Slashdot Mirror
PBS Goes Digital
FzZzT writes "This ditty from Wired tells about PBS's move next April, with help from Intel, to digital-only broadcasting. It also tells more about Digital TV, which can now only be seen with a PC and a tuner card. "
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
It was a totally inaccurate statement. There are several digital set top boxes and tuners as well as digital television sets with integrated tuners that can receive the US standard digital broadcasting. Look at any of the major television manufacturers (Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Sharp, etc) and they all have a method of Joe Homeviewer to view digital TV.
Digital TV is the greatest form of TV ever - it's the kind no one can afford to watch. I'd like to see digital be made mandatory now, and make sure it's incompatible with the current variety.
The sheeple would have to start reading books again, and - gasp! - maybe even start thinking again.
Even if PBS does nothing else, it will have been worth the tax dollars.
Guess all you care about it watching drivel like Simpsons reruns. I got Cable for two reasons, one so I could watch the final Season of B5, but mainly so I could get a clearer picture when I watch PBS.
These days I watch very little TV, and over half of it is on PBS. It's all a question of what you like to watch.
I believe the Digital content Rob was referring to is the more computer-related stuff... things like games, interview bits, text transcripts could all be sent with the digital tv setup pbs is employing. The type of digital tv you are talking about is more likely the HDTV setup (wide screen, kickass cd quality audio, high quality digital picture, etc.) Those tv's are indeed commonly available in the States(although pricey) and most major networks are dipping their toes into the HDTV realm, broadcasting digital content in major cities and things like that
BBC America is a cable channel, they show british stuff all the time. So does Comedy Central and CBUT (Vancouver BC).
In Texas no one can hear you smeg.
Well, I think its worth it (our TV tax that is).
Hooray! Pledge drives in digital! :->
Over here in Britain, our 'public broadcasting system', the BBC, has digital TV already, as do all the other usual analogue channels. And we can buy digital TV sets.
We're just so excellent!
> where you didn't pay a damn dime
But I do pay for it. All that advertising costs
money, and the cost ends up in the retail price
of everything I buy.
I pay as much as you do for ABC/NBC/FOX
even though I never watch that crap.
'course, if you don't have cable (and some
of us don't) it's nice to have one decent
channel.
It isn't digital-only, as the
puts it. It's "digital-enhanced", which means
they put out digital stuff as well as
the analog.
-Chuck
yeah fritz is a lamer
dtv clueless
... and over here in Britain... every TV has to be liscensed and the fee is over 100 pounds... for those not obcessed with conversions, that's around $160US or $200CND... and this fee is paid every year... and sure while the BBC puts out a lot of great programs, the very costumed dramas on PBS in fact, [hence the uproar about the lack of nudity a few months back, in show Vanity Fair because it had to show in the US]... PBS is superior to the BBC from the standpoint that it does make most of its operating budget from voluntary contributions (not tax dollars as one might think)... Sadly I must admit, I watch Channel 4 far too much, and so still watch commercials... so I'll shut up now...
note: Aussie Soaps does not good tv make... Neighbors... twice a day on BBC1... what are they thinking?
HDTV is a quasi-digital format that should have been shelved years ago. But too much has been invested in it by people who do that sort of stuff to scrap it and move on to the true digital realm.
It can't be Lister waking up. Lister is a hologram. Perhaps you mean Reg(?)
Actually according to a TV program the other night it's more like 1 million. Your point is...??
Rombu wrote:
PBS is an anachronism these days, since you can get the same types of programming over a number of widely available channels (Discovery, A&E, etc..) PBS was created to broadcast these types of programs and other things that "commercial" networks wouldn't touch. With the advent of cable and satellite we have seen that there is very little that commercial interests won't broadcast. This seems like a last desparate gasp of a dying system to try to draw attention to itself.
First off, PBS uses almost none of your tax dollars. Their federal and state funding has been cut so many times it's not funny. The total line in their financial report for grants is about $41 million of a $448 million budget. That's less than 10% of their expenses, and less than a single tank costs these days.
