@uctweezer said:

@jambot said:

@uctweezer said:

Cool! We've been talking about this for years, and finally someone did it

I wonder how source dependent it is - I didn't use the spreadsheet source. We had even considered introducing some (imperceptible) noise to fuck with people using fingerprinting schemes, but decided no one would ever spend that much time cheating for a $10 code haha

PM me if you want to kang your answer (I didn't get a matching hash but only tried a couple date formats)

PM'ing my answer. Yeah, I'm not sure, but it seems pretty robust. I tried comparing to the MJM history spreadsheet, it seems to get about 95% correct on first guess, with some caveats - only running on the "one-song" samples (not attempting to split into multiple clips - today's I split into two files by hand), skipping the non-phish, etc. I'd like to go back and see what it is getting wrong and why. Some annoyances with matching song names (eg the spreadsheet will have names like "__ > Jam" , etc).

Yeah, I don't want to spoil the fun here or take the prize and don't plan to put online, but since I recently decided to store all the shows I could get locally, I thought I'd give it a try.

5% is also about how often I spruce up the tapes I’m dealing with, whether making a SBD / AUD matrix or adjusting an old tape to the right speed (the latter of which I’d expect to fool your tool every time)

Additionally, the string of MJMs that I made starting in 2018 and hosted in 18-19 and sporadically since did not use spreadsheet AUDs or SBDs for the most part so those likely have mixed results if trawling for matching hashes. I’m curious about your tool’s performance on those.

This is super cool that you did this, and even cooler that you’re being a good sport by not sharing the answers.