I try to filter advertising out of everything I encounter. I use Firefox with the adbocker at home and work; before Firefox I used AdSubtract with IE and Netscape. I rarely watch 'live' TV - I prefer to watch DVDs (temporary copies with advertising removed). The TV shows I do watch I have recorded and then removed the commercials (with TMGEnc MPEG editor). I remove pages from magazines when both sides are ads. I want content without the crap. If reasonable, I will pay for content without advertising.
The whole idea of advertising, IMHO, is to bully your brain and thought processes into buying and/or doing whatever is being advertised. If there is a way into your brain, an advertiser will find it and exploit it. If I want to buy something I want to know that I need that thing and not an implanted desire to possess it. My brain is my playground, I don't need advertisers dumping their toxic wastes into it.
The power-that-be would probably still hate it, but an idea would be to keep your recordings of shows. You could then buy the DVD sets of the shows and destroy your recordings. Everybody would get what they wanted, everybody should be satisfied.
With this update the old VCRs I have laying around are now more functional than a TIVO. At least with a VCR I know that if I go away for a month the shows I want recorded will still be waiting for me. This update for TIVO is a death toll for what was once a very promising device/company.
Deterrents rarely work usually due to the reasoning of the mind. Most of the people that you want to deter from these criminal actions firmly believe they will not get caught, so the potential punishment does-/will-not relate to them. They believe they have covered their tracks, have impenetrable security, and/or loyal allies. Combined with egos that believe law enforcement personal are stupid and lazy and that the target(s) of the attack(s) have insufficient security - the deterrent factor is practically useless.
Some deterrent punishments should be applied by law to discourage would-be criminals, but our best strategy is a good defense combined with a good societal education (teach young children about crime and punishment - make them understand that engaging in criminal activity will result in capture and they will be punished severely).
This could be good for Netflix customers, if they work out the techical and structure issues.
Personally, I want to be able to download certain shows and get the rest in standard DVD format. For example, if I rent an MST3K show then I don't care where I watch it - computer or TV - chances are good that I will only watch it once. A movie like Million Dollar Baby I want to watch on the large screen TV with the whole audio setup.
If they let me specify what shows to download vs. mailed DVDs then I will be very happy with the service. Otherwise I'll just stick to mailed DVDs that I can watch wherever I want.
I find it interesting that the chief difference in the UK vs. USA reaction to terrorism is where the UK [proposes to] increase security measures, the USA reduces civil rights and almost ignores increases in security.
Camera based systems are useful and cheap as you suggest. But in the states there are limitations to usefulness. An example - when the image(s) are being reviewed there are limitations to the amount of modification that can be applied to make the plate readable. You cannot use a Photoshop type app to zoom and filter the image until the plate is readable. Another issue is camera aim - not every vehicle has the plate in the same location. Not every vehicle has the plate in the correct location.
The idea of using RFID was borne from watching workers trying to read vehicle plates from images. The images were rejects from a software app that was designed to read plates. The whole plate reading task is painfully complex and using some tech like RFID would greatly simplify the process.
Instead of trying to remove driver control, a better idea would be to just track the vehicle and send applicable fines.
A vehicle could have under-engine/cockpit RFID transponder that would be read by road sensors. The vehicle RFID would transmit the vehicle ID as well as that of the driver (driver would have logon to vehicle to start/drive it). The vehicle passing over sensors would be recorded on central systems and the vehicle speed calculated and recorded. Regular audits on the central system records would produce speeding violations and tickets/fines would be printed and sent to the responsible driver (or vehicle owner).
If you change the laws so that the fines are based on a fixed amount plus a percentage of the driver/vehicle-owner gross income then people might start believing the speed limit is the maximum, not minimum, allowed speed.
The Supreme Court today ruled that local governments may seize private property for corporate redevelopment. This overturns the long held rule that local governments can only seize private property (with compensation) for redevelopment into the public common.
In other words - not only are you not safe in your own home, but your home itself is no longer safe from government/corporate greed.
I think another few nails have been pounded into the coffin containing the ideal of the United States of America. An ideal where citizens rights come before government and long before corporate abilities. We the citizens of these United States of America have all but lost the war of our rights.
--- If Firefox is so damn good, then why can't I use copy-n-paste in it...
The lack of a laugh track may be making it hard for you to decide when to laugh.
You may have a point. However, the other three sitcoms I watch, Family Guy, American Dad & South Park, all do not have a laugh track and I have no problems finding the humour. I can't remember if Scrubs and/or Malcolm in the Middle have laugh tracks. The only other humourous show is The Daily Show and that either has an audience and/or laugh track.
Compared to Monty Pythons Flying Circus and Fawlty Towers, The Office is about as funny as watching paint dry (on a rainy day in South Florida). The more I think about it, the more I think that Are You Being Served and Keeping Up Appearances are better than The Office.
Some of the problems with The Office is that the timing is off. Instead of the pattern of setup->payoff, setup->payoff, simple-setup-involving-previous-setups-and-charact er-personalities->payoff, The Office relied on setup->nothing, setup->nothing, obscure-complicated-reference-to-something-only-a- UK/EU-citizen-might-realize-as-a-setup->payoff->ex planation-for-non-UK/EU-citizens(maybe).
Come to think of it, the Dilbert cartoon was/is funnier than The Office.
These drives would be good if you could take your favourite OS and a few applications and throw them on the drive with the directive that any files whose data frequently changes would be written to a traditional mechanical drive. Imagine boot time similar to resuming from standby, or the speed of level loads of your favourite games.
I have a problem with this last part. The citizen interest over corporate.
I am just stating my opinion that the law should not favor corporate interests over the interests of citizens. Corporations should not only provide income to itself and shareholders, but should also be responsible for any employees. Going further, corporations should be responsible for legal aspects of products & services produced and the local, national, & international environments it is affecting.
If a corporation breaks a law, the corporation should be fined enough to send a clear message to the CXXs and any shareholders that the offending behavior will not be tolerated. Far too often corporations are given small fines that do not discourage offensive behavior.
Copyright law affects everyone for good or bad. I can create something and copyright it JUST like a big corporation can. The law applies to me just as equally as to them.
At this moment and for the foreseeable future, yes. I would greatly like to see the copyright system changed as stated in the previous message.
But without getting into an argument if copyright is right or wrong (and this is not the thread for it really) - presently it is the law and we are discussing penalties.
I have noticed that I have wandered off-topic a bit here. My apologies.
I think we have both made our cases for penalty here, and I think we both understand each others position. Let me know if the case is otherwise.
You seem to have emitted the fact that the single mother on welfare shouldn't have been blatantly breaking the law if she didn't want a fine.
People are only human and occasionally break laws by accident. Drivers can get caught up in the mad rush on the roadways and exceed speed limits because of conformity. Dozens of reasons exist for breaking speed laws, some offenders are blatant in their disregard, others are accidental.
In addition to this, the law states that you wouldn't lose your car if it's the sole mode of supporting ones self.
Yes, some/most states/communities have hardship clauses that an offender can use to continue driving. I was making a point and didn't see the need to stretch the verbage to cover all cases.
I am an independent with progressive liberal ideals. The current administration causes me much grief over policies and laws passed & proposed, as well as the continued increase in corporate influence.
We are talking about penalties for breaking the law - i have no sympathy. It sucks for the person who has to sell his life - but he shouldn't have started an uploading fest.
I also have little sympathy for criminals - as long as the law that was broken was just, fair, non-discriminatory, placed citizen interests above corporate, and any punishment dealt be fair to victim and offender (except in certain cases, both victin and offender should be able to resume a fair life after the penalty phase has passed).
Copyright law in this country started out on the correct path, but has now been side-tracked onto a path of corporate/industry dominance. The time used for protection of works needs to be dropped back to original levels, and corporations/industries should be limited in copyright ownership. As pertaining to music, the individuals involved in writing the music, writing the lyrics (if any), studio performance, live performance, should own the copyrights and should have ability to license to corportations/industry. The actual people that are copyright owners should have control of their music, not corporations.
The music writers, lyricists, and performers should be going after these file sharers, not these corporate interests.
In this society, those would be discriminatory laws and not allowed. Because someone is rich they have to pay more then someone who is poor? That is unfair and absurd in our way of life.
I do not believe a fine based upon a percentage of annual income would be discriminatory. A 5% fine could be applied equally. The person making $200K would pay $10K, a person making $20K would pay $1K. This would be less discriminatory than our Federal income tax system. This would also satisfy the purpose of fines for penalties - to discourage further offences.
No I do not think so. First this can be so abused. Second what if the person doesn't have an income or they are making 10k a year. What they are supposed to pay a few hundred bucks? And, not to mention, our society legal system does not work that.
I am just suggesting a solution that would seem to be more economically sound than our current fixed rate system.
Giving a $200 traffic fine to someone driving a $70K Hummer-2 with a family annual income over $200K doesn't make sense. It will not be a large enough penalty to discourage further offenses. Giving a $200 traffic fine to a single mother on welfare driving a $1K Yugo (if that) might mean some foodless days ahead and/or suspension of license (risking jail) for failure to pay the fine. In the first example, the fine is like a bug bite - small and of little consequence. The last example, the file is too large - you might as well have hacked off an arm and broken a leg.
You are trying to protect the criminal here - and I hope you are not saying it is OK to upload/download songs that are not public domain music.
I am not trying to protect any criminals nor condone any criminal activities. I am merely suggesting that fines should be based upon the ability to pay; the rich should pay enough to feel the fine, the poor should feel like they have been fined but not cause extreme personal financial problems.
I agree that the penalty phase of punishment is being ignored by the writer. But the current penalties and settlements are far out of line with the economics of the 'crime' and the economics of the accused.
For example, being sued for $150K per song is absolutely ludicrous. Settling for $20K for the whole charge is still ludicrous. Basing a fine on a percentage of a persons annual income and credit score is a better idea. If a person cannot afford a $150K per song fine, or a $20K full fine, than the fine will not be paid. But a fine on 5% to 25% of a persons annual income would be realistic. It would allow the person to know that s/he is being punished without needing to put her/him through bankruptcy and/or forfeit of property. Possibly even taking that person out of the productive workforce.
Fines and penalties in this country have for too long been out of proportion of fitting the crime to the criminal. Basing fines on a percentage of annual incomes would bring penalties to a social fairness.
I rarely use the Internet distribution channel as a backup to my P/DVR. Occasionally I'll forget to check settings and recordings won't have proper padding, so front/back may be clipped. Also, the VCR tape may break and cause the loss of the entire night. The Internet is also useful for the rare instance that an affiliate refuses to carry content and/or has technical issues.
For example, the show Family Guy recently went back on the air. The local Fox affiliate had technical issues that blocked analog transmission. DirecTV was also out since they were forced into only keeping the local feed (they should carry local and national feeds to the networks). Through Internet distribution, I was able to watch the show (the local affiliate eventually re-broadcast with network approval).
The networks need to allow free or cheap downloads of aired shows. At least until a DVD set is released. Start offering free or cheap downloads and it will shut down some of these channels. The offerings will also bring greater validity to legal cases (because what is so wrong with distributing aired shows to others that may enjoy it?).
Mid to late July is typically when the hurricane season starts to really pick up steam. I would suspect that there will be more delays before the launch.
While I would hate to see the shuttle system scrapped due to another avoidable crash, I would also be disappointed to see NASA delay the launch until late November.
I don't know about the rest of this country, but in Florida, from June through November, this site becomes my browser homepage. Along with the satellite page, it contains the most consistently useful information regarding tropical activity.
I do not think it is a reasonable idea to pay for access to this required information. This information is a type of 'raw feed'. People can go to the commercial sites for the hyped-up, chicken little, 'we'er all gonna die!' media show.
This smells like another insane party politic trick. Get NOAA to stop publishing, then do away with the NOAA & the NWS. Privatize weather forecasting. All lies, no liability. Gotta love what corporations are doing to politics and our government.
I bother to remove the ad breaks because ads bother me. I want to watch the show, not the ads. It also happens that I have ADD/ADHD and if I get up to do something during an ad break I will likely not return to watch the remainder of the show (get up to check email/slashdot and four hours later wonder why the TV was on and what happened to what I was watching).
I don't know what application you use to transcode, but the operation usually takes several hours for me with TMPGEnc. There is also setup time for a transcode what with cutting ads, cropping frame, specifying bitrates (etc, etc, etc). I would just as rather use a straight editor to cut the ads and stitch together the pieces.
The reason I don't program a button [in SageTV] to skip a time, is that I don't use SageTV to watch the shows. The picture off my DVR system is horrible. I would fix the problem, but being able to watch the shows off another system or off a temp DVD onto TV just doesn't make it worth my time.
Due to an unusual work shift, I have to record any TV show I want to watch. I converted an old system into a DVR (using SageTV and couple Hauppauge tuner/capture cards). Works great.
When it comes to playback, I copy the files to my main system. I strip out the commercials using PegasysTMPGEnc MPEG editor. Knowing that most commercial breaks are three minutes, I can just jump around the timeline until I find where the show resumes. Then I watch the shows on the pc or burn them out to a DVD-RW for later TV viewing.
On just the first four points alone would be important. The driving public needs this info pounded into its collective brain constantly. They should be put on all drive exams to be taken every 5 to 10 years (stop this automatic license renewal nonsense).
Slashdot Mirror
I try to filter advertising out of everything I encounter. I use Firefox with the adbocker at home and work; before Firefox I used AdSubtract with IE and Netscape. I rarely watch 'live' TV - I prefer to watch DVDs (temporary copies with advertising removed). The TV shows I do watch I have recorded and then removed the commercials (with TMGEnc MPEG editor). I remove pages from magazines when both sides are ads. I want content without the crap. If reasonable, I will pay for content without advertising.
The whole idea of advertising, IMHO, is to bully your brain and thought processes into buying and/or doing whatever is being advertised. If there is a way into your brain, an advertiser will find it and exploit it. If I want to buy something I want to know that I need that thing and not an implanted desire to possess it. My brain is my playground, I don't need advertisers dumping their toxic wastes into it.
The power-that-be would probably still hate it, but an idea would be to keep your recordings of shows. You could then buy the DVD sets of the shows and destroy your recordings. Everybody would get what they wanted, everybody should be satisfied.
With this update the old VCRs I have laying around are now more functional than a TIVO. At least with a VCR I know that if I go away for a month the shows I want recorded will still be waiting for me. This update for TIVO is a death toll for what was once a very promising device/company.
Deterrents rarely work usually due to the reasoning of the mind. Most of the people that you want to deter from these criminal actions firmly believe they will not get caught, so the potential punishment does-/will-not relate to them. They believe they have covered their tracks, have impenetrable security, and/or loyal allies. Combined with egos that believe law enforcement personal are stupid and lazy and that the target(s) of the attack(s) have insufficient security - the deterrent factor is practically useless.
Some deterrent punishments should be applied by law to discourage would-be criminals, but our best strategy is a good defense combined with a good societal education (teach young children about crime and punishment - make them understand that engaging in criminal activity will result in capture and they will be punished severely).
This could be good for Netflix customers, if they work out the techical and structure issues.
Personally, I want to be able to download certain shows and get the rest in standard DVD format. For example, if I rent an MST3K show then I don't care where I watch it - computer or TV - chances are good that I will only watch it once. A movie like Million Dollar Baby I want to watch on the large screen TV with the whole audio setup.
If they let me specify what shows to download vs. mailed DVDs then I will be very happy with the service. Otherwise I'll just stick to mailed DVDs that I can watch wherever I want.
I find it interesting that the chief difference in the UK vs. USA reaction to terrorism is where the UK [proposes to] increase security measures, the USA reduces civil rights and almost ignores increases in security.
Camera based systems are useful and cheap as you suggest. But in the states there are limitations to usefulness. An example - when the image(s) are being reviewed there are limitations to the amount of modification that can be applied to make the plate readable. You cannot use a Photoshop type app to zoom and filter the image until the plate is readable. Another issue is camera aim - not every vehicle has the plate in the same location. Not every vehicle has the plate in the correct location.
The idea of using RFID was borne from watching workers trying to read vehicle plates from images. The images were rejects from a software app that was designed to read plates. The whole plate reading task is painfully complex and using some tech like RFID would greatly simplify the process.
Instead of trying to remove driver control, a better idea would be to just track the vehicle and send applicable fines.
A vehicle could have under-engine/cockpit RFID transponder that would be read by road sensors. The vehicle RFID would transmit the vehicle ID as well as that of the driver (driver would have logon to vehicle to start/drive it). The vehicle passing over sensors would be recorded on central systems and the vehicle speed calculated and recorded. Regular audits on the central system records would produce speeding violations and tickets/fines would be printed and sent to the responsible driver (or vehicle owner).
If you change the laws so that the fines are based on a fixed amount plus a percentage of the driver/vehicle-owner gross income then people might start believing the speed limit is the maximum, not minimum, allowed speed.
The Supreme Court today ruled that local governments may seize private property for corporate redevelopment. This overturns the long held rule that local governments can only seize private property (with compensation) for redevelopment into the public common.
In other words - not only are you not safe in your own home, but your home itself is no longer safe from government/corporate greed.
I think another few nails have been pounded into the coffin containing the ideal of the United States of America. An ideal where citizens rights come before government and long before corporate abilities. We the citizens of these United States of America have all but lost the war of our rights.
---
If Firefox is so damn good, then why can't I use copy-n-paste in it...
The lack of a laugh track may be making it hard for you to decide when to laugh.
You may have a point. However, the other three sitcoms I watch, Family Guy, American Dad & South Park, all do not have a laugh track and I have no problems finding the humour. I can't remember if Scrubs and/or Malcolm in the Middle have laugh tracks. The only other humourous show is The Daily Show and that either has an audience and/or laugh track.
Compared to Monty Pythons Flying Circus and Fawlty Towers, The Office is about as funny as watching paint dry (on a rainy day in South Florida). The more I think about it, the more I think that Are You Being Served and Keeping Up Appearances are better than The Office.
t er-personalities->payoff, The Office relied on setup->nothing, setup->nothing, obscure-complicated-reference-to-something-only-a- UK/EU-citizen-might-realize-as-a-setup->payoff->ex planation-for-non-UK/EU-citizens(maybe).
Some of the problems with The Office is that the timing is off. Instead of the pattern of setup->payoff, setup->payoff, simple-setup-involving-previous-setups-and-charac
Come to think of it, the Dilbert cartoon was/is funnier than The Office.
These drives would be good if you could take your favourite OS and a few applications and throw them on the drive with the directive that any files whose data frequently changes would be written to a traditional mechanical drive. Imagine boot time similar to resuming from standby, or the speed of level loads of your favourite games.
I have a problem with this last part. The citizen interest over corporate.
I am just stating my opinion that the law should not favor corporate interests over the interests of citizens. Corporations should not only provide income to itself and shareholders, but should also be responsible for any employees. Going further, corporations should be responsible for legal aspects of products & services produced and the local, national, & international environments it is affecting.
If a corporation breaks a law, the corporation should be fined enough to send a clear message to the CXXs and any shareholders that the offending behavior will not be tolerated. Far too often corporations are given small fines that do not discourage offensive behavior.
Copyright law affects everyone for good or bad. I can create something and copyright it JUST like a big corporation can. The law applies to me just as equally as to them.
At this moment and for the foreseeable future, yes. I would greatly like to see the copyright system changed as stated in the previous message.
But without getting into an argument if copyright is right or wrong (and this is not the thread for it really) - presently it is the law and we are discussing penalties.
I have noticed that I have wandered off-topic a bit here. My apologies.
I think we have both made our cases for penalty here, and I think we both understand each others position. Let me know if the case is otherwise.
You seem to have emitted the fact that the single mother on welfare shouldn't have been blatantly breaking the law if she didn't want a fine.
People are only human and occasionally break laws by accident. Drivers can get caught up in the mad rush on the roadways and exceed speed limits because of conformity. Dozens of reasons exist for breaking speed laws, some offenders are blatant in their disregard, others are accidental.
In addition to this, the law states that you wouldn't lose your car if it's the sole mode of supporting ones self.
Yes, some/most states/communities have hardship clauses that an offender can use to continue driving. I was making a point and didn't see the need to stretch the verbage to cover all cases.
Your a Republican aren't you?
I am an independent with progressive liberal ideals. The current administration causes me much grief over policies and laws passed & proposed, as well as the continued increase in corporate influence.
We are talking about penalties for breaking the law - i have no sympathy. It sucks for the person who has to sell his life - but he shouldn't have started an uploading fest.
I also have little sympathy for criminals - as long as the law that was broken was just, fair, non-discriminatory, placed citizen interests above corporate, and any punishment dealt be fair to victim and offender (except in certain cases, both victin and offender should be able to resume a fair life after the penalty phase has passed).
Copyright law in this country started out on the correct path, but has now been side-tracked onto a path of corporate/industry dominance. The time used for protection of works needs to be dropped back to original levels, and corporations/industries should be limited in copyright ownership. As pertaining to music, the individuals involved in writing the music, writing the lyrics (if any), studio performance, live performance, should own the copyrights and should have ability to license to corportations/industry. The actual people that are copyright owners should have control of their music, not corporations.
The music writers, lyricists, and performers should be going after these file sharers, not these corporate interests.
In this society, those would be discriminatory laws and not allowed. Because someone is rich they have to pay more then someone who is poor? That is unfair and absurd in our way of life.
I do not believe a fine based upon a percentage of annual income would be discriminatory. A 5% fine could be applied equally. The person making $200K would pay $10K, a person making $20K would pay $1K. This would be less discriminatory than our Federal income tax system. This would also satisfy the purpose of fines for penalties - to discourage further offences.
No I do not think so. First this can be so abused. Second what if the person doesn't have an income or they are making 10k a year. What they are supposed to pay a few hundred bucks? And, not to mention, our society legal system does not work that.
I am just suggesting a solution that would seem to be more economically sound than our current fixed rate system.
Giving a $200 traffic fine to someone driving a $70K Hummer-2 with a family annual income over $200K doesn't make sense. It will not be a large enough penalty to discourage further offenses. Giving a $200 traffic fine to a single mother on welfare driving a $1K Yugo (if that) might mean some foodless days ahead and/or suspension of license (risking jail) for failure to pay the fine. In the first example, the fine is like a bug bite - small and of little consequence. The last example, the file is too large - you might as well have hacked off an arm and broken a leg.
You are trying to protect the criminal here - and I hope you are not saying it is OK to upload/download songs that are not public domain music.
I am not trying to protect any criminals nor condone any criminal activities. I am merely suggesting that fines should be based upon the ability to pay; the rich should pay enough to feel the fine, the poor should feel like they have been fined but not cause extreme personal financial problems.
I agree that the penalty phase of punishment is being ignored by the writer. But the current penalties and settlements are far out of line with the economics of the 'crime' and the economics of the accused.
