Slashdot Mirror


Streaming the Inauguration In a School?

Anonymous Teacher writes "I work in a small school in Washington and we are trying to prepare a way to watch the inauguration in 20 classrooms over a 1.5 T1. As our bandwidth severely limits the ability to individually stream to these rooms, is there an alternative to presenting it to the students? Are there any sites that offer a downloadable copy of the video quickly after the event that can be hosted locally or is reconfiguring the computers to use a proxy server the best solution?"

201 comments

  1. Projector by russlar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Gather all the students in an auditorium, gym or cafeteria 2. Set up a single PC with a projector 3. ????? 4. Profit!

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
    1. Re:Projector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed...while I'm all for ed tech (it's what I do), sometimes old tech is best. Use cable TV, scan converter, LCD and project to a large screen in the gym or cafeteria. Why rely on technology that MAY fail or be frustratingly hard to watch (studdering, pixelated, etc) leaving students with the memory of when technology at their school failed, rather than the importance of the event.

  2. television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    seriously... that's how we did it back in my day. While it isn't as sexy as modern computer tech, it just works.

    1. Re:television by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And before that it was radio, before that it press, and before that it was in person. The simple fact is that time changes. I am 49 and would love to have kids see this from the net, rather than the TV. The news will be far more impressed by themselves and will be making loads of worthless comments; CNN will prattle on about this being a black man, while Fox will do everything to warn about the evils of a dem (with tones of it being that it is a black man). It would be better for the kids just to get a straight stream of this from the white house cams. If Obama and the dems are smart (and they tend to be), they will have multiple streams set up for this.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:television by Majik+Sheff · · Score: 0

      ...because your statements are in no way biased?

      --
      Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
    3. Re:television by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Insightful

      CSPAN?

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    4. Re:television by coryking · · Score: 1

      CPAN has feeds in Windows Media and Real. Dunno how this maps to anything or how you can suck down either feed and "rebroadcast it" over your network. My guess is both Microsoft and Real have some gadget that would support this.

    5. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree, in theory.

      But in practice, your argument just doesn't stand up.

      First: TV is best. It's a broadcast medium, made to transmit a single moving image to thousands (or, in this case, millions) of recipients. It does this job very well. If you want to avoid outlandish commentary and commercialization, obvious channel choices are either C-Span or PBS (in order of preference).

      Second: There isn't enough bandwidth in a T1 to send 20 video streams of any rational (for 2008) quality. Multicast IP would solve this problem, of course, but the M-Bone is all but dead. (Wikipedia those terms yourself if you don't understand.)

      Third: Why do you assume that the coverage on a television channel like C-Span is worse than the coverage which might be available online? No matter what the medium, someone has to produce the feed, and in doing so, they'll almost certainly be adding commentary of some sort.

      Fourth: Internet video for the sake of internet video. Who gives a shit? I know it's 2009, and we're supposed to be in Teh Future and stuff, but for fuck's sake: If, in 2009, this were a solved problem, the question would never have been raised. Think about it.

    6. Re:television by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      And before that it was radio, before that it press, and before that it was in person. The simple fact is that time changes. I am 49 and would love to have kids see this from the net, rather than the TV.

      And every step in that progression you mentioned was an improvement in quality. So you'd rather have kids watch an historic event in grainy, choppy, crappy video where they can barely watch what's going on, rather than in beautiful HDTV where they can see everything? Just so they don't have to see professional analysis (God Forbid!) AFTER the event?

      This is one of the most retarded things I've seen posted on Slashdot in a while.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    7. Re:television by westlake · · Score: 1
      While it isn't as sexy as modern computer tech, it just works.

      It can work very well.

      HD projection. 1080p 60 fps.

      Multilingual captions. Signing. Second channel audio. Your choice of perhaps a dozen feeds tailored for specific audiences.

      Most schools I suspect began planning for the Inaugural no later than the day after the election.

    8. Re:television by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      Except that TV is a hell of a lot better for broadcast. Why do people assume that computers are automagically better for every possible task? Sometimes, computers are not better. Not yet. Some day, maybe, but not in January 2009.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    9. Re:television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And every step in that progression you mentioned was an improvement in quality.

      Radio was an improvement in quality over seeing it in person?

      This is one of the most retarded things I've seen posted on Slashdot in a while.

    10. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Radio was an improvement over not witnessing it at all.

      Remember, kid: The United States hasn't always had a thorough network of interstate highways and a monsoon of motor vehicles with which to utilize them. If a Californian wanted to see an inauguration in the early 1800s, it'd have taken months, and few would have had the wherewithal to do so. Instead, they just read about it in the left-coast newspapers, once the news eventually showed up over there.

      Radio is definitely a step forward, in comparison.

    11. Re:television by sleigher · · Score: 1

      Maybe they should allow the to watch the ceremony, the swearing in and the speech, then turn it off and discuss? Forget streaming. Although the projector idea is good. I would think it is more about the content than the path it takes to get to your head.

      --
      All points of time and space are connected.
    12. Re:television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but just why would Spanish colonists be interested in the inauguration of the U.S. President?

      Captcha: province

    13. Re:television by WindBourne · · Score: 1, Informative

      Google for VLS if you do not know that application and do not understand how to set up your own broadcasting.

      If you like, I can direct you to schools that can help with your lack of tech knowledge and other schools (or books) to help with your lack of manners.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    14. Re:television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why do you assume that the coverage on a television channel like C-Span is worse than the coverage which might be available online? No matter what the medium, someone has to produce the feed, and in doing so, they'll almost certainly be adding commentary of some sort."

      CSPAN typically does not add any commentary.

    15. Re:television by neumayr · · Score: 1

      VLS? Well, I googled it, and assuming you mean VideoLAN streaming - it is interesting it supports multicast, but does the school's network?
      I would guess not. In which case, you wouldn't be broadcasting anymore.
      I still don't see how streaming video would be a better option than TV, and can understand the parent's discontent - there are many instances where modern technology is used for its own sake, even though older technology would have done the job cheaper and better.
      This is especially true for schools it seems.

      --
      Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
    16. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      I find the manner in which you attack the person instead of the idea to be very telling. It is a very moronic and nonsensical behavioral pattern, like using brass knuckles to finish off a chess match.

      Unfortunately, I don't know of any schools (aside from church, or perhaps prison) which can rectify such basic and imbecilic logical fallacies as these.

      I don't have any particular advice for you on this matter. These are just my observations.

      But I digress. VLC might be part of the answer, but Google brought me to this post which states that VLC and C-Span do not cohabitate well.

      With this in mind, perhaps the question would be better stated as follows:

      "We have chosen to use a labor-intensive network video distribution system in a production environment, with little time for testing and even less time to develop failsafes, and huge opportunities for human error at all points. We selected this route because television is too easy, the picture is too good, the sound is always in sync. We feel that by using Teh Intarwebs, we'll be inspiring our schoolchildren to always look for the most difficult, elaborate, and expensive attack angle whenever there is a problem to solve, as per the gospel of Rube Goldberg.

      Besides, TV is just uncool, with its lack of buffering and all. Where might we find a VLC-compatible feed of the inauguration proceedings?"

    17. Re:television by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I think he means, use a VCR.

    18. Re:television by pbhj · · Score: 1, Informative

      Of course you'll need to make sure you've got a license to present the broadcast! Oh and if you choose to use a PC relaying a broadcast (from the internet or from a TV signal) then you'll need to purchase "secondary transmission" rights ...

      In the US 17USC111 (a)(5) appears to give a publicly funded school a pass on this. But it does say under ibid (a)(2) that you must comply with 17USC110 (2) which at (2)(D)(ii)(I)(aa) [!] requires that any digital copy is deleted before the end of the classroom session. Oh and you'll need to "[provide] notice to students that materials used in connection with the course may be subject to copyright protection".

      Sounds like you need a good lawyer. I hope the TV stations band together and sue all the schools! Justice must be done!!

      US law: http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/111.html
      US law: http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/110.html
      Worldwide situations: http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/C/htmlC/copyrightlaw/copyrightlaw.htm
      UK licensing: http://www.gla.ac.uk/copyright/video.htm

    19. Re:television by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Why not watch one with say 5 minutes of the stations commentary and have a recording of another station and watch same on that. Then you could compare the stations, discuss what was and wasn't shown and highlight how much power the media have to influence us. That would be a lesson and a half.

      No, I don't really think this would work in high school.

    20. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 1

      Uhm. So what, precisely, is your point?

      Either it is legal, or it isn't legal.

      First you say it's legal, with a few restrictions. And then, you say I (me??) need a lawyer.

      I'd write you off as just another troll, but trolls aren't don't generally present such well-researched facts. So what, exactly, are you trolling for?

    21. Re:television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CPAN has feeds in Windows Media and Real.

      So these are videos about Perl?