For that money, they not only support great programming (such as Sesame Street and Nova), but they also spearhead development projects that you never see directly, such as this digital television program, the TeacherSource program, which offers video content for our schools. They also have an impressive Adult Literacy and GED program called LiteracyLink. They have a neat program to support distance learning colleges. They also offer, in conjunction with the MIT Business College The Business Channel, which many prominent companies subscribe to.
This digital television system is not a waste of tax dollars, nor is it a last desperate gasp of a dying network. It is another step forward for an organization that has long been at the core of our country's education infrastructure.
----
Open mind, insert foot.
First of all, that's the Declaration of Independence you're (mis)quoting. Learn some history.
Secondly, Free Quality Television Programming is not a constitutionally guaranteed right. Nobody is claiming that it is. Either are national parks, interstate highways, or schools, but nobody is suggesting abolishing those. It's merely a good idea that receives less than $10/year of your money.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Digital Red Green: Find out what those controls on Harold's keyboard *really* do. Also get .MPG videos of outtakes from "Adventures with Bill".
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
Isn't a "ditty" a song?
Anyway, I want to hear less about HDTV broadcasts and more about HDTV sets available for purchase CHEAP.
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
At least not much. Most Public Broadcasting funding these days (~60% IIRC) comes from "corporate sponsors", i.e. advertisers.
Johnson (?) created the program but didn't fully fund it. Reagan cut the funding way back in the mid 80's.
--
"Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say." - Rob Malda
Secondly, it isn't the government's job to entertain people, nor is that public broadcasting's job. Plenty of dollars flow through commercial broadcasting, and commercial broadcasting sucks to the Nth degree as a result (chasing after the lowest common denominator of everything); public broadcasting (in the US) was designed to provide a telecommunications infrastructure to public education, and to provide programming (news, documentaries, essays, science, culture, etc) that wasn't -- and isn't -- being provided by the commercial entities.
But irate politicians, almost from the beginning, angered by the news coverage, have, over and over again, cut funding, or made public broadcasters beg for money from its viewers or from corporations, making US public broadcasting mediocre at best. Public radio and TV is now about Lawrence Welk reruns, wimpy classical music playlists, and de-clawed information programming; public broadcasting in its current, messed-up state can be (and is) emulated by cable entities and commercial radio stations, yes, but with better funding, PBS/CPB/NPR could put its commercial-space emulators to shame.
In a country where "culture" means mass-produced corporate crap, and "news" means mass-produced corporate infotrivia, and "education" means mass-produced crappy consumers, it might behoove Americans to divert some War Department chump change into a mucho beefed-up PBS.
Not that it matters to you, of course; you'd rather keep public broadcasting's $1 for yourself. Don't spend it all in one place.
--
--
=8^
The reason why cash-starved public broadcasting sucks is because they have to resort to begathons (which is itself a sign that you Philistines have won). These stations are almost as commercial as the commercial media to which they were supposed to be an alternative. I don't think you bothered to read my previous post in its entirety.
If enough people can't get together to pay for cruise missiles, then maybe we don't deserve to have them available either. Let's pass the hat and see who'll pitch in.
--
--
=8^
I don't know of any other channel that shows British comedies.
--
Timur Tabi
Remove "nospam_" from email address
>2) Digital Red Dwarf: After being frozen in space
>for three million years, David Lister wakes up to
>find that Holly's Intel chip has corrupted,
>leaving it with an IQ of 60.
That's okay, they can just overclock Holly and fix everything back up! They actually did that in an episode, funny. Increased intelligence, decreased lifespan.
With the advances in DLP technology, by the middle of next year you should be able to buy a sub-$2000 video projector that will handle HDTV and NTSC. I've seen demos of 1280 x 1024 DLP machines, and TI is supposed to start selling a 1600 x 1200 chip in about three months. Slap a lens, a light source, and a decoder on that, and you have a 2000 lumen HDTV projector smaller than a lunch box...
