Regarding economic pressure - I can easily afford to go to the movies, it just doesn't make any sense to. I can buy 3 movies on DVD at full retail for what it costs for 2 adults and 1 student to go to the theater. If you add dinner and concession prices, it might be 6 movies. Despite that, I like seeing movies in a theater except that my nerves can't take it anymore - talking, cell phones, people wandering in and out of the theater, commercials (I love trailers, but I can skip through TV commercials at home whereas I can't at the theater), out of frame projection, out of focus projection, inconsistent sound, widescreen movies clipped off on small screens, and other annoyances.
I understand theaters charging outrageous prices for concessions, I understand them showing commercials, they should understand that combining all of these things make the problem worse. If they're going to subsidize the theater by commercials and concessions, why not just eliminate admission?
That's just it. I don't make arbitrary rules, I do teach them how to behave and I carefully explain my reasoning. While they are minors, I do take some responsibility for their actions but I do trust them (unless they lose that trust) when they are out with their friends or at their friends houses. I don't forbid them access to the internet. I don't snoop (much) into what they're looking at. I don't wiretap their phone calls.
I don't allow her to be in the bedroom with her boyfriend with the door closed, is that, in your opinion, too restrictive? When I was in high school, I knew a guy who had sex with his 13yo girlfriend in her room in the floor behind her bed with door open with her parents watching TV down the hall.
That's exactly what concerns me as well. I've read profiles of kids that my kids know and some of them are smart enough not to post risque pictures of themselves and know some of the basics of online safety (one 14 or 15yo girl posing in a bikini top, holding a condom, and winking aside). Yes, they cuss, gossip, and talk about sex - I know they do that everywhere else as well. The profiles and surveys, though, tend to give away a lot of information.
As I told my daughter, even if you don't post your pictures or reveal info about yourself intentionally, there are lots of ways to piece together info. I said, "What if your picture isn't online, but you post that you're meeting Brittany, Lindsey, and Paris (not their real names) at the food court on Friday night. Their profiles are linked, they've posted pictures of themselves and you, and you've all answered the questionnaires on your likes and dislikes. Then Friday, some guy comes up and says he's Nicole's (who isn't there) cousin and he's a big fan of so-and-so and really loves the same movies you do and know's all of your names. Can you see that this could potentially be a scary situation? Here's a guy in real life who acts like he knows you and knows more about you than a stranger possibly should and you know nothing about him. What is he asked y'all to leave to mall to go meet Nicole and some of your other friends?"
Using a computer in a public space is censorship? My 14yo daughter can use the computer with pretty much the same restriction she has if a boy is visiting - stay in sight and no closed doors. I don't spy on her every move and I don't read everything (or pretty much anything) on the computer screen. She can sit with the laptop and IM all day, but she knows that I can, if I so desired, walk over and read it. So far, she hasn't given me a reason to
I tried to embed an Adsense block into the page and it doesn't show. Probably because scripting is not allowed, but I haven't experimented further. Will they make scripting exceptions for Adsense? Will they not allow personal Adsense accounts on the page? They do on Blogger.
I put a Google Search box (part of the Adsense program) in and it seems to work, but I can't test it myself without violating my terms of service with Adsense:-(
I don't think they made it for you. They made it for my Mom.
Seriously, anyone who knows what a Wiki is and how to set one up is probably not in Google's target audience for this, it is more likely to be a an accessory to blogger and a way for casual users to easily set up a web page.
However, it will be interesting to see just what kind of stuff is allowed here...
You know, everything American isn't bad. When 100% of your time is taken up by trying to produce enough food and shelter to keep you alive, it doesn't leave a hell of lot of time for inventing, creating, and enjoying life. Are you sitting in a shack with no electricity exhausted from a day of backbreaking work on a sustenance farm drinking brown water and hoping you'll live long enough to see your kids grow up?
Yes, you can do this (I've done it). The next step will be for ATI and BeyondTV and MythTV to support the iPod video format as a native recording format so we don't have to convert the recorded video. Actually, I think iTunes or QTPro will convert any Quicktime movie to iPod format semi-automatically. Unfortunately, I currently use Beyond TV for my TV tuner and it won't save as Quicktime (just WMV and mpeg2).
Legal? Probably not in the strictest definition, but no different than a VCR or DVD recorder (unless you are uploading your results)...
ABC has done "catch up" episodes for Desperate Housewives, Grey's Anatomy, and Lost. These should be free downloads on iTunes to snag more viewers.