    22. Re:television by zgf2022 · · Score: 1

      Maybe the parent has a reason for trying to use the internet. I am a network admin for a school district in the middle of no where and we have two buildings constructed in the 30's. The issue being that they chose iron ore rocks as their building material. So I am in the same boat. A single t-1 and several classes that want to watch the ceremony with no way to do it by conventional tv.

    23. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 1

      Stop ruining my happy place with facts.

      Thanks!

      -mgt

    24. Re:television by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      And miss out on the Sean Hannity's "Obama: Will He Hand the Country Over to Osama Bin Laden?" and Keith Olbermann's "Obama: New Messiah or Merely Saint?" segments? No way!

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    25. Re:television by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I meant (to the troll parent) that, if s/he really hates the networks that much, and wants the raw feed, that s/he could just watch CSPAN.

      The original poster could capture CSPAN on a PC and share it among all the classroom, completely bypassing their inbound network pipe.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    26. Re:television by WhiteDragon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      C-SPAN has feeds in Windows Media and Real. Dunno how this maps to anything or how you can suck down either feed and "rebroadcast it" over your network. My guess is both Microsoft and Real have some gadget that would support this

      VLC will also live convert a stream and multi- , uni- or broadcast it. A T1 connection should be fine for one stream, assuming that you have the local bandwidth. I actually set this up at a previous job. We had some DirectTV feeds going into a computer with a couple of video capture cards, and then re-transmitted it over the company LAN.

      Interestingly enough, I am also helping with getting a school set up to watch the inauguration. Our solution, have all the students go into the auditorium, and display the video from an ATSC tuner on two projectors.

      --
      Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
    27. Re:television by pbhj · · Score: 1

      IANAL, it was not intended to be a troll but a slightly ascerbic observation on the state of copyright. The variables are too great for me to guess whether the proposals are infringing behaviour. My suspicion is that if the signals can be received over the air (or by satellite, cable) from the providers agents (eg local cable company) that setting up a secondary transmission (eg buffering an internet feed and relaying on the school network) will be a copyright infringement and hence be tortuous malfeasance.

      The bits of law I linked too show that there are some exceptions for educational establishments that are showing TV as a regular part of a course (which this isn't really, but might be argued to be - "we always show inaugarations") provided guidelines are adhered too. Those guidelines include providing materials and a talk on copyright infringement as a part of the same course.

      Assuming the guidelines are followed there are further technical restrictions which include deleting a show once it has been shown in the "class" and also preventing access to a show from anyone outside of enrolled students and school staff (make sure not to invite any parents or not yet enrolled students).

      Perhaps it is a troll.

    28. Re:television by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Sorry, the bit about needing a lawyer .. just because something appears to be legal doesn't mean you can't be sued for doing it. I can't really see a TV station suing schools for showing the inaugaration but strange things happen.

      The UK Police (http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/14487.cfm, amongst others, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7029892.stm) got in trouble for listening to commercial free-to-air radio at work without a license.

    29. Re:television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My pet peeve with television is the sound is NOT always in sync.

      All the TV stations seem to have moved to a digital back-end. This means I get the disadvantages of both digital AND analog broadcasting.

    30. Re:television by Michael+Hunt · · Score: 1

      You could do it trivially with a command like

      vlc http://path-to/stream --sout '#std{access=http,mux=asf,dst=:8000}'

      Depending, of course, what format the input is in, you may need to change the muxer (not everything will sit in an ASF container. If your clients are also VLC, I'd use mux=ts for anything that's MPEG.)

      This is obviously a trivial-as-shit implementation, but it doesn't require multicast. If you wanted to do multicast RTP, you could do that with #sout{access=rtp,dst=239.255.0.1,mux=ts}, for instance. This will probably be considerably more expensive on the local network, however, unless you have switches which handle IGMP prune/graft messages sensibly (i.e. not most cheap switches.) Truth told, if you just want to save T1 bandwidth, reflecting the stream via http is probably a far simpler alternative.

      You could also transcode the stream if your clients don't natively support whatever format it's in, by adding the 'transcode' filter to the sout line. Read the VLC docs for how to do this, I don't know offhand.

    31. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 1

      Right. But:

      http://www.c-span.org/about/copyright.asp

      C-Span's copyright policy for their own material is easily the most liberal I've ever seen associated with a television network. It boils down to this: As long as it's non-commercial use, and you keep the C-Span bug in the corner of the screen, go for it.

      They even freely proclaim that almost everything on the network is, in fact, public domain and free of copyright, due to the Federally-funded nature of (most of) it.

      Sounds good enough to me.

    32. Re:television by adolf · · Score: 1

      You mean to tell me that in the past 70 years, nobody has ever installed an antenna on those buildings?

      I am, frankly, shocked.

      Best wishes.

    33. Re:television by WhiteDragon · · Score: 1

      indeed, streaming to http was our solution. For a company of less than 100 employees, straight unicast http was fine. We tested it by having every employee watch the stream, and having a bunch of test windows open, and it worked fine. I investigated multicast, and some of our switches supported it, and some didn't, and it seemed like it was overly complex. As for the transcoding, I didn't have that issue as the video capture cards do hardware mpeg 2 encoding, so we just streamed that directly.

      --
      Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  3. VLC? by Tyris · · Score: 5, Informative

    Could be wrong, but can't VLC (VideoLanClient) do the trick?
    Get it to recieve one copy of the stream, and then repeat it over the local network (assuming your local network has the bandwidth).

    1. Re:VLC? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I second VLC. It isn't pretty; but it runs anywhere, plays anything, and is quite powerful.

      http://www.videolan.org/doc/streaming-howto/en/streaming-howto-en.html

    2. Re:VLC? by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ummm... TV...

      Dag Nabbit Back in my day classrooms had TV that you can pick up via Radio waves. Near every classroom had a TV, a huge 20" TV. I remember watching the first shuttle launch after the challenger exploded. The results of the first O.J. Simpson trial. Also other big current events that has happened during school hours. For the classes that didn't have a TV we just merged 2 classes together. I can't believe that civilization has fallen so far that this simple concept is no longer possible. And you need to setup some odd Internet Hack to watch this.

      No wonder schools are always running out of money, no one is smart enough to do it the easy way.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:VLC? by Chabo · · Score: 1

      For me, 9/11 was the big one.

      Starting at about 10:00AM, every class I was in had either the TV or the radio on, and we did no real work that day. Except band, of course.

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
  4. VLC - VideoLAN Client by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 3, Informative

    VLC might be an option.

    VLC can play back from a file that another process is writing to. So if you can figure out how to write the incoming video stream to a network filesystem, each classroom could use VLC to playback that file and you would only have to worry about a delay buffer of a minute or two to ensure smooth playback.

    While I have not tried it myself, VLC is also capable of rebroadcasting video. So if you can view the live stream directly with VLC, you can probably get that copy of VLC to multiplex it out to other VLC clients on other machines.

    1. Re:VLC - VideoLAN Client by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VLC might be an option.

      VLC can play back from a file that another process is writing to. So if you can figure out how to write the incoming video stream to a network filesystem, each classroom could use VLC to playback that file and you would only have to worry about a delay buffer of a minute or two to ensure smooth playback.

      While I have not tried it myself, VLC is also capable of rebroadcasting video. So if you can view the live stream directly with VLC, you can probably get that copy of VLC to multiplex it out to other VLC clients on other machines.

      why bother with a networked file system? VLC can stream directly to a client over the network

    2. Re:VLC - VideoLAN Client by Kyrubas · · Score: 1

      http://forum.videohelp.com/topic259354.html
      This article will tell you how to stream from VLC using a TV tuner (assuming you have one) to the Windows media player. The article is for an older version of VLC, but it should still work.

    3. Re:VLC - VideoLAN Client by dissy · · Score: 1

      Thank you, that is exactly what I was looking for out of this article.

      I am planning to do something similar, but for work.

      Most of our building is RF shielded, and there are only two small breakrooms where TVs can get reception.
      Our internet pipe is only 3mbit down, so multiple streams are out of the question.

      I feel it would also be more productive for employees to watch it at their desk on media player from a link on our intranet site, than to gather everyone in two small break rooms. The normal conference room where everyone can fit in only has a computer projection system, so cant easily get TV reception either, but could stream.
      Either way, some staff can still do work while watching at their desk, while for others who will stop working to watch it, it would at least save the walking time from there to one of the break rooms or conf room, which depending where you are can be as much as a 10 minute walk (each way)

      Thanks for the info again

  5. umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Download it with your server. Stream it using VLC. Yay!

  6. Mod parent up by Alarindris · · Score: 1

    This should be a no brainer, unless they don't have a gym for some reason.

    1. Re:Mod parent up by afidel · · Score: 1

      Or you know a projector capable of displaying to a gym sized crowd, that requires some serious lumens which costs big bucks.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Mod parent up by alta · · Score: 1

      Not really, plenty of churches display to chuch size crowds, where are similar to school sized crowds (500-5000.) I live in a non-rich zone/district and the local elementary/mid/high all have this capability.