For current comparison, I saw an LCD-based projector from Toshiba (the TLP 650) at InfoComm last week... pushing a 1080 line HDTV signal onto a 20' wide screen at about 1000 lumens. $9995, and it was about as big as a large laptop.
For home use, if you're sticking to 1080 HDTV, there are some LCD projectors out there right now that run for $5000 or less. You'd just need a decoder.
Europe's had what... 4+ Digital channels for about a year now? Digital Set top boxes being given away with your breakfast cereals left right and center. :)
As soon as they start giving cash away, I'll take one.
America is sooooo backwards.
Deleted
This looks like an excellent broadcast medium for arts and sciences in our homes; however, I am worried that if Intel is the only one sponsoring this technology, it may become forgotten. Hopefully, there will be multiple vendors that have significant capital and interest to push this method of media into the market. PBS has provided many wonderful programs througout the decades and this technology could provide a great evolutionary step in education. I just hope there are some dedicated people who will back this and ensure its diversity in the market.
I haven't watched television in a long time, but I do remember Nova. It would be great watching the space program in its full digital glory right from the satellites cameras and obtain a more personalized view of space and physics. This could be possible with high bandwidth PBS television!
I disagree with PBS being a waste of tax dollars. I don not receive cable television and am unable to watch Discovery, A&E, etc. PBS is public and free and I can watch it from a rooftop arial.
I used to subscribe to cable for $60 a month with all the channels. After one month, all I was seeing was the same repeats of violence and mayhem. PBS is more independent from ratings and more donation driven. The quality seems to survive.
And don't forget the constitutional part about public forests and parks, paved roads, space technology, and consumer protection to name a few. The government is a big business and looks out after our interests, good and bad. PBS just seems like a good byproduct of government pork in my opinion. Bad pork might include the NSA and other nonsense.
The market handles ABC, MSNBC, CBS, and FOX. I have never seen so much shooting, decapitation, mutilation, and disregard for other's civil rights, all from the market you suggest. These are not only on late night shows, but also on Saturday morning cartoons. I don't have anything against freedom of the press and speech, but its just when its *all* crap that I get pissed off. PBS seems to raise the standard of broadcast television and I feel it currently deserves support.
Granted, the government is big brother, and is always trying to justify its ever increasing payrolls to tax our paychecks. 50% of what I make is pretty steep and I see much of it that can be cut. For me, it seems like PBS is doing good maintaining a community focus and is a good value for what I pay.
But that's just my opinion. Taxes are high and it would be a good idea to just cut the crap. I feel I could do a better job at spending that 50% than the government does, but the IRS would disagree with me in a most unpleasant way.
Hauppauge is coming out with a new HDTV tuner for the PC, with an expected list price of $500. Adding the card to your existing PC(and maybe a bigger monitor) is a lot less than the current sets.
This makes one wonder, if Hauppauge can come out with an HDTV tuner card for only $500, then why are the HDTV tuner's for the current sets going for $1500??? (yep - the tuner is sold seperately on a lot of the current HDTV sets)
Hopefully the OS/2 drivers for Hauppauge's WinTV card can be updated to support the new tuner :-)
TI's DLP page has a lot of info. We've got a DLP(Digital Light Processing) projector at work and I am very impressed with the image it produces. Much cleaner than an LCD projector.
"Widely available channels" for those willing to pay the ever-rising cost for cable. On the other hand, if all you have are the broadcast networks PBS is a real asset. As for the "last desparate gasp" crap, PBS has been a leader in bringing new technologies to the market for years. This is just another example.
"I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it." Be's Jean-Louis Gass
(I knew I should have hit preview first!)
"I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it." Be's Jean-Louis Gass
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
No, you do not have Digital TV. If you had you would not require a decoder box. You would simply plug the arial coax cable directly into the TV and that would be that. You require a decoder box because there must be something that converts the incoming digital signal (an MPEG-2 transport stream) into an analogue format suitable for your TV.