I kicked myself for a year because I never started watching Lost. When I subscribed to NetFlix, the first thing I got was Lost season 1. I finished around Christmas, got a video iPod for Christmas, then the first thing I bought on iTunes was all of the season 2 episodes so far ($18?). I actually watched them all on my 42" HDTV with my iPod. Quality wasn't much worse than my analog TV channels (a little artifacting in dark scenes). I finally caught up, so now I can watch the first run episodes in HD, so I won't be buying them on iTunes (unless I forget to DVR them).
ABC (and Disney and ESPN) and NBC are aligned with Apple/iTunes. CBS has gone with Google. Fox is just sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Where is 24, Arrested Development, etc.?
I DVR everything I watch (dual tuner Motorola HDTV DVR box with Comcast digital cable). I also have a TV tuner on my computer and the software where I can record TV shows then convert them to iPod video format. I haven't tried the DVD rippers/re-encoders yet.
I don't have a problem with $2 per episode because I don't intend to ever use iTunes as my primary way of watching a TV series -- I see using it to (a) catch up with shows I haven't been watching, (b) try out new shows by picking popular episodes, (c) be able to buy a show that I missed for some reason.
IMO, iTunes would be selling movies if it wasn't for the fact that an iPod will only show about 2 hours of video on a fresh charge. People would be pissed if they bought a movie that they couldn't watch on a single charge. Unfortunately, this just means my 30GB video iPod will be obsolete when they release one with a longer battery life.
You can use a $10 camcorder video cable to watch iPod videos on TV, but you have to ignore the cable's color coding.
For $300, Apple should include a video cable and a wall charger.
Kudos for Google to support iPod downloads on Google Video (the free ones at least).
I expect to pay for a new version of media if I am going *upwards* in quality and technology, not backwards or sideways. Is this rational? If I bought a movie on VHS, I don't expect them to automatically give me the DVD version when it comes out. But, if I have it on DVD, I should be able to copy it to VHS (or another DVD, or my iPod, or my computer). And yes, when it comes out on Blu-Ray or whatever, I expect that I'll have to buy it again.
Re:video DRM is more tolerable than music DRM
on
A Look at Google DRM
·
· Score: 1
Yes, it is just a PIA workaround, but it does allow Apple to pay lip service to the RIAA and provide users with a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" way of getting around the DRM.
Re:Have you actually looked at video.google.com ye
on
A Look at Google DRM
·
· Score: 1
As far as I know, they just added this today and also added the ability to download the non-DRM'ed videos in iPod and PSP formats. Yay.
I had a horrible brain fart the other day while watching an episode of Lost that I purchased from iTunes to watch on my iPod video. The thought actually popped into my head that they could provide these TV shows for free if they interleaved ads in them. Then I had a big, "Duh" moment.
You know, I really hate to come off as a prude, but...
My kids (who are a bit older) both love Futurama and quote it continually and they are very exciting about the idea that there might be new episodes (we've seen all of the others one or more times), but I have a fear that they might want to compete (or compliment) Adult Swim, South Park, Family Guy, American Dad, etc. and make it more "adult". I trust Groening, who's walked a fine line for a long time between the family OK (if not friendly) and more adult themes, but I still worry about the networks.
Two of *my* favorite cartoons are South Park and the Boondocks, but I don't watch those with my kids (yet)...
Interesting that you bring up CSI. In two recent CSI:New York episode, they've made blatent ring tone advertisements for some cell phone company and artist (must not have worked well, because I can't remember the details, just that I was a bit shocked). In the first, one of the character's phone rang and the other character said, "Isn't that the new [xyz] song?" "Yeah, I just downloaded it as a ringtone." In another, two suspects were caught because they had the same ringtone on their phones.
What was weird to me about this was that, in a way, these exchanges were very realistic in that real people would say that if they noticed a friend's ringtone. It was only because it is unusual in a TV show that it stood out.
Personally, I think it is extremely naive to think that, under present conditions, good TV shows will be produced if avenues of ad revenue are bypassed. Yes, everyone wants information and entertainment to be free. Personally, I'd settle for it to be (a) cheap, (b) reusable on different devices/media, (c) easily available, (d) not subject to subscriptions.
Ditto on the audience disturbing the movie experience, but, while I don't care for the commercials, I do like trailers (which are often more fun than the movie I go to see or the movie they are advertising). At least the Regal Cinemas I go to do their "Twenty" thing starting 20 minutes before the advertised start of the movie. Trailers start at the start time (although sometimes they slip in an extra commercial, the bastards).