      And a ginormous screen isn't as imparitive to the experience as making sure they can hear well.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    3. Re:Mod parent up by c_forq · · Score: 1

      I'm involved in one of those churches in the hundreds of people, and I can tell you the cost of the bulbs alone we use for our projectors cost more than most schools would feel comfortable spending on a complete projector. Unless the school has received a grant for it I doubt they will shell out for that good of a projector, even then I was at a school that turned it down a grant due to maintenance(mainly replacement bulbs) cost. Another debate for school purchasing is if it will get enough use to buy one instead of getting a few cheaper ones that can be installed in or moved between classrooms.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    4. Re:Mod parent up by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can easily get a pretty good projector (5000-9000 lumens) in the $6000 range. That's chickenshit money for even the smallest schools (contrary to pleadings of poverty, most schools actually get big bucks in technology grants for computers and related equipment). Most 5000 lumen models (like the NEC NP4000) can be had for under $4000.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Mod parent up by Propaganda13 · · Score: 1

      Buy everything needed then request some bailout money.

    6. Re:Mod parent up by Vadim+the+Conqueror · · Score: 1

      There's also the option of renting. It's a neat thing where you pay a significantly lower amount than the purchase price of an item, and in exchange you get to use it for a while and then give it back.

      Works well for parties and events.

    7. Re:Mod parent up by edittard · · Score: 1

      Works even better when everybody doesn't want to use it at the same time.

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
  7. Projector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would probably be a lot easier to just project it in an auditorium and play it from youtube.
    http://www.youtube.com/inauguration
    That's what my school's doing.

  8. TV by Toonol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll be broadcast free over the air. Give each classroom a TV. Why deal with the internet?

    1. Re:TV by Ecuador · · Score: 3, Funny

      What is this "TV" you speak of?
      And does it run Linux?

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    2. Re:TV by gpmanrpi · · Score: 1

      I have to second this. Why use the internet when OTA is a better solution here? Just because you can stream it does not mean you should.

    3. Re:TV by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Maybe each classroom already has a computer or ten, but no TV. Why not deal with the Internet?

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    4. Re:TV by dns_server · · Score: 1

      If it's a sony tv probably

    5. Re:TV by Jbain · · Score: 1

      I think he misspelled Hulu

    6. Re:TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The high school I currently attend was created three years ago and is definitely a product of the "tech age." Each teacher has a room equipped with a "smart cart" and their own personal laptop, but the school hasn't installed any TVs. There are only two television sets on campus, one of them is owned by one of the teachers and the other is owned by one of the on-campus clubs.

    7. Re:TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commercial free?

    8. Re:TV by Carrion+Creeper · · Score: 1

      It'll be broadcast free over the air. Give each classroom a TV. Why deal with the internet?

      A school I have something to do with has projectors in every room. (It is a public charter school)

      They bought one ATSC (over the air) tuner for every room. There is no cable, and much less guesswork than relying on their 1.5 T1s or any restreaming. We considered VLC but you need very specific models of tuner cards as far as I can tell.

      Even money is that the internet is going to break anyhow, and nobody wants hundreds of kids staring at them like they were idiots. It is worth buying the tuners even if there was a 10% chance streaming would fail, and internal streaming would be a hack.

    9. Re:TV by Forbman · · Score: 1

      ...Maybe they're in the middle of bum-fuck eastern Washington, far from Yakima, Tri-Cities, Wenatchee or Spokane? It looks flat on a map, but unless they're by Moses Lake, it's not really all that flat at all, so VHF TV signals aren't gonna work well at all.

    10. Re:TV by shiftless · · Score: 1

      So let me get this straight: they have some sort of reasonably fast internet connection out there in "bumfuck Washington", but they don't have cable TV, satellite TV, etc?

    11. Re:TV by rammer · · Score: 1

      Or maybe their school can't afford cable TV or satellite TV or TVs for that matter.
      Internet is just about a requirement these days.
      Just as a school library was back in the day.

    12. Re:TV by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Not to be argumentative, but they have a T1 for crying out loud. If they are way out in the boondocks like is hypothesized, then they are paying a shitload of money, probably $1,000-1,500+ for the T1. What's $50 more a month for some basic satellite service? Really, there is no excuse for a SCHOOL to not have some sort of TV news access.

    13. Re:TV by 3cardtrick · · Score: 1

      Even if you don't have the resources for each classroom to have a TV in the school, I'm sure you can get a parent/kid from each class to be the designated "TV kid" for the day to bring in a TV for the class to watch the Inauguration. Sounds funny, but I'm sure kids would fight over the chance to watch it on their TV.

      --
      Laissez-faire
  9. windows media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    windows media services does exactly what you want

  10. There's this invention called television by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's this invention called television. It allows for any number of viewing stations with no increase in bandwidth requirements. Pretty sexy 21st-century stuff.

    1. Re:There's this invention called television by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      No, it is NOT 21st century. It is VERY 20th century. With the net, the teacher can have kids look up information quickly.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:There's this invention called television by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      But Radio/TV is actually a great way to broadcast events like this.

    3. Re:There's this invention called television by A+Commentor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wouldn't it make more sense to watch the live video on a TV leaving the computer free to look things up? This allows computer use without interfering with the video.

      --

      Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com

    4. Re:There's this invention called television by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1

      Dude, the Internet is just the wrong medium for this. The Internet excels at "store and forward" content, on-demand content, interactive content. TV is best used for live broadcasts. Period. Full stop. End of conversation. If either your politics or your tin-foil hat prevent you from watching it on MSNBC or Fox, watch the C-SPAN feed.

      Forget the With the net, the teacher can have kids look up information quickly crap. The teachers should just let the kids watch the friggin' inauguration and not be distracted. They can ask questions -- and have them answered -- later.

      The choice between TV and the Internet is not one of a town crier versus radio, it's one of a helicopter versus an airplane.

  11. Is this why... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...we don't get much bang for our education dollars? Something that is going to be broadcast on 97 different networks for free, and you need to go through who knows what effort to stream it? Do you have math classes at that school? Get some parents to volunteer to bring in a TV. If you want the kids to see it later, you don't think YouYube will be inundated with copies of it?

    1. Re:Is this why... by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      Seriously! If they already have a projector or something for a large group, all they need is a VCR (or one of those new-fangled ATSC receivers I keep hearing about) to catch one of the OTA signals. Yet again, how did this manage to make Ask Slashdot?

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:Is this why... by NNKK · · Score: 3, Informative

      The fact that they're running off a single T1 would seem to imply that the "Washington" being referred to is Washington State, not D.C. (since the latter is unlikely to have anywhere in it that it's not far easier and more economical to go for DSL or another more modern solution, yet there are many such places in Washington State).

      That being the case, some small schools, particularly in eastern parts of the state, may have difficulty getting any sort of television signal. Check out a map, we've got an awful lot of empty space up here.

    3. Re:Is this why... by hoyty · · Score: 1

      Actually it is surprisingly hard to get DSL / Cable connections in many places in DC. Further you get to pay dearly for T1's due to local loop fees. I know several people who run IT for schools there and they often complain of this issue.

      --
      Hoyty
    4. Re:Is this why... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Most schools have no reason for owning any sort of TV tuner in every classroom, and are located in steel-roofed buildings that do not get reception easily.

      Last I checked also, projectors weren't terribly common in K-8 schools, and also don't include any sort of tuner.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    5. Re:Is this why... by Albanach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most schools have no reason for owning any sort of TV tuner in every classroom, and are located in steel-roofed buildings that do not get reception easily.

      Seriously?

      When I was at school in the UK we would regularly - though not frequently - use video as part of lessons. The BBC broadcast a whole host of TV shows designed to be shown in the classroom with accompanying teaching material.

      Is this some peculiar European teaching strategy?

      All our classrooms has access to a TV and an aerial socket on the wall. That was decades ago, seems hard to believe it isn't the case for most schools.

    6. Re:Is this why... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe that they have a T1 line - and no cable.

      But then, there has been an effort to run fiber to all the school districts in Washington. Here on the Peninsula they are running fiber to individual schools as part of a county wide fiber optic backbone.

    7. Re:Is this why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you seen the crap on TV in the US? Pretty much every class in CA has a TV monitor with a VCR or probably DVD nowadays from what I understand, but not TV tuner /rabbit ears or cable.

      When I saw the space shuttle columbia take off and land for the first time, the teacher brought in his own TV and we had the other 3rd grade class come in and watch with us.

    8. Re:Is this why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having worked as a teacher both in the US and in Europe (Germany), I can assure you that cable/broadcast television access is not common in either country.

      There is simply not a strong need or place for television content in the classroom in either country. The teachers I know prefer to integrate media they can control: clips from YouTube, DVDs from textbooks and of movies, and VHS recordings.

    9. Re:Is this why... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      This is something mainly specific to the BBC (I've also lived in the UK, though I never attended school there)

      American educational TV does exist, though much of it is distributed via VHS, DVD, internet, or filmstrip. It's far more convenient to allow teachers to decide when and where they want to show the film.