The UK managed to be the first country to begin transmitting a TERRESTRIAL digital signal. Meaning you can pick up the signal using a decoder box and a standard arial. Everyone has been transmitting digital satellite signals for years.
Digital TV in the US means that not only is the signal digital, but so is the TV. The TV becomes one large computer monitor and is able to process the digital MPEG-2 signal itself. Note: these sets are expensive as they are all HD (High Definition). SD (Standard Definition) digital TV sets are also possible and should be a lot cheaper, however they will look like standard TV sets (abiet with a much higher picture quality) and not the widescreen 16x9 HD format.
As far as the Interactive TV component is concerned, the UK uses a terrible monstrosity called MHEG. I nearly went mad after spending over six months writing an interactive Stock application in it.
I followed the " Read more about Digital TV" link and the subsequent link to the article " A Frim Grip on Digital TV". It discusses a Gore Commission and it's recommendations that the Federal Government regulate what is shown on the air.
The best quote is near the end: "Although the Media Institute knew Gore's handpicked panel members might be inclined to endorse regulation, it found the final report particularly disappointing. The institute hoped the commission would look at the original basis for government regulation -- spectrum scarcity -- and decide it doesn't apply to digital TV."
An interesting side note, if I understood it correctly, Gore does not recommend allowing free air time for political candidates. I can't decide if this hurts or helps him.
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
~afniv
"Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
Richard von Weizs
Hmmm... With everything going Digital, I'm glad I haven't bothered to buy a new TV set yet.
i think i'll stick with my little 13" set until the prices drop on the HDTV buggers...
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
Discovery and A&E do not show anything suitable for my children (3 years and 10 months respectively). While the content of childrens programming on other networks can be good, the content of the adverts is totally unacceptable.
:)
You tell 'em!
My house doesn't have cable because it's too expensive to pay for when all i can get is junk. i have two boys, ages 2 years and 4 months. the two year old loves Sesame Street, Zoom, Arthur, and a few others that are shown during the day.
I'll take PBS over cable any day of the week. i can't wait to get an HDTV... then (based on what i've read about it) i won't have to worry about crappy reception...
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
"Ken Starr's four year investigation of Clinton cost about as much money as a year of PBS. Can you actually tell me with a straight face that it did more good for the US than PBS does?"
Yes, I guess we should just admit that we have no concept of legality and any elected official can commit purjury openly, in otherwords, become a criminal, and face no punishment for it. Why even spend money to make an APPEARANCE that elected officials aren't above the law? We all know that they are perfectly above the law because they are the ones that hold the power of coercion and they can buy whoever they need to, or get them killed as a last resort (Mary Mahoney).
The government is only good for breaking your legs and then giving you crutches and saying how
you "needed" them to come along and help you.
It was wasted because the senators refused to do what was right even though they were handed all of the evidence on a silver platter..they decided to keep a federal criminal in office. Purjury is purjury.
This is kind of like you complaining that the money spent investigating a serial killer was wasted and never should have been spent because the jury wimped out and didn't convict him or her.
It's a stupid and brainless cliche..black helicopters would attract much more attention then it would be worth.
No...if they were to "come for me" (and I'm sure they've got better things to do right now), it would look like just another routine break in or just another mugging, done by people that look (and act) like routine criminals. Except I'd be dead..and if they were in a real hurry, they'd forget to rob me of anything.
What, you think that political enemies that have powerful ammunition against the current leadership DON'T get murdered?
I donno for faulty towers, maybe he could have a shitty web portal or something? =P
hehe
www.fawltyportal.com =)
"Computers will never truly be free until the last windows user is strangled with the entrails of the last mac user."
LOL! Shareware reminders for PBS!
Beep!
You have not sent in your registration for Red Dwarf. Don't you feel guilty? Please send $20 to PBS and we'll send you a 1024-bit key that disables this popup for 3 months. We now return to the regularly scheduled program.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Speaking as a Brit. I think you will find that the majority of UK residents are happy to pay for the exceptional quality of the BBC and the luxury of not having you favorite progs. screwed up with commercials.