I used to work as a projectionist, back when it was a real job with reel changes, splicing film if it breaks, and tinkering with the carbon-arc projectors. I get upset with dim projectors, bad framing, bad focus, and bad sound. I can control these at home.
Finally, even ignoring rentals, it costs easily $50-60 for our family to go to a movie. I can *buy* 3 or more DVDs for the same price.
Pretty good, but I'm waiting for Google to take over the Celestia project, combine it with Google Earth, acquire all of NASAs imagery and mapping data, then release Google Universe.
Imagine, smooth zooms from Olympos Mons to your house or zooming to your house, panning the camera up, and seeing a correct representation of the night sky. Or watching the ISS orbit the zoomed out view of GE.
There was a good summary of this technique as well as the hydrogen sulfide method in an article in Discover last month. This appears to be a very hot (no pun intended) topic in experimental medicine.
117, although I may have included a few duplicates. I also counted a few collections where I have not read every story in the collection, but have read more than two -- so I'll fudge and say about 100.
I'm another person who rarely watches TV and it's precisely because of this that the broadcast flag idea would affect me *more*.
If I were a TV addicted couch potato, what would I care? I would go home from work, turn on the tube, and sit there mindlessly until I fell asleep changing channels during the commercials, so I probably wouldn't be watching them anyway.
Since getting a DVR, I can pick and choose a handful of good shows and movies a week or so in advance. Then, on my time, when I have a chance or inclination to watch TV, there's always something I want to see. I'm no longer a slave to the TV. Yes, I skip commercials. But, I often see the commercial and occasionally stop on one to watch it (I'm a sucker for movie trailers). When I'm watching live TV, I usually switch channels or mute during commercials.
So, back to what the original poster said, if a broadcast flag was enabled, any channel that used it indiscriminately just wouldn't get watched by me -- it wouldn't be a boycott, per se, just if it doesn't record, I won't be seeing it. And yes, I know there is a "one time record" flag for DVRs, but I also have a DVD recorder for archiving (or more likely for super-timeshifting -- copying something off to it to clear up space on my DVR).
Slashdot Mirror
Regarding economic pressure - I can easily afford to go to the movies, it just doesn't make any sense to. I can buy 3 movies on DVD at full retail for what it costs for 2 adults and 1 student to go to the theater. If you add dinner and concession prices, it might be 6 movies. Despite that, I like seeing movies in a theater except that my nerves can't take it anymore - talking, cell phones, people wandering in and out of the theater, commercials (I love trailers, but I can skip through TV commercials at home whereas I can't at the theater), out of frame projection, out of focus projection, inconsistent sound, widescreen movies clipped off on small screens, and other annoyances.
I understand theaters charging outrageous prices for concessions, I understand them showing commercials, they should understand that combining all of these things make the problem worse. If they're going to subsidize the theater by commercials and concessions, why not just eliminate admission?
That's just it. I don't make arbitrary rules, I do teach them how to behave and I carefully explain my reasoning. While they are minors, I do take some responsibility for their actions but I do trust them (unless they lose that trust) when they are out with their friends or at their friends houses. I don't forbid them access to the internet. I don't snoop (much) into what they're looking at. I don't wiretap their phone calls.
I don't allow her to be in the bedroom with her boyfriend with the door closed, is that, in your opinion, too restrictive? When I was in high school, I knew a guy who had sex with his 13yo girlfriend in her room in the floor behind her bed with door open with her parents watching TV down the hall.
That's exactly what concerns me as well. I've read profiles of kids that my kids know and some of them are smart enough not to post risque pictures of themselves and know some of the basics of online safety (one 14 or 15yo girl posing in a bikini top, holding a condom, and winking aside). Yes, they cuss, gossip, and talk about sex - I know they do that everywhere else as well. The profiles and surveys, though, tend to give away a lot of information.
As I told my daughter, even if you don't post your pictures or reveal info about yourself intentionally, there are lots of ways to piece together info.
I said, "What if your picture isn't online, but you post that you're meeting Brittany, Lindsey, and Paris (not their real names) at the food court on Friday night. Their profiles are linked, they've posted pictures of themselves and you, and you've all answered the questionnaires on your likes and dislikes. Then Friday, some guy comes up and says he's Nicole's (who isn't there) cousin and he's a big fan of so-and-so and really loves the same movies you do and know's all of your names. Can you see that this could potentially be a scary situation? Here's a guy in real life who acts like he knows you and knows more about you than a stranger possibly should and you know nothing about him. What is he asked y'all to leave to mall to go meet Nicole and some of your other friends?"