      Also, much of the US has pitiful broadcast reception. Whereas I could receive 20+ channels of crystal-clear digital broadcasts in my middle-of-nowhere village in Scotland, I can barely receive 1 or 2 analogue networks from my house located barely an hour outside of New York City.

      Ironically, a good portion of the films we watched were produced by the BBC.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    10. Re:Is this why... by adolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Around 1992 when I was in school in Ohio, there was a big effort to put televisions in every classroom. Nothing terribly fancy; just wall-mounted 21" Zenith TVs with a factory modification so that they could be turned on centrally. Larger classrooms got more than one. There was a fairly elaborate head-end system with automated tape recorders which would record educational programs (apparently broadcast during middle-of-the-night off-peak hours for free). The regularly-scheduled use of this system was for a specially-produced program of current events and a bit of science, which the entire school would watch in unison. Regular cable TV was also available on the system (which the school would also get for free), but was normally turned off to prevent abuse.

      Prior to that, there were big carts which lived in a few places on each floor of the school, each with a color TV and a VCR. They'd get wheeled around between classrooms as needed. But even then, we had cable. We watched the Challenger explode on the set in the school library (which was then quickly turned off, and we were ushered back to our classrooms in solid wonderment about what the silence was all about until we got home).

      I'm also old enough to remember film projectors being used in school. There typically was a large projection screen which lived on the stage, which could be used for assemblies.

      I can't imagine that schools these days can't come up with a bloody TV, or a projector and a blank wall, or something that allows large groups of kids to watch a broadcast. If they really, really can't, they're doing something very wrong.

    11. Re:Is this why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had the same thing in elementary school in Kentucky, but wasn't so fortunate in high school up in Boston. While each room had it's own TV, this was only used to broadcast from an on-site TV studio that we (myself and other students) broadcast about 10 minutes of news through during morning homeroom. No way to get outside channels without running an antenna out a window.

    12. Re:Is this why... by WhiteDragon · · Score: 1

      American educational TV does exist, though much of it is distributed via VHS, DVD, internet, or filmstrip. It's far more convenient to allow teachers to decide when and where they want to show the film.

      Also, much of the US has pitiful broadcast reception. Whereas I could receive 20+ channels of crystal-clear digital broadcasts in my middle-of-nowhere village in Scotland, I can barely receive 1 or 2 analogue networks from my house located barely an hour outside of New York City.

      Most schools that I have been in have either cable tv or satellite. Especially with cable, signal strength is almost never an issue. A lot of educational programs are on cable, as part of the community access program.

      --
      Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  12. DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe this was posted. The teacher reads ./ but doesn't know about VLC? Sad. I suppose the teacher also doesn't know who Barack Hussein Obama II is really controlled by either. Lamer....

    Don't blame me I voted for Ron Paul. :) /me ready for the flame.

  13. Odd by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Funny

    I keep trying to get that to work on my system. Where in KDE can I start this and make it work? Otherwise, I will stick with VLC.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Odd by Kadagan+AU · · Score: 1

      I think it's for Gnome..

      --
      This space for rent, inquire within.
  14. Alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An alternative way of presenting this? Simply tell them the America their parents knew has been killed by illogic, fluffy rhetoric, and masterful manipulation.

    I'm Nikita Kruschev, and I approved this message.

    P.S., Told you we'd bury you.

  15. Broadcast/multicast? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Informative

    You shouldn't even need more bandwidth, if your local network is configured properly.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  16. TV? by tqk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'd be very surprised if it isn't going to be on ALL the major TV networks. Use the right tool.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:TV? by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      Right tool might be: TV signal + Hauppage TV tuner card + VLC or other multicast solution on the internal network.

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    2. Re:TV? by tqk · · Score: 1

      Why not just turn on the TV set?!?

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:TV? by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      That depends on the relative distributions of TV sets and monitors within the school. At most of the institutions I know, there are more monitors, and they are more widely distributed, than TV sets. In addition, ethernet is also in-wall in more places than coax or rabbit ears.

      But this shouldn't be an either/or proposition.

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
  17. Just do what you did... by bobobobo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...for Bush's inauguration! What's that you say? You didn't force all the kids to watch W's? In all seriousness though, why the big deal for Obama's inauguration? What makes it more significant than any other inauguration in the past? Did you guys broadcast Bush's or Clinton's?

    1. Re:Just do what you did... by dcowart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First Black President, that's why this is important. I plan to watch it. This is how far we as a nation have come in the 60 years since the civil rights movement and the Jim Crow laws that held black people down for so long. More than just another president being inaugurated this is a statement that anyone can achieve anything they push for. Yes, I'm a flag waving optimist about this but having grown up in an inner city and having seen the devastation of being poor in America, It makes me hopeful that things can change for the better.

      This is the kind of thing that can give an inner city kid a shred of hope that he can get out of the slums and into something better.

      I'm starting to get all preachy now, but that's why this is something kids should watch.

      --
      www.rdex.net
    2. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First Black President.

      he is not black he is biracial

    3. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>This is the kind of thing that can give an inner city kid a shred of hope that he can get out of the slums and into something better.

      OK, so the US has had a black secretary of state, black all-the-jobs Colin Powell had, black senators, judges, businessmen and women, sports heroes and used car salesmen and you think that THIS is finally going to give an inner city kid a shred of hope to get out of the slums and into something better when nothing else has?

      With confidence like yours, that kid's fucked already.

      Still, it's good that there's no poor white kids anymore, because all of the white presidents giving them so many shreds of hope and stuff. Latinos are still screwed, though.

    4. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have got to be kidding me.

    5. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which means he gets crapped on by everyone. If anything being a successful biracial man in the US is even more impressive.

    6. Re:Just do what you did... by umbra_dweller · · Score: 2

      Aside from the obvious racial issues, because Obama drew so much support and interest among young people.

      Growing up with Clinton and the Bushs being elected, I never saw the kind of interest among young people that Obama garnered - at least not at my schools. I have a number of under-18 family members in high school who not only followed Obama's progress through the election season but have continued to read about and comment about his speeches and proposals after the election.

      Perhaps you feel that they have just been caught up in a cult of personality - but regardless, in my mind the point of showing this type of thing in school is to capitalize on a teachable moment. The pre-existing interest that kids have in Obama represents a perfect opportunity for educators to get them interested and involved in government and politics. It's the perfect thing to spark discussion, which can later grow into a discussion about some of the challenges that the Obama administration is facing, and what students think about the proposed solutions. Of course, one could have done this for any inauguration - but as I said, it's much more valuable if the kids are already interested and engaged.

    7. Re:Just do what you did... by Deanalator · · Score: 1

      I think this event is probably far more significant to people who actually saw the civil rights movement.

      I think that to many of the younger kids out there, Obama will just be another guy being sworn into office. They don't notice anything odd or abnormal about a black guy being in power. That in itself might be significant.

      I personally never understood the racial hubub of it all. I think first multi-racial is more significant than first black president anyway. I'm just glad that we will soon have a president who actually understands the importance of investing in technology, and won't it be nice to have a sane foreign policy?

    8. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *barf*

    9. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought he was mixed race

    10. Re:Just do what you did... by HanClinto · · Score: 1

      Speaking as someone who is in a mixed-race marriage, I'm honestly not sure how to take your comment as anything other than expressing racial prejudice (or "race-power" or "racism" however else you want to express it).

      Race is never supposed to be a factor in interviewing a job candidate, and comments like this only exacerbate the issue for the next generation, and teach them that race somehow matters.

      For a thought experiment, take any NYT article that's ecstatic about this "historic" president and swap all instances of "white" with "black", and the articles start to sound a lot more offensive.

      Is racial prejudice truly something to be eliminated from society, or is racism only a vice when you're white?

    11. Re:Just do what you did... by fizzziks · · Score: 1

      While most kids wish to become an astronaut, or a firefighter, or a President... then yes, I do think this is a remarkable figure for them to look up to.

    12. Re:Just do what you did... by rsborg · · Score: 1

      I think that to many of the younger kids out there, Obama will just be another guy being sworn into office. They don't notice anything odd or abnormal about a black guy being in power. That in itself might be significant.

      Well, it's a boatload of firsts:

      • First black president
      • First multi-racial president
      • First multi-cultural president
      • First truly progressive president
      • First poor-kid turned out to be president in recent history

      The list could go on and on.

      But another huge thing is that this is the real awakening of the progressive movement in America, and consequently (since we only have a 2 party system), the death of the conservative movement. As Obama would say it's a "defining moment".

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    13. Re:Just do what you did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First Black President, that's why this is important. This is how far we as a nation have come in the 60 years since the civil rights movement

      If the US has really progressed, then the fact he's black should have nothing to do with anything. If you're saying that (recent) previous presidents have been elected because they were white, then clearly there hasn't been an awful lot of progression after all.

