are left, nonetheless, with the question of whether the establishment of coercion and monopoly of certain forms of defense are desirable, and/or superior to the anarchist position which claims such social institutions are unnecessary and undesirable. People, reasonable or not, as Brok has already said, do disagree over these questions. Unlike anarchists, however, I think people like Mr. Brok and myself at least, have learned much more about anarchism, than anarchists appear to know about the prevailing wisdom of constitutional law, common law, and the economics of law, as we know and experience it. I have repeatedly found that it is nearly impossible to refer to any attribute of these things without encountering denial of their legitimacy, if not complete ignorance of their details, even as a framework subject to debate.It is my view that one is better served by a deep understanding of that which he opposes, than to merely steep himself in the rhetoric of opposition. Here is how, in the same lecture, Rothbard describes anarchism: “On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.Please define “legal possibility”; “coercive aggression”; and “invasions of individual rights” and you will see what I mean. You must, I understand from countless other dialogues on this subject here, refer only to your own anarchist framework to define these terms. Therefore you assume your conclusion as a precondition for discussion.If I refer to the foundations of property, tort and contract law in terms of the common law meanings, and bridge those meanings to the concepts of self-government, which in fact possess the attributes which Rothbard defines, I see these as a positive development, not a terrible mistake that is the downfall of liberty and freedom. In that regard, I rather prefer the view of Mises, who described government of one of the greatest of human inventions.Yet Rothbard uses these terms to distinguish between his view of anarchism and his view of the State by allowing these terms to only be used within his own frame of reference, in which coercion and monopoly of force are presumed to be antithetical to the concept of liberty. I quite disagree.Those of us attempting to converse with you (meaning the Rothbardian anarchists who sadly make up the intellectual core at mises.com) from the “outside” cannot effectively do so, because you only allow your own frame of reference to apply meaning to common terms. This is why there has never been a constructive outcome, in my experience, from engaging in such a discussion here. Perhaps Mr. Brok has a new approach. I’m listening.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *