I posted part of this here but this thread is much better for my suggestions, and my reaction to the article.
First off, American cell phone providers should be told to fuck off. They should not be included or considered this time around in figuring out what to do to move the spectrum forward in any way, shape, or form. They have their parcel of bandwidth, and I'm not in favor of them getting even more of a chunk until the industry can come up with a national cell standard - one that makes "tri-mode" phones obsolete. They are just wasting space which could be better alotted if they'd just work together for a change.
Next up, we need "3G" radio. Satellite radio isn't local which IMHO is its only drawback. Current regulations and standards for AM/FM could be updated for more efficient use of spectrum. But screw it. Lets just go all out and make an FM2 or something. Yes, I know there is a technology in the works to "digitize" local radio, but they're going about it in a legacy-supporting way. By going about an upgrade in this manner, the FCC is preventing smaller players from going live. UHF is an over-sized playgrond that nobody uses and FM is an overcrowded ClearChannel clusterfuck. The FCC needs to fix it... starting over from scratch. Hell, let ClearChannel keep FM... but give us another way to broadcast and receive local content... digitally. "FM2" should have about 100 low-medium power channels for everyone to use... requiring an FCC permit, but unlike AM/FM, it should have very low or nonexistent broadcaster fees. It should be what LPFM strived to do, only much better.
In that vein of thought, let's go one step further, and give every high school in the nation the option of having one free (no FCC fee) channel of DTV and "FM2."
First off - Over The Air broadcasting is going nowhere. Period. Your local affiliates will exist well into the future. We need local news and local TV competition... and as much as some affiliates suck, they're absolutely necessary.
Now, what about idle TV spectrum? Metro and/or Suburban Area Networking. Meshed, fast(?) bla bla bla. I'm no technical genius, and I'm sure that a good protocol for this doesn't even exist, but remember, 802.11x didn't exist several years ago. At any rate, Make it commercial. Make it public/free. Do both. Do whatever is needed to make it happen. It'll never be a replacement for fiber to the home, but maybe it'll allow for the holy grail of telecom competition... wireless VoIP. Even better, maybe it'll allow everyone to have a small chunk of bandwidth out in BFE rural areas. Who knows. At any rate, something is better than nothing, which is what is going on with the majority of TV spectrum.
Finally - "3G" radio. Satellite radio isn't local which IMHO is its only drawback. Current regulations and standards for AM/FM need to be updated for more efficient use of spectrum. But fuck it. Lets just go all out and make an FM2 or something. Yes, I know there is a technology in the works to "digitize" local radio, but they're going about it in a legacy-supporting way. By going about an upgrade in this manner, the FCC is preventing smaller players from going live. UHF was over-allotted sand box, and FM is an overcrowded ClearChannel clusterfuck... and the FCC needs to fix it... starting over from scratch. Hell, let ClearChannel keep FM... but give us another way to broadcast and receive local content... digitally. "FM2" should have about 100 medium-power channels for everyone to use... requiring an FCC permit, but unlike AM/FM, it should have very low or nonexistent broadcaster fees. It should be what LPFM strived to do, only much better.
Of course, if we had a good Continental Area Network (ho ho!!) we could just use that to power 3G radio. But I think I've already shot at the stars at it is.
I am very thankful! I just wish Apple would have gone into a little more detail regarding the feature.
On a side note, even though my computer is quickly approaching its third birthday, and newer computers may be faster, I still love my 450x2! Anyone that says computers aren't good investments obviously doesn't own Macs...;)
Am I the only one that's bitter from the experience with FCP3 not actually rendering things in real time, going against what it was originally touted to do? This is on a 450 dually mind you, but at the time of FCP3's release, it wasn't too antiquated.
In mass media, you have three options to pay for content.
*Subscription-based ~ All income to the content provider comes from subscriber funding. Depending on the size and scope (and greed) of the network/publication, fees can be extremely high. Examples: HBO or PBS.
*Mixed ~ This includes many American cable channels and magazines. You pay a fee, substantially lower than a subscription-only content provider, because advertizing pays for the majority of the content provider's expenses. Examples: Your local newspaper and MTV.
*Advertizing-only ~ Ads pay for almost, if not all, of the operating expenses for a given content provider. This includes ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX and others. NetZero tried this. Look where they are now.
Seeing that I only have so much money to spend, I'd rather see a handful of ads in order to keep the fees I must pay to recieve content as low as possible. I imagine most of America agrees with me. Do you have a magical forth option? One that doesn't involve taxing consumers?
I could go on to elaborate on how cable/satellite pricing is *too* high, but I'm probably off-topic as it is.
of a friend of mine who still insists on using Netscape 4.7. Why? "Because..."
Nevermind the incompatibilities with a large chunk of the "modern" web... she thinks it's not only stable, but that NS4 is the best for web design debugging.