I have to agree. If I see one more UFO special or "Cars of Tomorrow"-type show on Discovery or TLC I think my head is going to explode! I like a lot of the stuff they have, but even there a lot of it caters to the lowest common denominator. There's plenty of stuff that PBS shows that they would never show.
Perhaps he was referring to Starr, not ABC. He was forced to pay for it.
One minor details that you pretty much glossed over (you don't happen to work for Sky do you?).
Sky Digital requires a satelite dish, On Digital does not, all you need is a TV aerial. What that means to Joe Public is that if you do not own your property (which I don't, like one helluvalot of people in London, I rent) you almost certainly will not be able to put up a dish to get Sky Digital.
Hence, people who rent will probably go for On Digital. Like I have.
Yes, Discovery, Learning Channel, A&E etc have a lot of good stuff, and we usually watch those in preference to PBS or (ugh) network TV in the evenings (with exceptions).
But for little kids, PBS rules. Sesame Street and stuff like Shelly T. Turtle kept our daughter (and now our boys) educated and entertained without constant commercial interruptions for the latest Mattel marvel or sugar frosted glucose cereal. Now she routinely watches Bill Nye the Science Guy and Magic Schoolbus.
Around here the local PBS stations also routinely broadcast more targeted educational stuff in the wee hours of the morning for teachers to tape and use in their classes.
Yeah, the libertarian in me says that shouldn't be paid for by unwilling taxpayers, but the concerned parent says "cool". And I do fork over some bucks come pledge season.
If PBS were to go subscription-only (via cable and satellite) I'd pay for it, but I like the idea that it's available to those that don't have access (for physcial or financial reasons) to cable or satellite - at least the educational kids programming.
-- Alastair
If you're not already doing this... tape those shows!
We've got hours and hours worth of Sesame St, Bill Nye, Shelly T Turtle, Arthur, Magic Schoolbus, and yes, even some Barney. Our daughter (4-1/2) grew up on that stuff (plus Disney videos and a lot of being read to). Kids love to watch the same videos over and over (and over, and over...) again -- they pick up new things each time, and also gives them a feeling of mastery that they can "predict" what's going to happen next. (It's the same with favorite books.) We also found that, with my daugher anyway, they go through phases. For a few weeks all she watch was Arthur. Then just Magic Schoolbus. And so on. Then she'll rediscover something she hadn't watched in a long time.
My boys (twins, 8 months) aren't quite into any of that stuff yet. We have a couple of 'baby videos' -- music and shapes/toys/etc which help us keep our sanity at times. We do limit how much the kids watch TV, and we hardly watch it ourselves, but it has its uses.
-- Alastair
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/showcase/education/ wgbh/index.html
Maybe I am not understanding but what will become of my old television? Will PBS be taken away from me so that I have to make a several THOUSAND dollar investment just to watch something that is supposed to be FREE.
This is the same principle why such things as hotmail are just plain stupid. If I purtchess an account (email) from an isp why would I need something like that. I get more options. I get to control what I recieve. I can filter as I choose. and as well as having control as to how email is read.
If this is the case I will just invest the money for the FREE pbs access and just pay for a top of the line computer to access the net 24/7/365 and do things that way.
The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic --Joseph Stalin
so I assume that this will not cause me to spend more of my money and I can instead spend it on what I want?
The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic --Joseph Stalin
Not typically most of our cost of living expences are far less than that of Europe. Most of what occurs in Europe occurs maybe before America because most people have some more money to spend on experimental products. What I think is that it is just the speed in which people find out about something and think that it's a good idea to change. Not all ideas are so good remember DIVX?
