Server Help

LVZ/LVL Questions - Hum.Mp3

(Deactived B l a h e r) - Wed Apr 27, 2005 3:53 pm
Post subject: Hum.Mp3

(Yes I finally got in with out it loging me out)
Here is a couple of questions I need answered (sounds direct

).
1. Can the continuum cleint read a .Mp3 file for a Hum?
2. How large can the Music file be for a Hum?
3. Can a tagged music file go into a a lvz for Hum (The file I'm useing is tagged and copyrighted but you can pretty much download WewillRockYou.Mp3 any where for free)
I know this has nothing to do with a Hum question but It just came up
4. For the learning lvz that teaches you how to make a lvz says to use the first two sections of [ScreenObjects] x,y for cords but instead of my server reading those cords as cords on the map it uses it as pixle cords and really bunchs every thing together when I was thinking it was for map cords, so is this how it's supposed to be or is my server just reading it wrong?

Assassin2684 - Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:31 pm
Post subject:

Well first all i kno is continuum can not rune .mp3s all you have to do is convert it to a .wav and it will work

(Deactived B l a h e r) - Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:58 pm
Post subject:

k I was just woundering that because I saw somewhere that it said the new cleint could now read them and I was unsure where it was.

Edify - Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:35 pm
Post subject:

blah-er wrote:

k I was just woundering that because I saw somewhere that it said the new cleint could now read them and I was unsure where it was.

by new client, you mean...

.39 pr1?

Purge - Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:45 pm
Post subject:

Any Continuum release out right now doesn't support MP3 files.

StepUp - Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Post subject:

Purge+ wrote:

Any Continuum release out right now doesn't support MP3 files.

maybe in 0.39 full, keyword being maybe, maybe as in if there smart they'll do it so it wont take up as much space on servers..

Solo Ace - Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Post subject:

What do you think a .wav takes up?

StepUp - Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:39 pm
Post subject: well....

im just saying a 3 minute song as an MP3 is like 3mb, but a three minute song as wav is like 35mb, so a ten second clip as a wav might be 1 mb, but as an MP3 you could fit like ten 10 second clips on a server for that much space.

(Deactived B l a h e r) - Wed Apr 27, 2005 8:34 pm
Post subject: Re: well....

StepUp wrote:

Well your right since I just changed my .mp3 into a wav and befor it was 1mb now it's 10mb O.o

Purge - Wed Apr 27, 2005 8:58 pm
Post subject:

Further compress the WAVs to a lower Hertz. I use Audio Recorder Pro for this, but I don't know if they still have this available as a free download.

StepUp - Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:15 pm
Post subject:

open it up in sound recorder and save its as 44mhz-16bit-stereo

Smong - Thu Apr 28, 2005 3:48 am
Post subject:

If you mean 44khz, then that is quite high. I suggest 11khz 8bit mono.

StepUp - Thu Apr 28, 2005 7:05 pm
Post subject:

im pretty sure thats the max that continuum supports is 44Khz

D1st0rt - Thu Apr 28, 2005 7:48 pm
Post subject:

If you're doing a voice send macro thingy, I believe it only allows Smong's settings for bandwidth reasons.

Cyan~Fire - Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:14 pm
Post subject:

It's not a lower "Hertz", it's a lower frequency. "Hertz" is a unit of frequency.

Bak - Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:43 pm
Post subject:

delete me

Cyan~Fire - Fri Apr 29, 2005 11:17 pm
Post subject:

Maverick - Sat Apr 30, 2005 7:53 am
Post subject:

empty it!
empty it!
empty it!

(Deactived B l a h e r) - Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:09 am
Post subject:

Lol how much memory was Bak useing 3kb

Purge - Sat Apr 30, 2005 9:51 am
Post subject:

You mean 35.6 MB.

StepUp - Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:22 pm
Post subject:

you mean 356 GB, or maybe even 356 TB

Cyan~Fire - Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:43 pm
Post subject:

A human is worth a thousand gigabytes...

Maverick - Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:24 pm
Post subject:

A human can't ever be compared to a machine or machine components since its (1) not comparable and (2) the human will always be supreme due its million years of evolution

Purge - Sat Apr 30, 2005 6:03 pm
Post subject:

You can compare a machine to a human since they both can die out of notice.

D1st0rt - Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:26 pm
Post subject:

A human can be compared to a machine because there are actions that they both perform. Even the actions themselves can be compared. About the evolution, one million years of genetic evolution is not as distinguishable as ten years of electronic evolution. If cars had advanced in performance and price in the same manner computers have, a brand new sportscar would cost about $1. The only advantages humans currently have over computers are life and free will, and some people don't even consider those advantages.

Cyan~Fire - Sun May 01, 2005 11:23 am
Post subject:

Gah, a joking comment gets all these serious replies going.

Humans are still "better" than computers, because no code can ever be "smarter" than its writer. Computer code, all the way down to the individual operations performed by the CPU, is just a reflection of a fraction of the operations that are performed in the human brain. So what if it can do it faster, it's still far below the human brain in the complexity of operations it can perform.

Now once we start including biological components in computers for the purposes of artificial intelligence (since, as far as I can see, that's the only way it can be accomplished), we have to start worrying.

D1st0rt - Mon May 02, 2005 8:32 pm
Post subject:

However, the brain uses electrical impulses to send messages. Therefore in theory we could recreate a brain that would be similar in function to a human brain using mechanical components. Code can become smarter than the writer if the writer gives it the ability to evolve and change its own code. At that point, it would be a little bit more dicey. At any rate, you can always compare any two objects on some level.

Cyan~Fire - Tue May 03, 2005 4:22 pm
Post subject:

You can't make artificial intellgence computer code. It's completely rules-based, and the human brain isn't!