Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

gnat (29)

gnat
  (email not shown publicly)

Journal of gnat (29)

Sunday March 23, 2003
06:33 AM

Audio blogging

[ #11178 ]
I think audio blogging is a wank. For those of you who don't keep up with the /.*blog.*/ flavour of the week, audio blogging is where you don't type up your message, you record it and give people an MP3. The deficiencies are obvious: you lose all the interop of text--now your audience needs to have an mp3 player and broadband. Never mind that you're giving the finger to the deaf.

That said, I'm thinking of doing a little of it. I've been listening to the Dr Dobbs Technetcast archives as I drive back and forth from Auckland, and really enjoying it. I've been contemplating recording a few Perl Cookbook recipes or bits of Perl advice every day, so that people with long drives could have something to listen to. I guess this is more a book on tape than an audioblog, so it escapes immediate wankness.

What do you think? Stupid idea? Good idea? Shut up and write the second edition? :-)

--Nat


List all Journal entries
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Audio blogging 9 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.

  • You're forced to endure the "umm.."s and "uhhh..."s that are naturally edited out of text.

    Audio is sequentially accessed so you can't just skip down by paragraphs because someone is prattling on about something you're not interested in.

    The visual cues from even decent writers are missed. Paragraphs to separate related ideas, bullet lists for lists of gripes... True that some cues can be transmitted through audio, but to me those are much more vague without an accompanying face.

    Audio is of inconsistant q

  • Just because Perl is designed with natural language principles in mind does not make it a beautiful spoken language. :)

  • and finish writing the damn book. ;-)

    I would rather read than listen.

    Audioblogging would be ok if it was edited and otherwise munged. With written blogging there is a little a minimum level of editing that occurs between brain and fingers. Heck, there might even be some editing done after the fingers have done their work. How much editing is down in audioblogging after it is spoken?
  • Keep in mind that audio (and video) is quite literally a much more noisy medium than text. The difference between someone posting a dictation to the web for the world to ignore (audio blogging) and something of value and substance that's worth listening to on your iPod (audio publishing) is that the latter is planned, produced and focused. It may be interesting and useful, but it would probably be rehearsed (to get rid of the, uh, meaningless, um, pauses), and "professionally" recorded (to get rid of the

  • doesn't mean that everyone wants to listen to the cheeky kiwi wanker who should be writing instead of yammering a stream of consciousness onto the net about his huge pr0n collection and secret lust for wearing women's lingerie :) Don't add more noise to the noise of the net.

  • I'd be too afraid to play your audio blog at work. You'd have to provide a rating system.

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.