The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic --Joseph Stalin
PBS is an anachronism these days, since you can get the same types of programming over a number of widely available channels (Discovery, A&E, etc..) PBS was created to broadcast these types of programs and other things that "commercial" networks wouldn't touch. With the advent of cable and satellite we have seen that there is very little that commercial interests won't broadcast. This seems like a last desparate gasp of a dying system to try to draw attention to itself.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Discovery and A&E do not show anything suitable for my children (3 years and 10 months respectively
Jeezus! What kind of programming is appropriate for a 10 month old anyway? Damn, isn't that a little young to be using the TV as a babysitter?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
...with on digital you don't have to
-plug the box into your phone line so it can phone up Sky and tell them what you watch.
-give any money to Murdoch
My tax dollars go to PBS too. At least you get a vote to decide how they get spent.
;-).
#include "taxation_without_representation_rant.h"
Discovery and A&E do not show anything suitable for my children (3 years and 10 months respectively). While the content of childrens programming on other networks can be good, the content of the adverts is totally unacceptable. Like the ad last year that had Santa on the rocket powered sleigh and the red battle armor. Almost ruined my 3 year old's Christmas. We fired a babysitter because we caught her watching WB while the kids were in the room.
That's why I donate additional money to PBS. I just wish that once you give them money you could turn off the appeals and go back to the programming (maybe with multicasting
--
E_NOSIG
I wouldn't read Lord of the Rings to either of them yet. When they get old enough to appreciate it, I will. Currently we read a lot of Thomas the Tank Engine (the Rev. Awdry originals, not the Britt Alcroft crap) and Arthur.
Just because the TV is on does not make it a babysitter. Children can learn from TV, a particular point of PBS. On Monday we had a child development person from KTCA (Twin Cities PBS station) to our house to talk to our daycare provider, some of her other parents, my sister-in-law and other friends about how to use TV as an education aid. No doubt this is a flagrant misuse of Rombuu's money, but if it reduces "TV babysitting" I think it's worthwhile.
--
E_NOSIG
I'm betting my children's emotional and intellectual wellbeing on it. Do you know of higher stakes?
Children are supposed to giggle. I would hate to live in your world, where there are no more discoveries no more misteries [sic]. I still discover stuff every day, and there are many mysteries (like the 2.3 Linux kernel).
Small children do not learn on a 101/201/301 schedule. They are constantly relearning everything they know. they need a balance of challenge, guidance and passive learning, as well as giggling and running around in circles until they fall over.
--
E_NOSIG
A learning experience involves taking a 12 guage to the TV
And the precise lesson here would be what? That if you don't like something it's OK to destroy it? That violence solves problems? The nasty dinosaur won't get you so long as you have a gun handy?
Speaking as the possessor of an extremely good education, it's overrated. Being able to solve problems is not as important as being able to identify which problems are important in the first place. If you cannot realize that my family, where the children watch 75% less television that the national average and 100% less commercial television, is not the problem, then maybe you are too educated.
--
E_NOSIG
Quite correct.
I believe tax money funds CSPAN as well, which was wall-to-wall impeachment at the time.
--
E_NOSIG
You lot can only watch Digital TV on a computer? That seems very odd; normally Britain lags a little behind the US, technology-wise. Here in the UK, there are plenty of Digital TV decoders and IDTVs in the shops, and the broadcasters are all jumping on the bandwagon and launching digital channels as fast as they can.
they say 'it is possible because digital signal
takes less bandwidth than the anolog'. This is BS.
Digital signal takes *more* bandwidth the
analog. Substantially more. But then we can do
some fancy things like MPEG-2 compression, and
that's how we can keep the bandwidth requirements
for digital video within the reasonable bounds.
Grunt. Oink, oink.
face recognition. So guess what good luck with your HD/ID/Non-analog-TV's.
Oh by the way digital editing is so much easier than analog. Have fun.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
effluvium. Ever see Dark City prime time when people are home? How about Brazil? And oh what was that, only Showtime has the balls to show Lolita?
C'mon. Really, go drown in Dawson's Creek or dehydrate crying over 7th Heaven.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
You are under arrest for failure to read JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings to your child, negligent TV babysitting known to be a danger to children, and pretty much everyday ordinary moron behaviour. Let's go now. It's over.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
Barney causes children to simply waste their brains giggling. A learning experience involves taking a 12 guage to the TV taking your child to a library and challenging it actively. Passive learning is impossible at this stage. Once the child has grown after continous support challenge and guidance passive learning will happen because the child already has a decent foundation. At that point there will be no more discoveries no more misteries simply the power to act, or not act, and self-respect and confidence. Happy giggling and passive training do not result in an education.
Children need to play and try different solution to puzzles not be indoctrinnated by some Purple moron.
How much do you want to bet on this?
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
House call?
All right, may be you're light years ahead of most parents. However I'm warning you as a guy who's shit scared of ever bringing a child into the world and for the child's sake I'm more scared of this than contracting some venereal disease.
Myself I have a few things I definitely owe to my parents. They waited till their mid 30's before they had kids. Biggest favor they ever did us.
Thanks to them I was programming computers when I was 8. They didn't give me a computer late in my teens so I could just do my homework. They had better foresight than that. I'm involved in international projects on the net thanks to them. I was never sent to summer camp, never to sunday school. They gave me everything.
Most parents can't get past the hype and give their kids a solid outlook.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
OK...Fair enough
I know the first thing people in this world need to do is learn to laugh. I was mentioning the fact that from my view of the show, it looked like a diversion to keep kids busy not an involved educational program.
IANAP, but I can tell you Barney is no comparison to Sesame Street. At least if they watch that they won't end up like some people I know will swear to you if you ask for directions that you cannot get there from here.
But even Sesame Street aside, they need to be in the loop with the world (without necessarily imitating) as soon as possible. Of course without scaring them to death. This is earth in 1999 not Eden or some other paradise.
I'll concede that I'm somewhat paranoid when I hear officials talk of calculators for third graders. That's like the worst one of all the techno-future-got-to-keep-up babble. So maybe I lost it when I read B-a-r-n-e-y.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
I'm not afraid of Barney, it's what he does that scares me when we talk about where kids are going. I myself have given up TV. I only watch socially.
As for identifying which problems are important, that's precisely what I'm getting at. I really don't give a crap that Ben Stein knows what root turpentine is extracted from. Actually, I do care. It scares me that anyone would waste their time on such trivia.
I have a stinking feeling that this world is going of the deep end, and that the answer is right under our noses. If only more parents got together and started www.edu.org and perhaps created a public fund from which to pay teachers. The fact is that besides the gyms and libraries buildings are obsolete.
One note on commercial TV, I do have to agree with the sentiment that Buffy does represent high school, though I rarely watch since it's stuck in reruns. (Granted I wish to see a return to text adventures that have the depth and interactivity of novels.)
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
Watched BBC 5 recently, I dont think even Digital TV can improve the quality of that channel. ;)
Seriously though, the structure and size of our public television systems are so different that they can't even be compared. You can buy digital TVs here too but only a few markets have digital TV yet.
+-------+ between the wish and the thing lies the world - All the Pretty Horses
Basil Fawlty goes ballistic as hordes of geeks & nerds invades the hotel for a Linux convention ...
- - -
6) Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy: A platetwide cluster of Linux PCs solve the question of Life, The Universe and Everything in, say, 20 minutes.
- - -
I do not understand the point of a 'free' programming service going to a format which makes it inaccessible for an immense amount of people. This is akin to requiring you fly to D.C. to apply for welfare. if you had the cash, why would you bother?
-Those who never speak are never understood.
Those who speak frequently are misunderstood frequently.
Well, Sky has over 200 channels (off of one satellite, Astra 2), and that is just England, Ireland and that place just to the north, um, Scotland.
Germany must have around the same amount of programming available on Astra 1 (where the Sky analogue broadcasts are). France, Italy and Spain are getting into DTV as well, and must have several hundred channels between them.
The only problem is that the companies give you the equipment, in return for subscription. Sky do say that they will be updating the whole system in 2 years to a much higher spec. Probably the same system with built in HD, PSX2 and more...