Using a computer in a public space is censorship? My 14yo daughter can use the computer with pretty much the same restriction she has if a boy is visiting - stay in sight and no closed doors. I don't spy on her every move and I don't read everything (or pretty much anything) on the computer screen. She can sit with the laptop and IM all day, but she knows that I can, if I so desired, walk over and read it. So far, she hasn't given me a reason to
I tried to embed an Adsense block into the page and it doesn't show. Probably because scripting is not allowed, but I haven't experimented further. Will they make scripting exceptions for Adsense? Will they not allow personal Adsense accounts on the page? They do on Blogger.
:-(
I put a Google Search box (part of the Adsense program) in and it seems to work, but I can't test it myself without violating my terms of service with Adsense
I don't think they made it for you. They made it for my Mom.
Seriously, anyone who knows what a Wiki is and how to set one up is probably not in Google's target audience for this, it is more likely to be a an accessory to blogger and a way for casual users to easily set up a web page.
However, it will be interesting to see just what kind of stuff is allowed here...
Or, in the media and government version, it's easy to lose sight of the overall benefit when focusing on the individuals.
Sometimes, it may make sense to base policies on cold math rather than the emotional level of individuals. For example, pesticides vs. malaria.
You know, everything American isn't bad. When 100% of your time is taken up by trying to produce enough food and shelter to keep you alive, it doesn't leave a hell of lot of time for inventing, creating, and enjoying life. Are you sitting in a shack with no electricity exhausted from a day of backbreaking work on a sustenance farm drinking brown water and hoping you'll live long enough to see your kids grow up?
I shouldn't have included the link to what I used: http://www.videora.com/en-us/Converter/
Yes, you can do this (I've done it). The next step will be for ATI and BeyondTV and MythTV to support the iPod video format as a native recording format so we don't have to convert the recorded video. Actually, I think iTunes or QTPro will convert any Quicktime movie to iPod format semi-automatically. Unfortunately, I currently use Beyond TV for my TV tuner and it won't save as Quicktime (just WMV and mpeg2).
Legal? Probably not in the strictest definition, but no different than a VCR or DVD recorder (unless you are uploading your results)...
Actualy, with product placement like that, the Christmas episode should have been a free download...
ABC has done "catch up" episodes for Desperate Housewives, Grey's Anatomy, and Lost. These should be free downloads on iTunes to snag more viewers.
I kicked myself for a year because I never started watching Lost. When I subscribed to NetFlix, the first thing I got was Lost season 1. I finished around Christmas, got a video iPod for Christmas, then the first thing I bought on iTunes was all of the season 2 episodes so far ($18?). I actually watched them all on my 42" HDTV with my iPod. Quality wasn't much worse than my analog TV channels (a little artifacting in dark scenes). I finally caught up, so now I can watch the first run episodes in HD, so I won't be buying them on iTunes (unless I forget to DVR them).
ABC (and Disney and ESPN) and NBC are aligned with Apple/iTunes. CBS has gone with Google. Fox is just sitting around twiddling their thumbs. Where is 24, Arrested Development, etc.?
I DVR everything I watch (dual tuner Motorola HDTV DVR box with Comcast digital cable). I also have a TV tuner on my computer and the software where I can record TV shows then convert them to iPod video format. I haven't tried the DVD rippers/re-encoders yet.
I don't have a problem with $2 per episode because I don't intend to ever use iTunes as my primary way of watching a TV series -- I see using it to (a) catch up with shows I haven't been watching, (b) try out new shows by picking popular episodes, (c) be able to buy a show that I missed for some reason.
IMO, iTunes would be selling movies if it wasn't for the fact that an iPod will only show about 2 hours of video on a fresh charge. People would be pissed if they bought a movie that they couldn't watch on a single charge. Unfortunately, this just means my 30GB video iPod will be obsolete when they release one with a longer battery life.
You can use a $10 camcorder video cable to watch iPod videos on TV, but you have to ignore the cable's color coding.
For $300, Apple should include a video cable and a wall charger.
Kudos for Google to support iPod downloads on Google Video (the free ones at least).
I expect to pay for a new version of media if I am going *upwards* in quality and technology, not backwards or sideways. Is this rational? If I bought a movie on VHS, I don't expect them to automatically give me the DVD version when it comes out. But, if I have it on DVD, I should be able to copy it to VHS (or another DVD, or my iPod, or my computer). And yes, when it comes out on Blu-Ray or whatever, I expect that I'll have to buy it again.