      In addition, the fact that you're hyping this due to his being black makes me rather worried. Did the public vote for him purely on virtue of him being black? I personally would prefer that the US President is voted for due to a combination of morality, integrity, intelligence, and reliability. His or her colour should most certainly not be a factor.

  18. If you really want to stream... by strredwolf · · Score: 1

    Grab a Pinnacle PCTV HD Pro, and slap Linux on a laptop. Plug in, tune in a station with Kaffeine, and note it down. Then get VLC configured to multicast that channel to the classrooms.

    No need to kill the T1, when you can get digital TV of it for free.

    The only other way is to have VLC multicast a smaller stream that won't choke the T1.

    --

    --
    # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
    $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    1. Re:If you really want to stream... by GiMP · · Score: 1

      I agree, although I wonder about licensing rights? Can they do this legally? Assuming they can, there are many sorts of variants of this theme. Is this why you can't just use televisions, or are you hoping to make use of large-scale projectors that won't accept a TV input? Why weren't you in an auditorium again? Well, okay, lets assume you do this with technology... grab a cable feed and stream it on your LAN, it won't touch your T1. The only reason you would need to touch the T1 is if you don't have cable anywhere in the school. Then, you could stream it from off-site somewhere. Assuming it is done on the LAN, you don't even have to bother setting up and using multicast for only 20 classrooms if you have FastE, unicast will work fine.

    2. Re:If you really want to stream... by Forbman · · Score: 1

      He did say he was from a small school district in eastern Washington, which is largely rural (except perhaps Wenatchee, Ellensburg, Yakima, Spokane, Richland, Kennewick and Pasco). If it was a school in any one of those towns, chances are they've got the free cable TV feed and can probably set up TVs in some/most of the classrooms.

      Will they show all the pomp and circumstance, or just Pres. Obama's speech and swearing-in?

      Indoctrination? Yeah, whatever.

    3. Re:If you really want to stream... by lazarusdishwasher · · Score: 1

      I have not tried to do this with more than one computer, so I don't know how well it will scale, but I have run the command cat /dev/video0 >~/public_html/tv.mpg to save a stream from my pvr150 to a location readable by apache. On my laptop I could then stream the video by telling issuing the command xine http://serverip/~username/tv.mpg.

      Another thought that I had is if the network does not support multicast, could you configure vlc to stream to the broadcast address of the network and have all of the computers listen for the incoming stream?

  19. Streaming Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am going to assume that you are talking about a T1 to the Internet and that you actually have at least 100MB switched network locally.

    If this is the case, then you should be able to easily do what you need. I work for a school and I understand that you probably don't have TVs, but you do have a computer and a projector.

    You need one over the air TV or cable connection. Where I live, one cable drop per school is provided for free to the district.

    Take this feed and connect it to a video capture card in a computer running Windows XP. Download the Windows Media Encoder, it's free from Microsoft. Use this to encode your cable video source. I suggest C-SPAN, but it's up to you.

    Use a single Windows 2003 server to host a Windows Media Service. This is a very lightweight service that can run on a server that is already in use for something else. Set your media server to pull the feed from the encoder.

    Tell all of your classrooms to point to the media server. A single media server can easily handle 50 - 60 streams over a 100 MB/sec switched network.

    The effect of all of this is that you don't need to use any of your ISP's Internet bandwidth at all. All of your streaming traffic would be local to your LAN.

  20. Why do you have to ask? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do you have to ask? Just do what your school did for the past inaugurations. How did they show the inauguration 4, 8, 12, and 16 years ago?

  21. One Last Question... Why? by Revotron · · Score: 1

    Okay, now that many posters have recommended VLC (which I as well recommend for stream rebroadcasting), I have one final question.

    Why does this need to be a live feed? Seriously, record the stream on a computer or bust out one of those ancient VHS tapes and record it. Then, show the kids the video the next day in their Social Studies/History classes. There's no reason to disrupt the school's daily flow for something that happens every four years.

    1. Re:One Last Question... Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Social Studies is what they should be doing to their behaviour about this inauguration.

    2. Re:One Last Question... Why? by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      On the question of why disrupt the school to show an inauguration, I ask. . . Why not? Particularly the inauguration of a *new* president. The 2005 inauguration of Bush was no big deal simply because he was only continuing his Presidency. But, I would say the 2001 inauguration would have been a big enough deal to stop school and show the kids, because Bush was being *newly* installed as President.

      The installment of a new president happens at most every 4 years, sometimes after 8 years (as in this case). Is it such a big disruption to our educational system to devote 1 hour every 4 or 8 years to showing the kids the installment of a new President? When I was in school, part of education was Civics, and Current Events. The installment of a new President certainly fits those conditions.

      I think it's not unreasonable that our educational system should include having the students watch important Presidential speeches - inaugural speeches, State-of-the-Union Address (though that is always at night, so that's more of a homework assignment, or watch recorded clips the next day), and potentially one-off speeches of high significance (declarations of war, declarations of armistice/treaty/enemy surrender, response to attacks from terrorists or hostile states, etc).

      On the issue of live vs. recorded - well, I suppose it could be viewed recorded, but why? Why not watch it live? Things like this typically have more significance to people when they are watching it live, when they feel like they are *part* of events, as opposed to viewing events after-the-fact.

  22. I'd imagine they are Windows based. by coryking · · Score: 1

    Here is how I'd do it:

    1) Buy a USB capture card that has known drivers for whatever windows server version is in use
    2) Assume Windows Media Services can use this capture card and stream it to windows clients on your network.
    3) ???
    4) ???

    My other thought would be to use like MythTV and then use it's streaming stuff. I'm pretty sure they have a web based client.

    This is actually a pretty tricky question to be honest. Especially considering you have less than a week to set it up and test it!

    Personally, I doubt you are going to be able to take a stream from the internet and "rebroadcast" it over your network. The only thing that would get you half way is CSPAN, who offers a stream using windows media player or real player. I somehow doubt you'll be able to stream from the big-boys like MSNBC, CNN or (shudder) FOX.

    My hunch is you will be more happy with a capture card and streaming that.

    Either way, this is a pretty large project. Good luck.

  23. Maybe. Just Maybe by coryking · · Score: 2

    Because it is a historic moment in our time. That might be, oh, a *small* part of it, you think?

    Back when I was in high school, they stopped classes to show the OJ verdict live on every TV in the school. I'd say in terms of importance, this is a bit more important and historic.

    1. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Toonol · · Score: 1

      A historic moment, that happens every four years of the child's life. Has the world changed so much that whatever solution they used in 2004 won't work any more?

    2. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Revotron · · Score: 1

      Why is it a historic moment? He's a man who was elected President. Don't make a big deal out of it, for the sake of equality. Equal treatment means equal recognition.

      P.S. My school never showed us the OJ verdict because it had nothing to do with any of our actual studies.

    3. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by coryking · · Score: 1

      Why is it a historic moment?

      I pity you if this is a legitimate question and not a troll.

      My school never showed us the OJ verdict because it had nothing to do with any of our actual studies.

      I'm sorry to hear that.

    4. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're under about 18, you don't really remember anyone other than Bush being president. It's a huge change for a kid.
       
      Mind you my school has cable to all the TVs, for some reason (and we never use it).

    5. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Why is it a historic moment? He's a man who was elected President. Don't make a big deal out of it, for the sake of equality. Equal treatment means equal recognition.

      OMG!!!!111

      BARAK OBAMA IS BLAK! WTF?

    6. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Revotron · · Score: 1

      It is not an entirely legitimate question. For the most part it's rhetorical but I asked it to prove a point: Just because he's BLACK doesn't mean it should be covered more than a white man's inauguration. Civil rights activists have been screaming about equal treatment, but what they need to accept along with that is equal recognition. If we make a big deal about the fact that he's black, we will never look any deeper into him than the color of his skin.

    7. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Forbman · · Score: 1

      It does if he's the FIRST one. He'll be the only first one. Just like it'll be a big day when the first woman is elected president (sorry, Hillary supporters, it won't/shouldn't be her, but if it's a choice between Sarah Palin and Hillary...well...lesser of two evils prevails... At least Hillary was clever enough to hide most of her blind ambition behind Bill's).

      The first Apollo landing was big news. The 7th one wasn't.

    8. Re:Maybe. Just Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they probably didn't show the 2004 inauguration. Bush was "just another president".

      I say use the same method here, as you did then.
      If you didn't show it before, don't show it now, he's "just another president".

      What's that you say? "But he's the first black president, its historic!" I thought after all those years of being told that skin color doesn't matter, and all people are equal regardless of race, that it didn't matter if he was black, white, pink, purple or green???

      He had a rough childhood, and overcame a lot of obstacles to get where he is now. Yay for him, good job. But if you treat him differently than any other president because of his skin, YOU are being a racist, and I myself intend to treat him as any other president. I'll watch a news clip after the fact to prove that it happened, but I'm not going out of my way to see it live.