Colin Crawford, an executive at the publisher IDG and a long-time Apple watcher, said, "It looks very cool and easy to use. It's classic Apple. They've taken a complex environment and made it simple."
Crawford said the service is likely to change significantly in coming months, with price drops and big growth in the library of available music.
"It's a premium service at the moment," he said. "The audience that Apple is after here can afford the iPod and to pay for music like this. But by the time it comes to Windows, it'll be a lot different."
Am I the only one who feels 99 per song is a rip-off? Yes, it is wonderful that you get full rights to the song, but it's AAC... 128k AAC I may add.
Their marketing people now have two problems. 128k AAC is still better than 128k MP3, but how many people are going to believe that when most people assume that a 2ghz Pentium is faster than an AMD processor running at a lower clock speed? Second, who is going to pay 99 for something they can get for free on Gnutella?
Sure, some people will pay for the convenience of downloading very simply from the iTunes Music Store.
I will not be one of those people.
I *still* won't buy unless I know how much money is going to the artists, and how much everyone else gets. I've been boycotting the music industry for almost three years now, and this doesn't look compelling to me. Anyone else agree?
Oh, and before I hear a bunch of people calling me a cheapskate, I have a good collection of DVDs and an Apple Computer. I'd assume most cheapskates have a thriving collection of VCDs and a Windows PC... not to stereotype or anything...:)
I have one on preorder. With that said, I'm very doubtful the iTrip will sound that great. Even the best FM signal can't match that of a Compact Disc, or a DAT for that matter.
Slashdot Mirror
I posted part of this here but this thread is much better for my suggestions, and my reaction to the article.
First off, American cell phone providers should be told to fuck off. They should not be included or considered this time around in figuring out what to do to move the spectrum forward in any way, shape, or form. They have their parcel of bandwidth, and I'm not in favor of them getting even more of a chunk until the industry can come up with a national cell standard - one that makes "tri-mode" phones obsolete. They are just wasting space which could be better alotted if they'd just work together for a change.
Next up, we need "3G" radio. Satellite radio isn't local which IMHO is its only drawback. Current regulations and standards for AM/FM could be updated for more efficient use of spectrum. But screw it. Lets just go all out and make an FM2 or something. Yes, I know there is a technology in the works to "digitize" local radio, but they're going about it in a legacy-supporting way. By going about an upgrade in this manner, the FCC is preventing smaller players from going live. UHF is an over-sized playgrond that nobody uses and FM is an overcrowded ClearChannel clusterfuck. The FCC needs to fix it... starting over from scratch. Hell, let ClearChannel keep FM... but give us another way to broadcast and receive local content... digitally. "FM2" should have about 100 low-medium power channels for everyone to use... requiring an FCC permit, but unlike AM/FM, it should have very low or nonexistent broadcaster fees. It should be what LPFM strived to do, only much better.
In that vein of thought, let's go one step further, and give every high school in the nation the option of having one free (no FCC fee) channel of DTV and "FM2."
Thoughts?
I thought the political parties already had their own channels.
:)
Republicans have Fox News and AM radio.
Democrats have everything else.
First off - Over The Air broadcasting is going nowhere. Period. Your local affiliates will exist well into the future. We need local news and local TV competition... and as much as some affiliates suck, they're absolutely necessary.
Now, what about idle TV spectrum? Metro and/or Suburban Area Networking. Meshed, fast(?) bla bla bla. I'm no technical genius, and I'm sure that a good protocol for this doesn't even exist, but remember, 802.11x didn't exist several years ago. At any rate, Make it commercial. Make it public/free. Do both. Do whatever is needed to make it happen. It'll never be a replacement for fiber to the home, but maybe it'll allow for the holy grail of telecom competition... wireless VoIP. Even better, maybe it'll allow everyone to have a small chunk of bandwidth out in BFE rural areas. Who knows. At any rate, something is better than nothing, which is what is going on with the majority of TV spectrum.
Finally - "3G" radio. Satellite radio isn't local which IMHO is its only drawback. Current regulations and standards for AM/FM need to be updated for more efficient use of spectrum. But fuck it. Lets just go all out and make an FM2 or something. Yes, I know there is a technology in the works to "digitize" local radio, but they're going about it in a legacy-supporting way. By going about an upgrade in this manner, the FCC is preventing smaller players from going live. UHF was over-allotted sand box, and FM is an overcrowded ClearChannel clusterfuck... and the FCC needs to fix it... starting over from scratch. Hell, let ClearChannel keep FM... but give us another way to broadcast and receive local content... digitally. "FM2" should have about 100 medium-power channels for everyone to use... requiring an FCC permit, but unlike AM/FM, it should have very low or nonexistent broadcaster fees. It should be what LPFM strived to do, only much better.