Yes, it is just a PIA workaround, but it does allow Apple to pay lip service to the RIAA and provide users with a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" way of getting around the DRM.
As far as I know, they just added this today and also added the ability to download the non-DRM'ed videos in iPod and PSP formats. Yay.
I had a horrible brain fart the other day while watching an episode of Lost that I purchased from iTunes to watch on my iPod video. The thought actually popped into my head that they could provide these TV shows for free if they interleaved ads in them. Then I had a big, "Duh" moment.
Maybe I should qualify favorite. I've really liked one or two of the Boondocks episodes, the rest have been mediocre or at least unfocused.
You know, I really hate to come off as a prude, but...
My kids (who are a bit older) both love Futurama and quote it continually and they are very exciting about the idea that there might be new episodes (we've seen all of the others one or more times), but I have a fear that they might want to compete (or compliment) Adult Swim, South Park, Family Guy, American Dad, etc. and make it more "adult". I trust Groening, who's walked a fine line for a long time between the family OK (if not friendly) and more adult themes, but I still worry about the networks.
Two of *my* favorite cartoons are South Park and the Boondocks, but I don't watch those with my kids (yet)...
Interesting that you bring up CSI. In two recent CSI:New York episode, they've made blatent ring tone advertisements for some cell phone company and artist (must not have worked well, because I can't remember the details, just that I was a bit shocked). In the first, one of the character's phone rang and the other character said, "Isn't that the new [xyz] song?" "Yeah, I just downloaded it as a ringtone." In another, two suspects were caught because they had the same ringtone on their phones.
What was weird to me about this was that, in a way, these exchanges were very realistic in that real people would say that if they noticed a friend's ringtone. It was only because it is unusual in a TV show that it stood out.
Personally, I think it is extremely naive to think that, under present conditions, good TV shows will be produced if avenues of ad revenue are bypassed. Yes, everyone wants information and entertainment to be free. Personally, I'd settle for it to be (a) cheap, (b) reusable on different devices/media, (c) easily available, (d) not subject to subscriptions.
Ditto on the audience disturbing the movie experience, but, while I don't care for the commercials, I do like trailers (which are often more fun than the movie I go to see or the movie they are advertising). At least the Regal Cinemas I go to do their "Twenty" thing starting 20 minutes before the advertised start of the movie. Trailers start at the start time (although sometimes they slip in an extra commercial, the bastards).
I used to work as a projectionist, back when it was a real job with reel changes, splicing film if it breaks, and tinkering with the carbon-arc projectors. I get upset with dim projectors, bad framing, bad focus, and bad sound. I can control these at home.
Finally, even ignoring rentals, it costs easily $50-60 for our family to go to a movie. I can *buy* 3 or more DVDs for the same price.
Pretty good, but I'm waiting for Google to take over the Celestia project, combine it with Google Earth, acquire all of NASAs imagery and mapping data, then release Google Universe.
Imagine, smooth zooms from Olympos Mons to your house or zooming to your house, panning the camera up, and seeing a correct representation of the night sky. Or watching the ISS orbit the zoomed out view of GE.
There was a good summary of this technique as well as the hydrogen sulfide method in an article in Discover last month. This appears to be a very hot (no pun intended) topic in experimental medicine.
117, although I may have included a few duplicates. I also counted a few collections where I have not read every story in the collection, but have read more than two -- so I'll fudge and say about 100.
You might be interested in this, then:
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
I'm another person who rarely watches TV and it's precisely because of this that the broadcast flag idea would affect me *more*.
If I were a TV addicted couch potato, what would I care? I would go home from work, turn on the tube, and sit there mindlessly until I fell asleep changing channels during the commercials, so I probably wouldn't be watching them anyway.
Since getting a DVR, I can pick and choose a handful of good shows and movies a week or so in advance. Then, on my time, when I have a chance or inclination to watch TV, there's always something I want to see. I'm no longer a slave to the TV. Yes, I skip commercials. But, I often see the commercial and occasionally stop on one to watch it (I'm a sucker for movie trailers). When I'm watching live TV, I usually switch channels or mute during commercials.
So, back to what the original poster said, if a broadcast flag was enabled, any channel that used it indiscriminately just wouldn't get watched by me -- it wouldn't be a boycott, per se, just if it doesn't record, I won't be seeing it. And yes, I know there is a "one time record" flag for DVRs, but I also have a DVD recorder for archiving (or more likely for super-timeshifting -- copying something off to it to clear up space on my DVR).