      But, if you're still intent on "watching history in the making" or whatever, ditto the TV comments from everyone else, you're looking at the problem backward. Don't try to make a unicast media into a broadcast when you already have a broadcast media that is better at, well, broadcasting.

  24. I was in elementary school by coryking · · Score: 1

    And the janitor had to come into every classroom and fiddle with our antique black and white televisions to watch that.

    1. Re:I was in elementary school by ezratrumpet · · Score: 1

      We had to listen to the news on the crystal radios we built ourselves...and we liked it.

    2. Re:I was in elementary school by qengho · · Score: 1

      You had crystals? We had to make our radios out of amorphous silica.

    3. Re:I was in elementary school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The topper! (dilbert) lol...

    4. Re:I was in elementary school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think that's special? Back in my day we had to brainwash the CIA to broadcast the news to our tooth fillings.

  25. Real has some nice streaming tools by mariushm · · Score: 1

    As title says, Real has a nice streaming server called Real Helix and a producer (tool that creates the stream and sends it to the server for other people to view from server) called Real Producer.

    There is a free version for both Real Server and Real Producer Basic.

    Here's the page:
    http://www.realnetworks.com/products/free_trial.html.

    I believe you're not allowed to use the software commercially. As you use it for school and for noncommercial purposes you should be fine.
    It may also be worth to send an email to Real because they may have discounts for educational licenses.
    Anyway, Real Producer is about 100$

    You just have to install the server on any computer with good network card because that's the computer that all classrooms will download the stream from. Your stream will be about 200-300KB/s for each user but you can change it as you want, for better or lower quality.

    You install Real Producer on a somewhat powerful (a Core2Duo will be enough) computer with a TV tuner. Start the software, select the tv tuner as video and audio input, configure where to upload the stream and the bitrate and you're all set.

    There are tutorials to help you on Real's website.

    I've done this broadcasting football games at 80+ people in a college dormitory, on a 100mbps network so it definitely works.

    Another alternative (though I didn't test this) would be to use an open source Flash streaming server like Red5 ( http://osflash.org/red5 ) and use the free Adobe Flash Media Live Encoder 3 ( http://www.adobe.com/products/flashmediaserver/flashmediaencoder/ ) to record and send the stream to the Flash server.

    1. Re:Real has some nice streaming tools by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Also, don't forget VLC! It can capture, encode, stream, and play all in one package (and do so on virtually every platform under the sun).

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    2. Re:Real has some nice streaming tools by Foo2rama · · Score: 1

      That was what I was going to post, use one computer to grab it inbound then rebroadcast with VLC player, should be pretty easy to set up, and free.

      --


      ---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
    3. Re:Real has some nice streaming tools by mariushm · · Score: 1

      I personally find VLC to be quite buggy on Windows. In fact, if I test now to create a stream and send it to a broadcast server, I'll either have no sound or VLC would crash with runtime errors after a few minutes.

      Especially about 2 years ago when I last did broadcasts with Real Producer, everything was a breeze, I don't think VLC even had streaming features then..

      I've successfully used Real Producer then with great success and also in more recent times using Adobe Live Media Encoder coupled with Ustream.tv, to broadcast the CNN Obama debates to more than 3000 people at a time.

  26. Re:Fuck you Linus Torvalds!!!! You god damn thief! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was pretty cheap actually. Maybe the money for the SCO license has yet to appear on your credit card statement.

  27. Same problem solved here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am going to be doing this for our Board of Ed (6 schools) using a two bonded T1s. We are lucky that each school is connected via our own fiber network. So, here's what I'll be doing...

    -VLC to a compatible feed (used the C-SPAN live feed as a test at 194kbps).
    -Loaded it into VLC on a temporary server in a VLAN accessible by all clients.
    -Set preferences to allow for maximum compatibility across client OS/players.
    -Doing a little extended math, using 50% of a 1Gb connection, this setup can support about 2,500 clients. The net feed will only take a hit of one 194kb stream.

  28. Use it all... by bigdaddy25fb · · Score: 0, Redundant

    If you have the tech and resources why not use it to its somewhat full potential. VLC will do a multicast broadcast. Just use that if your network can support it.

  29. That won't work by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    If one person presses pause then it freezes for everybody!

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  30. Not only free, but at 15 Mbps in 1080i HD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone just needs to bring in a cheap 46" HDTV with a built in ATSC tuner and put the antenna next to the window. Now you get to watch at 1080i 15 Mbps MPEG-2 rather than a 1 Mbps stream from Hulu.

    The same thing can be said about the office. You've got these high-rise buildings with large windows and you've got 20 people all trying to unicast the same 1 Mbps stream over the Internet bringing the whole office connection down.

  31. My high school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My old high school: http://www.lahigh.org/apps/news/show_news.jsp?REC_ID=81795&id=0&rn=4855263

    And the gathering everyone into a large area (gym, cafeteria), then projecting is probably the most suitable..?

  32. proxy, radio or tv by modestgeek · · Score: 1

    If you are on a school network, you most likely have a proxy of some sort. The proxies I've worked with can proxy streaming media. (Websense and Bluecoat) I would have a chat with your networking department to see what you're proxy is capable of. Otherwise, turn on the radio or tv. You don't have to use the internet for delivery.

  33. Subject by z-j-y · · Score: 1

    finally, our students are forced to line up to listen to our dear leader's speech. just like in communist countries.

  34. What's wrong with television? by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

    Or the PA system? Do you really need to see a speach? Sure, everyone wants to be watching when another president gets shot, but the chances of that are slim.

    Perhaps you could capture an AVI or MOV file from the live broadcast, burn or copy it to a bunch of cd's or memory sticks and deliver it to classes.

    Yes, I'm suggesting a sneakernet.

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
  35. Here's an idea by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why don't you just do whatever you did to stream the inauguration 4 years ago? Oh, wait.

  36. Why isn't the inauguration on President's Day? by cyberspittle · · Score: 1

    Seems to me if the inauguration was on Presidents Day in February (a national holiday), then schools wouldn't have to worry about streaming it. 8^D

  37. Bring back the MBONE by lobotomy · · Score: 1

    Multicasting could have solved this problem. Too bad the MBONE died.

  38. Bunch of Crap by bobobobo · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, no one cared when we had blacks ascend to prominent positions in govt eg. Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, etc. I guess this is the first person of color to ascend to high ranking office that the media and left approve of, therefore it's a big deal. Being black helped Obama during the election, period. The only people making a big deal of him being the first non-white president was the media and the left.

    1. Re:Bunch of Crap by Forbman · · Score: 1

      Uh, actually, people DID care, and they DID receive more than the usual media attention than is afforded the positions they took over (of course, Clarence Thomas' was slightly controversial as well. Just ask Anita Hill, and Condoleeza Rice's thunder was lessened by Madeleine Albright being the first woman in general to be Sec. of State)...

    2. Re:Bunch of Crap by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Being black helped Obama during the election, period.

      This is exactly why this is such a huge deal and worth celebrating. One of these days we'll get over skin colors entirely, but until then, I'm quite happy with the American consciousness having become explicitly in favor of electing a black person.

    3. Re:Bunch of Crap by bobobobo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wow, and the fact that you were modded up speaks volumes. This is what's wrong with race relations in America. We still focus on them and thrust identity politics onto every facet of our society. What you're saying is that you didn't vote for the candidate based on his qualifications or experience, but voted on him based on his skin color. That is racism, plain and simple, even if the result was a positive one in your eyes. Playing the race card does not help. The fact is, we should already be over skin colors entirely, the only people who constantly bring it up are the far left and the media.

  39. Being lucid helped Obama during the election... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's face it. We're NOT excited about Barack Obama because he's biracial. We're excited about him because he can put words together into sentences without endless interregnums of ums, hems, and haws.

    1. Re:Being lucid helped Obama during the election... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So you want a slick salesman who can speak very well but compare his record with what he said and they don't match?

      We are going to be so lucky if this country survives the next 4 years. It is a toss up if we end up in a 2nd civil war or get President Biden first.

  40. FFmpeg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look in to using FFmpeg(ffserver) to relay the stream to your classroom again if your network has the bandwidth to do it.

    Also if you have a Apple server laying around it has a streaming server app that you can run to do the same thing.

    As for the VLC idea I have done that one. I live in Colorado and I only have about a T1 for internet bandwidth as well so I told VLC to play and rebroadcast the stream to my other computers. FYI it took some tweaking with the setting to get it to work

  41. Re:Your racism is showing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was exactly my thought.

    It's special because he/she is black = racist
    It's special because she is a woman = sexist

    But it seems that racism is ok as long as it's reverse.

  42. Re:Your racism is showing. by shiftless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hi, I'm a good ole boy from Alabama and I get called a racist--that is, racist against anyone who isn't white--all the time on the interwebs. So allow me to weigh in with my racist opinion. I am glad Obama got elected. Back in the 60s, or even the 80s, a black president was an impossible dream. Now today it is reality. This is certainly proof of how far we have come as a nation. This is a shining example for the world to see, at a time when America's image is somewhat tarnished. I'm happy that black folks, especially the old timers who saw real racism in past decades, now have something like this to stand up and be proud of. I'm glad that we had a record turnout this election and large numbers of people becoming interested in politics. It's good for the country. The story of a poor black kid growing up to be the president of the United States is very inspiring. It IS a big deal.