There are 8 satellites at the Astra 1 position, each providing 16 analogue channels (3-7 digital channels), giving a possible 900+ channels from one little satellite dish! Astra 2 only has 1 or 2 satellites in orbit, and provides 200+ channels already, a lot of them high quality.
I might be a little wrong with the details, but I think they are correct.
Most people don't know this, but PBS broadcasts data in their signal. The technology is similar to Intel's Intercast. Anyone with a TV capture card that supports VBI can retrieve this -- And it's as fast as all get out. I use it to grab video clips from Fox News.
Unfortualtely, it's in affiliation with a commercial company (WaveTop).
Wrong! you can buy decoder boxes for your TV you NEVER needed a PC for it. And most new TVs, wide-screen or not can do widescreen for DVD.
I guess Schoolhouse Rock confused you at some point, all those dancing scrolls look pretty much the same. But some of them are different. The one that includes the "Life, Liberty, and Private Property^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h The Pursuit of Happiness" is essentialy the press release of the revolution, and has no legal weight. Except when those evil liberal Supreme Court justices get into original intent arguments.
But, as for me, I have a bit more trouble with the corruption and local monopoly stuff that go with cable (go to the library and read the microfiche of the news stories surrounding your town's cable negotiations) than I do with the Feds allocating chump change to PBS.
Fear my wrath, please, fear my wrath?
Homer
We apologize for the inconvenience.
Just had to defend the CBC a little...
"Virtually indistinguishable from American networks"?
Maybe in the year or so where I haven't tuned in very much it's gotten a lot worse, but I doubt it.
1. It's free.
2. They show Canadian news (better canadian news than american)
3. Canadian content (This hour has 22 minutes, small time movies, hockey games, etc.)
4. Most of the 8 minutes advertisement time is used up informing us what else is shown on CBC.
ok... so it shows the Simpsons and various other american shows, but it is very, very different than an american network.
Screw that! PBS shows Monty Python... No other station has quality humor like that.
I will give up my Python when you pry it from my cold dead fingers!
Tell a man that there are 400 Billion stars and he'll believe you
1) Digital Sesame Street: Come play with Oscar in his Recycle Bin. Watch hilarity ensue when Elmo fubars the Linux kernel!
2) Digital Red Dwarf: After being frozen in space for three million years, David Lister wakes up to find that Holly's Intel chip has corrupted, leaving it with an IQ of 60.
3) Digital Fawlty Towers: I can't think of anything. Suggestions are welcome. The show rocks, though.
4) Digital Mr. Rogers: "It's a beautiful day in the Network Neighborhood..."
5) Digital Inspector Poirot: Watch the Inspector sniff out security holes in his Windows NT server.
-
The "Stop wasting my tax dollar" point of view from Americans ticks me off. You don't realize what a gem you have. PBS has intelligent programming, teriffic movie features (Dickens' "Great Expectations" for example), and should be supported more. Do you really think that eight minutes out of every half-hour you watch TV should be devoted to ads?
Flame away, docu-drama fans.
Wah!
The only point I'd like to keep is this: The CBC has been going more and more in the direction of commercial stations. The advertisement quantity is nearly as large, and has been criticised in The Globe and Mail on numerous occasions.
PBS, though it has to resort to those damned telethons, has few advertisements besides "This program brought to you by...", and is altogether more sound, no?
Once again, good points.
Wah!
Um, not quite correct on the "only watch on PCs" bit...here's some stuff you might NOT know, tho...
1. Those nifty little personal satelite dishes (DirectTV, Primestar, etc.) are digital signals. How do YOU think there getting 200+ channels in there? Check DirectTV's own tech page
2. YOUR cable company may be getting digital signals! There's a "package" from TCI (or whatever there called these days (Liberty Digital, I think?) called HITS (Head-end In The Sky). What it does is it "takes" three or six or so analog channels, and sends digital signals in place of them. Then, the DIGITAL set top reads the signal, and translates it into a channel that you "see". See the HITS tech page