For example, being sued for $150K per song is absolutely ludicrous. Settling for $20K for the whole charge is still ludicrous. Basing a fine on a percentage of a persons annual income and credit score is a better idea. If a person cannot afford a $150K per song fine, or a $20K full fine, than the fine will not be paid. But a fine on 5% to 25% of a persons annual income would be realistic. It would allow the person to know that s/he is being punished without needing to put her/him through bankruptcy and/or forfeit of property. Possibly even taking that person out of the productive workforce.
Fines and penalties in this country have for too long been out of proportion of fitting the crime to the criminal. Basing fines on a percentage of annual incomes would bring penalties to a social fairness.
I rarely use the Internet distribution channel as a backup to my P/DVR. Occasionally I'll forget to check settings and recordings won't have proper padding, so front/back may be clipped. Also, the VCR tape may break and cause the loss of the entire night. The Internet is also useful for the rare instance that an affiliate refuses to carry content and/or has technical issues.
For example, the show Family Guy recently went back on the air. The local Fox affiliate had technical issues that blocked analog transmission. DirecTV was also out since they were forced into only keeping the local feed (they should carry local and national feeds to the networks). Through Internet distribution, I was able to watch the show (the local affiliate eventually re-broadcast with network approval).
The networks need to allow free or cheap downloads of aired shows. At least until a DVD set is released. Start offering free or cheap downloads and it will shut down some of these channels. The offerings will also bring greater validity to legal cases (because what is so wrong with distributing aired shows to others that may enjoy it?).
Mid to late July is typically when the hurricane season starts to really pick up steam. I would suspect that there will be more delays before the launch.
While I would hate to see the shuttle system scrapped due to another avoidable crash, I would also be disappointed to see NASA delay the launch until late November.
I don't know about the rest of this country, but in Florida, from June through November, this site becomes my browser homepage. Along with the satellite page, it contains the most consistently useful information regarding tropical activity.
I do not think it is a reasonable idea to pay for access to this required information. This information is a type of 'raw feed'. People can go to the commercial sites for the hyped-up, chicken little, 'we'er all gonna die!' media show.
This smells like another insane party politic trick. Get NOAA to stop publishing, then do away with the NOAA & the NWS. Privatize weather forecasting. All lies, no liability. Gotta love what corporations are doing to politics and our government.
I bother to remove the ad breaks because ads bother me. I want to watch the show, not the ads. It also happens that I have ADD/ADHD and if I get up to do something during an ad break I will likely not return to watch the remainder of the show (get up to check email/slashdot and four hours later wonder why the TV was on and what happened to what I was watching).
I don't know what application you use to transcode, but the operation usually takes several hours for me with TMPGEnc. There is also setup time for a transcode what with cutting ads, cropping frame, specifying bitrates (etc, etc, etc). I would just as rather use a straight editor to cut the ads and stitch together the pieces.
The reason I don't program a button [in SageTV] to skip a time, is that I don't use SageTV to watch the shows. The picture off my DVR system is horrible. I would fix the problem, but being able to watch the shows off another system or off a temp DVD onto TV just doesn't make it worth my time.
Due to an unusual work shift, I have to record any TV show I want to watch. I converted an old system into a DVR (using SageTV and couple Hauppauge tuner/capture cards). Works great.
When it comes to playback, I copy the files to my main system. I strip out the commercials using Pegasys TMPGEnc MPEG editor. Knowing that most commercial breaks are three minutes, I can just jump around the timeline until I find where the show resumes. Then I watch the shows on the pc or burn them out to a DVD-RW for later TV viewing.
Really quite simple.
On just the first four points alone would be important. The driving public needs this info pounded into its collective brain constantly. They should be put on all drive exams to be taken every 5 to 10 years (stop this automatic license renewal nonsense).
Includes a guilt and auto-purchase module. After disconnection of iPods, a Shuttle is charged to your account and shipped 9 months later.
If you cancel or dispute the charge you get a sharp note from the GOP and a one year membership with planned parenthood.