  43. Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pull the 'net video stream into 1 server and dump it into a shared file. Hopefully your school network has Ethernet, switches, routers, etc. Then let the classroom computers play from that file. The file acts as a buffer, but you should be able to be close to realtime. A well designed server (RAID 0, 5, 6, etc.) with lots of RAM and fast disks should have no problem with many clients.

    Or use a solution mentioned above like VLC and class D IP (the m-bone) or any of many videoconferencing solutions.

  44. Chucking... by Stanislav_J · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This old fogy is getting a good laugh at the thread. Some (very few) have already touched on it, but what the hell is wrong with watching TV on a TV? Borrow someone's huge-ass plasma and set it up in a large classroom. You don't even need cable or satellite as the broadcast networks will be covering the inauguration stem-to-stern in beautiful 1080i HD.

    But no, the parent is hellbound to do this via computer. (And most of the responses seem to be troubleshooting and spitballing the idea.) Why? Because it's "cool" or the latest thing? Because he has some anti-TV bias? Or because he's so caught up in that "it's newer, so it must be better" mentality and literally did not even think of good old broadcast TV?

    Sometimes the best and most appropriate technology is the good ol' tried and true. There are many applications in life where previously existing and "old fashioned" solutions are good enough. (And much simpler.) Often it's also cheaper, and it's almost always a hell of a lot less convoluted and headache-inducing.

    Alas, so many are caught up in this "newer must be better" mentality. And the companies who develop and more importantly sell the stuff feed the frenzy by insuring that there's always something new out there to shell out the big bucks for. Today's new, neat-o technological breakthrough will be "obsolete" next year (hell, maybe next month) and of course you are encouraged to upgrade or replace what you already have that still works perfectly well for the newest, biggest, fastest, sharpest, shiniest, coolest thing. Feel free. I sit here with my old computer, relatively tiny picture-tube TVs, $29 radio and CD player, books and printed newspapers, and enjoy the hell out of all of them with no diminishment of my quality of life because all of these things are "old-fashioned." And I laugh.

    Now, turn down that music and get off my lawn, you whippersnappers...

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
    1. Re:Chucking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey gramps, there's probably a few computers in the classroom already networked. A simple solution like using VLC to connect to the internet stream and stream it on the local network is WAY EASIER than coordinating people to unhook their TVs and bring them into the school. What if the school has no cable? Now you have to run out and buy rabbit ears. Because do you think the guy who just dragged his 46" lcd tv into the classroom had it running off of rabbit ears at home? Laugh away, you old fart. You just show how far behind the rest of the world you've fallen. This isn't about shunning things that are old-fashioned. This is about USING THE GODDAMN TOOLS YOU HAVE.

      I once had a team of doddering old fools like you make me rewrite a perl script I wrote that did some simple copying and substitution into bash and sed scripts because they couldn't figure out the 50 line program. You are one of them; forever doomed to what you learned 20 years ago even though there's better tools at hand and someone willing to teach them to you. Learn to keep up, you damn raisin.

    2. Re:Chucking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a teacher and you are clueless.
      We have TVs in the classroom but you need cable to connect to a TV station. I have internet as well but a large class and two small computer screens. We are on a very limited budget and do not have cable! I am trying to find a way to bring this wonderful day to my students. It's not a simple as you seem to think.

  45. MythTV by rhpenguin · · Score: 1

    Setup a quick and dirty MythTV server with an analogue TV tuner and run live discs throughout the school.

  46. Do it the way you did 4 years ago by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 0

    Oh, right... you didn't stream the inauguration live.

    They should be at school learning how to compete with the rest of the world, not sitting in front of a monitor watching this live.

    It'll be on YouTube before they make it home from school.

    --

    To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

  47. Over Thinking by jgtg32a · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I think too many people are over thinking the issue

    http://xkcd.com/530/

    1. Re:Over Thinking by Igarden2 · · Score: 1

      Don't they have televisions?

      --
      Normally I ascribe all life to intelligent design, but in your case I'll make an exception.
  48. Mod Points by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    Lovely a great point and I just spent all of my points marking up all of the Linux jokes in the British Navy thread.

  49. In the words of Qui-Gon by jgtg32a · · Score: 0

    The ability to speak does not make you intelligent. Now get out of here.

    Honestly the only difference I ever saw between Palin and Obama is one is more articulate than the other.

    1. Re:In the words of Qui-Gon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Honestly the only difference I ever saw between Palin and Obama is one is more articulate than the other.

      That and Palin wasn't running for President. You may want to take your own advice there Jinn ol' boy.

    2. Re:In the words of Qui-Gon by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      That's the scary part, Obama was

  50. Prayer? by kennygraham · · Score: 1

    With all the christian prayer that'll be going on at the inauguration, would this count as staff-sponsored captive-audience prayer in public school? Would be interesting to see in court ;)

    1. Re:Prayer? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Well, the man being sworn in is already venerated like he's Jesus. Might as well go all the way.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Prayer? by Beefaroni · · Score: 1

      i would think maybe the kids should be in class learning something vs watching this coronation - not like the media won't be spamming this event for the next four years in some masturbative fashion. heck, why don't we just shut down the whole nation, not like he hasn't taken back all his changes, had his cabinet investigated for some corruption charges, or made the cover of Spiderman /puke

      wake me up when it's over - i will be at work

  51. CNN, VLC by gatkinso · · Score: 2, Informative

    Watch it on CNN.

    Or, download it and UDP stream to your.sub.net.255.

       

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  52. Stinky Mcfartypants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We are doing this in our school. We have a computer with Windows Media Encoder 7 hooked up to our satellite tuner with a Hauppauge hvr-1950 and it streams out over the internal network. We have tested it with 40 connections with no hiccups.

    Hope that helps

  53. Don't you have channel one? by kabocox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I graduated HS in 96 from Arkansas. That was 93-96 in HS and 90-93 in junior high. We had what was called "channel one" almost daily from junior high to the end of HS. What the heck was channel one? About a 5-10 min news program aimed at kids and broadcast to schools through out the nation. They had about a 5 minute local segment where the local school could insert their daily news program if they wanted from the A/V kids if they wanted. I had the impression at the time that it was paid for by a grant or bond or something. Now if we had that in Arkansas back then, I'd assume that every one else had similar educational tools growing up.

    If there was any content that the school wanted piped to every one, they'd make sure to tell the teachers and then they'd run it though the tv. They could centrally turn on the tvs play it and then turn them off. (It took effort of a teacher manually turning the things off if they wanted to do something during that period of time.)

    I'd really be surprised that in 2008 that there are schools without those sorts of resources. Oh on commentary, what the heck do you think we did for the next 5 minutes after channel one was over? It was discuss/debate what ever the heck was running and wait for the teacher to quieten the room down. We learned more from each other and discussing than from the teacher at that point. The teachers generally thought that it was cutting into their class time and didn't want to waste any time discussing most of the content anyway. It was wait for lunch if you wanted to talk about it. Like we'd have really cared to bring it up by then any way. ;)

    1. Re:Don't you have channel one? by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 1

      The deal with Channel One is basically:

      1. The company that produced the program placed TV monitors in every schoolroom and a satellite dish to the school district.

      2. The school district agreed to require every student to watch the program and its ads. No exceptions, no teacher discretion. Students must watch, or they lose the free TVs.

      In some districts, parents objected to the second half of this deal. Often, strongly enough that the districts were forced to throw out (or replace) all of the monitors.

    2. Re:Don't you have channel one? by kabocox · · Score: 1

      The deal with Channel One is basically:
      1. The company that produced the program placed TV monitors in every schoolroom and a satellite dish to the school district.
      2. The school district agreed to require every student to watch the program and its ads. No exceptions, no teacher discretion. Students must watch, or they lose the free TVs.
      In some districts, parents objected to the second half of this deal. Often, strongly enough that the districts were forced to throw out (or replace) all of the monitors.

      Like I said, I went to an Arkansas Junior High and then High School. I believe you. I just find it really funny that others would piss away free TVs over minor ads. Maybe if you were rich enough to already be doing that, then you could stand on your high moral horse and do that. It reminds me of those book covers that had local ads on them. Did it piss off some people? Yep. They could go buy their own book covers that had their own or no ads at a higher rate. Most everyone used the "free" ad based book covers and just drew on them.

      Like I said the things came on and went off by themselves and we watched the 5-10 minutes of whatever they wanted us to watch. Some of it was ads yes. I see tons of ads daily. I filtered it out then. I don't recall many of them except some drink ads. We rarely ever used the TVs other than Channel One so its not like we couldn't do without it, but I did find it actually useful for just daily discussions everyone that you are like to see to day seeing the same 5-10 minute program.

