Re: [cdin] Re: Distributed Data

Jason Dufair (funne nospam at iquest.net)
Tue, 09 Mar 1999 16:54:26 -0500

I really have to speak up and resist the editing idea. Who is going to
edit? How are they going to know that Mr. Bungle really intended the title
of the song to be "Stubb (a Dub)" and not "Stub (a Dub)". They've probably
never heard of Mr. Bungle.

I think we (users) all have an interest in the data being correct, so leave
it up to us do decide what is correct. Simple majority. I will be glad to
write the code for this. Yes, we'd have to keep tabs of each entry and how
many submissions it got, but if we want our data to be correct, let's
depend on the people who deem it so. I think one of the the biggest flaws
with CDDB is that I pop a disc in and the titles are wrong with no way of
fixing them. I end up fixing them in my local database, but then what
value has CDDB added?

At 01:35 PM 3/9/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Matt Sergeant wrote:
>>
>> "Kyle R. Rose" wrote:
>> >...
>> > Because the hash function required to insert data into the database is
>> > one-way. This means that a troll cannot reasonably be expected to
>> > know the hash value of ANY CD that he does not possess -- even CDs
>> > that won't exist for millenia! Since it is reasonable to expect that
>> > only a person who likes the CD is going to rush out, buy it, and put
>> > it into their DMI/CDDP+/whatever-enabled player, they aren't going to
>> > enter crap into the database. (Of course, they may just be
>> > brain-dead, stupid, or poor spellers, but I'm not sure there's a way
>> > around this short of creating a trust system for "reliable" data
>> > providers.)
>>
>> Look at the # of hits on cddb.com - entries are about 300 a day. That's
>> not too many to check for dupes manually if there isn't an exact match.
>> I'd bet that if you used some decent code that checks for duplications
>> you'd have only about 10 a day to check manually. One person could cope
>> with that.
>
>Excellent.
>
>A post-process each day could scan the new submissions and send a report
>to an editing team. That 10 a day could be processed by a group to
>lighten the load even further.
>
>This implies an authenticated/privileged editing access to the master
>database (I'm still assuming a master/slave replication model). I don't
>think this is a problem, but it merits a mention.
>
>Cheers,
>-g
>
>--
>Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
>

-----
Jason Dufair
funne nospam at iquest.net
http://www.iquest.net/~funne
http://www.iquest.net/~funne/jdufair.asc for PGP public key.
"A laugh for the newsprint nightmare, a world that never was
Where the questions are all 'why' and the answers are all 'because'"
-Bruce Cockburn