<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><title>Michael Jay Lissner</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/" rel="alternate"></link><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/feeds/tag/concept" rel="self"></link><id>https://michaeljaylissner.com/</id><updated>2008-01-15T18:00:04-08:00</updated><entry><title>Search Concept</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2008/01/15/seach-concept/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2008-01-15T18:00:04-08:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2008-01-15:posts/2008/01/15/seach-concept/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#8217;s this ongoing problem I&amp;#8217;ve been having in that search engines do not have the ability to search the insides of password protected sites. It&amp;#8217;s a little frustrating from time to time because so many sites have gads of information that search engines just can&amp;#8217;t get to, which means that you have to rely on the site&amp;#8217;s search engine, which invariably does not work very&amp;nbsp;well. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So, here&amp;#8217;s the concept. The search engine creates an opt-in program wherein websites (like banks for example) can give the engine a generic login and password, and then the search engine can get in, crawl the site, make an index, and then get out. Later, when you search for content, you can search for that information, if you desire, but to see it, you&amp;#8217;ll need to log&amp;nbsp;in.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Similarly, if you are a person who uses the secure site, you can give the search engine the ability to log in as you, and then crawl the site for your information. Thus, if you gave the search engine the login to your bank, you could later search for all your transactions at Cha Cha&amp;#8217;s restaurant&amp;#8230;.or whatever. Actually, this might be a privacy concern&amp;#8230;but it&amp;#8217;s a&amp;nbsp;thought.&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="google"></category><category term="infotech"></category><category term="concept"></category></entry><entry><title>Program Idea - Public Jukebox for Internet Cafes</title><link href="https://michaeljaylissner.com/posts/2008/01/02/public-jukebox-for-internet-cafes/" rel="alternate"></link><updated>2008-01-02T21:32:08-08:00</updated><author><name>Mike Lissner</name></author><id>tag:michaeljaylissner.com,2008-01-02:posts/2008/01/02/public-jukebox-for-internet-cafes/</id><summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;The problem with Internet caf&amp;eacute;s as I see it is that they can never 
make everybody happy when it comes to music. They can quite easily please 
one crowd, but they can never please everybody. Back in the good old days, 
they tried to solve this in restaurants and bars by having a jukebox with a
bunch of music stored physically inside it. Now we have jukeboxes that can
download music, but that&amp;#8217;s where the technology seems to have&amp;nbsp;stopped.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So here&amp;#8217;s my concept on the theme. You create a website that can only be 
accessed by those on the Internet caf&amp;eacute;&amp;#8217;s wireless router, 
and you post the address somewhere conspicuous in the caf&amp;eacute;. Next, 
you allow the people in the caf&amp;eacute; to stream their music through their
laptops into a queue where it eventually gets played over the loudspeakers. 
This way, the people in the caf&amp;eacute; can actually play their own 
music when they go to the caf&amp;eacute;, share it with others, 
etc. The caf&amp;eacute; servers would have an override button and volume 
control and the like, so they can control the masters on the whole ordeal 
(this would be to prevent the Kenny G lovers of the world). This 
permission could also be given to certain caf&amp;eacute; members who had 
proven their good music taste. Actually, giving this permission to all 
caf&amp;eacute; patrons might work&amp;nbsp;too.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I think this idea could work with a little manipulation, 
but the question of copyrights will probably come up. My argument would be 
that the music is being shared non-commercially by the laptop owners, 
not the caf&amp;eacute;, and that thus no infringements are being made by the 
caf&amp;eacute;; that this would be no different than a laptop owner bringing 
speakers into the caf&amp;eacute; and simply sharing their music. This would in
turn shield the caf&amp;eacute;&amp;#8217;s of the world, leaving the music sharers&amp;nbsp;liable. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of course, the counter argument could be made that on a grander scale, 
what if the speakers brought in were huge, and what if the audience was 
that of the Superbowl, and not the caf&amp;eacute;? In other words, 
how is this model different than a Superbowl host playing music during the 
Superbowl? To this I would respond that the Superbowl is doing it for 
money, whereas the cafe could arguably say they were doing it just to have 
good&amp;nbsp;music.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The final idea behind this would be that the caf&amp;eacute; could keep a 
database of the music their customers wanted to play, 
and that they could then know which single songs to actually buy, 
and to actually own the copyrights&amp;nbsp;for.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It could almost&amp;nbsp;work.&lt;/p&gt;</summary><category term="music"></category><category term="concept"></category></entry></feed>