Of course, if we had a good Continental Area Network (ho ho!!) we could just use that to power 3G radio. But I think I've already shot at the stars at it is.
I am very thankful! I just wish Apple would have gone into a little more detail regarding the feature.
;)
On a side note, even though my computer is quickly approaching its third birthday, and newer computers may be faster, I still love my 450x2! Anyone that says computers aren't good investments obviously doesn't own Macs...
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Thank You.
Am I the only one that's bitter from the experience with FCP3 not actually rendering things in real time, going against what it was originally touted to do? This is on a 450 dually mind you, but at the time of FCP3's release, it wasn't too antiquated.
I'm going to sue bananas for copying my personal likeness, if you know what I mean. ;)
Uh... yeah, I got nothin.
As opposed to HTML 4, which is incompatible with CSS, right? /sarcasm
CSS is not HTML, last time I checked. Did something change?
Nevermind the fact that HTML (True HTML, not a hack or Internet Explorer function) doesn't have a tag for indenting... among other problems...
In mass media, you have three options to pay for content.
*Subscription-based ~ All income to the content provider comes from subscriber funding. Depending on the size and scope (and greed) of the network/publication, fees can be extremely high. Examples: HBO or PBS.
*Mixed ~ This includes many American cable channels and magazines. You pay a fee, substantially lower than a subscription-only content provider, because advertizing pays for the majority of the content provider's expenses. Examples: Your local newspaper and MTV.
*Advertizing-only ~ Ads pay for almost, if not all, of the operating expenses for a given content provider. This includes ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX and others. NetZero tried this. Look where they are now.
Seeing that I only have so much money to spend, I'd rather see a handful of ads in order to keep the fees I must pay to recieve content as low as possible. I imagine most of America agrees with me. Do you have a magical forth option? One that doesn't involve taxing consumers?
I could go on to elaborate on how cable/satellite pricing is *too* high, but I'm probably off-topic as it is.
What about ASCII porn? What if it was compressed?
Errm... nevermind.
Talk about Weapons of Mass Destruction...
of a friend of mine who still insists on using Netscape 4.7. Why? "Because..."
Nevermind the incompatibilities with a large chunk of the "modern" web... she thinks it's not only stable, but that NS4 is the best for web design debugging.
Why are replacement lamps for these things so damn expensive?
Colin Crawford, an executive at the publisher IDG and a long-time Apple watcher, said, "It looks very cool and easy to use. It's classic Apple. They've taken a complex environment and made it simple."
Crawford said the service is likely to change significantly in coming months, with price drops and big growth in the library of available music.
"It's a premium service at the moment," he said. "The audience that Apple is after here can afford the iPod and to pay for music like this. But by the time it comes to Windows, it'll be a lot different."
More here: click
Maybe he's right...?
So changing channels during a commercial means I'm a TV thief?
Visa makes money this way. The record companies should too.
If I TiVo a show on TV, am I stealing?
If I download a song, using Gnutella, that is all over the radio, am I stealing?
I guess I should stop liking music released from record companies under the RIAA umbrella then, right? That'll teach 'em.
And if I'm listening to the radio and I switch stations during a commercial break, I'm stealing too, right? What a load of shit.
By the way, the last time I checked, Fords weren't replicated digitally, so your analogy is flawed.
Am I the only one who feels 99 per song is a rip-off? Yes, it is wonderful that you get full rights to the song, but it's AAC... 128k AAC I may add.
:)
Their marketing people now have two problems. 128k AAC is still better than 128k MP3, but how many people are going to believe that when most people assume that a 2ghz Pentium is faster than an AMD processor running at a lower clock speed? Second, who is going to pay 99 for something they can get for free on Gnutella?
Sure, some people will pay for the convenience of downloading very simply from the iTunes Music Store.
I will not be one of those people.
I *still* won't buy unless I know how much money is going to the artists, and how much everyone else gets. I've been boycotting the music industry for almost three years now, and this doesn't look compelling to me. Anyone else agree?
Oh, and before I hear a bunch of people calling me a cheapskate, I have a good collection of DVDs and an Apple Computer. I'd assume most cheapskates have a thriving collection of VCDs and a Windows PC... not to stereotype or anything...
Is the "dial" on 10/20GB iPods a rotary dial if there are no moving parts?
No...
...crack into that T1 and start reselling the service to others via 802.11 or something...
I have one on preorder. With that said, I'm very doubtful the iTrip will sound that great. Even the best FM signal can't match that of a Compact Disc, or a DAT for that matter.
Just remember this...
it's OK to use propaganda aimed at altering one's perception of reality....
but smoking a joint is strictly prohibited.
Nevermind the similarities.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no pothead... but "annoying" doesn't even begin to describe the incongruities in American law.