      I listen to an mp3 CD on the way to work. I don't do morning talk radio or watch TV. It's whatever my co-workers happen to mention that I talk about with them. It was some what nice having "anything" other than the weather or HS sports to talk with others about.

    3. Re:Don't you have channel one? by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 1

      I just find it really funny that others would piss away free TVs over minor ads. Maybe if you were rich enough to already be doing that, then you could stand on your high moral horse and do that. It reminds me of those book covers that had local ads on them. Did it piss off some people? Yep. They could go buy their own book covers that had their own or no ads at a higher rate. Most everyone used the "free" ad based book covers and just drew on them.

      I think the main objection was that the teachers could not decide whether or not they wanted the program to be shown. There was no room for teacher discretion, no matter what other educational priorities might be scheduled for the day. State achievement test? Final exams? Too bad, gotta wait until after the mandatory television program..

      Imagine what would happen if the students were suspended for drawing on their book covers. Or if the teachers were disciplined for letting the students do that in class.

  54. yes, yes they are by coryking · · Score: 1

    No other programming language has that kind of streaming video coverage. LOL.

  55. Broadcasting over the Interweb... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hulu.com is going to be broadcasting the inauguration. You can copy the embed code to put on a simple web page or blog at http://www.hulu.com/spotlight/obamapresidency .

    Not very many more details are given, but there are other clips to watch if you're interested.

  56. What we are doing by Kantara · · Score: 1

    We got stuck in a similar issue with our schools. The cafetorium is scheduled for lunch at that time and doesn't have cable anyway. It also serves two different schools that are linked by the cafetorium. The only places that cable exists are in the libraries that can only sit about 30-50 kids each (grade level sizes are 130-150 per grade level and we are talking about 6 grade levels). Some grades wanted to watch live while others wanted to watch later in the day. I solved it with the new web server I was setting up. I am going to stream CSPAN over our network to classrooms with projectors. I am using Quicktime Broadcaster along with QTSS (This is what we're using. You might find an alternative that fits your system better). Quicktime Broadcaster will also record the event at the same time and we will have it available shortly afterwards as a streaming video. I chose CSPAN specifically because of their rebroadcasting rules. This allows us not only to broadcast it but also rebroadcast it for the high school the following week for class use since they have mid terms during the event. The sad thing is that these schools were going to have cable installed in each classroom but the school board at the time worried about students/teachers watching tv all day. On top of that, the newly negotiated cable franchisee they signed just last year included wording that the school/town needed to pay for any new cable installation beyond the one they already have installed. Since we just found out that are state isn't giving $421,000 of the expected subsidy we budgeted in for this fiscal school year, we are sort of in a budget freeze. Work with what you got!

  57. a solution you won't even consider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows Media encoder (free as in beer from MS) receiving the stream and encoding, This can act as a limited streaming media server itself (though I do not know if it will handle 20 streams, most times, non production level MS products only handle 10 concurrent connections) but I believe it can encode and provide the data on demand to windows server with media extensions, which can handle it. Windows media player on the clients in the 20 classrooms to watch. I am sure you have at least one Windows server that can be used for the media server purpose, any decent desktop can be used to run WME. One stream in, multiple streams inside. Problem solved.

    Oh, that's right you can't use this, it involves Windows, and you won't admit that anything involving Windows can solve any problem. Sorry.

  58. Obama by mattwarden · · Score: 1

    Just do the same thing the school did when they showed Bush's inauguration to all the students.

    Oh...

  59. Will They Have To Sing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . that creepy "Yes, we can" song, and will their parents stand along the walls trying to out-smug one another?

  60. logic error by mcmonkey · · Score: 1

    What you're saying is that you didn't vote for the candidate based on his qualifications or experience, but voted on him based on his skin color. That is racism, plain and simple, even if the result was a positive one in your eyes.

    The truth is, Obama's experience growing up in America is affected by his skin color, is affected by the fact that he had parents very different in appearance (aside from the obvious male/female differences). You cannot judge his qualifications and experience without considering race.

    The truth is, while we have come far as a society, we still have a ways to go. This is not an either/or proposition. It would not be fair to exclude race as a consideration in judging Obama as a presidential candidate, any more than it would be fair to judge him solely on race.

    1. Re:logic error by bobobobo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hell I've got karma to burn. I still don't buy that arguement. Why is it a factor? You just kind of danced around the topic saying it mattered, but didn't say why. If you want to vote on a guy because he happens to be black that is obviously your choice. How much farther as a society do we have to go? We just elected a black president, where his being black was a net positive for the guy. Where do we go from here? I'm not being antagonistic, I'm genuinely curious on your thoughts.

  61. That doesn't really solve their problem. . . by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    Because, it appears, that the problem is that they only have enough bandwidth two support one or two copies of the stream. If you have computers in 15 different classrooms, and the teachers load up hulu.com (or cnn.com, msnbc.com, cspan.org, whatever) and play the video, this will result in 15 different copies of the stream being separately downloaded.

    What they need is some sort of multicast-like solution - something where the stream is being downloaded only once. Since the Internet hasn't really adopted multicast (which is really the 'solution' for these types of problems), the next best thing is, as some people have suggested, some sort of 'proxy server', which goes and loads the video, over the T1, then all the classrooms stream the video from that proxy server over the LAN.

    I wonder if VLC could be used to do such proxying (probably depends on the stream format - if it's a 'standard' format without DRM, VLC might be able to handle this)?

  62. Using Flash by pkphilip · · Score: 1

    I have used Adobe Flash Media Encoder for live streaming in large halls.

    The setup I have used is something like this:

    Stuff you need:

    1. Get a decent camera with a firewire port.
    2. Get a laptop with a firewire port. You can use a desktop too. Lets call this the "Encoder Laptop."
    3. Load Adobe Flash Media Encoder on it. It is available free from Adobe.
    4. Get an account with a Flash streaming service such as Serverroom.us (I have used their service and I recommend them).
    5. Get a mixer for handling the audio.
    6. Get a cable for connecting the audio from the mixer to the "Encoder laptop"
    7. Get a firewire cable for connecting the camera to the "Encoder Laptop"

    The process:

    1. Connect the camera to the "Encoder Laptop" using a firewire cable.

    2. Pass the audio from the mixer to the laptop's microphone / line input.

    3. Start up Adobe Flash Media Encoder on this laptop.

    4. Select the camera as the video source. Select the microphone / line in as the audio source.

    5. Set up the address of the streaming server to point to your account with any streaming service (example Serverroom). You can also test this using justin.tv or ustream.tv.

    The other option would be to run your own streaming server locally. You can download the Adobe Flash Media Server or the Wowza Media Server. Red 5 is yet another option but I am not sure how well it handles H.264 of VP6 streams.

    All you need to display the stream would be to get yourself a computer with Flash plugin installed and then you can setup a player such as the JW Player (check on the web) to connect to the streaming server to play the stream.

    1. Re:Using Flash by pkphilip · · Score: 1

      Sorry for replying to myself.

      I thought you were thinking of watching some inauguration (wasn't thinking of the presidential inauguration) and hence all the notes on how to record the video.

      However, if you are just going to be streaming a TV show, it is best to just watch a plain old TV. If you want a really big display, use a projector.

  63. 1 VLC + "N" VNC if no TV? by austingeekgirl · · Score: 1

    This is based on the possibility , puzzling as it might seem that
    1. Broadcast TV won't do it.
    2. Everyone involved is rather lazy
    3. There is at least one ethernet connected computer in each classroom or other viewing spot.
    4. Direct Software cost (like buyng rec-coding stuff, ala adobe/real/microsoft) won't work.
    5. Did I mention lazyness?
    6. Zero to less network background,experience,etc

    So, we have :

    1. One computer that recieves the main stream, (cnn, c-span, etc).
    2. It also runs a VNC server (tight, real, ultra,etc)
    3. All viewing computers run a corresponding VNC client, preferably set to relative low,but tolerable quality mode. preferably connected in viewonly mode (so no 2nd graders pull pranks)
    4. Central computer is in the principal's office and the audio is piped over the public annouce system (VNC not so good for audio)
    Voila, all local area network computers can view (& hear) and only 1 incoming stream is needed.
    Cost: 0 in software, 4-8 hour in client computer setup (teach email giving link to where to download VNC viewer).
    No routing or multicast wizardly and everybody gets to watch and listen (over the PA system)
    Alt solution:

    Every class takes a field trip to the Mall (or wal-mart) electronics sections and watches it on broadcast television there.
    Downside to alt fix, costs fuel.

  64. Streaming the Inauguration in a School? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, I can't believe how nasty and sarcastic many of these replies have been. As an instructor at a state technical college, I can tell you that we do not have TVs in every building not to mention every classroom. Also, the administration has chosen not to set up a viewing in the auditorium because of politics (our governor is republican). I plan on streaming the event in my classroom, but the results will be less than optimal.