A big problem I see with the different distribution methods out there is how to fund the production of the good shows.
I've always wanted to see a sort of TV stock market where viewers can directly fund the shows they like in exchange for a piece of the DVD sales. It seems a lot less risky than the actual stock market. For instance, if Joss Whedon (Buffy, Firefly, Angel) were to put out another show, it would be guaranteed a full run because people, who don't even like his shows, would invest after seeing the DVD sales for his previous shows. The outdated Nielson concept would go away completely. Shows like Star Trek would never go off the air (not that that's a good thing) as long as there's one ultra-rich Silicon Valley valley geek who was a fan. Networks wouldn't have to deal with fan backlash when a show is canceled cause the fans would have no one to blame but themselves. It really is a near-perfect business model, but the networks (and all corporations these days) are control freaks more than they are capitalists. Sometimes you need to let go in order to get back.
And there is a cost to downloads as well. There are pay services that make it easier than using torrents, then there are the extra hard drives you need cause a 45 minute TV show is over a gig. Blank DVDs to back it all up. The time and effort as well. I figure I'm paying more to download certain stuff all because I want a little flexibility. But overall, it would cost me less if I can just give the money directly to the media companies. They'd rather try to coerce the money out of my, rather than provide something that I would gladly pay for.
The irony is, that I'm back to using rabbit ears again because of a pcHDTV card and unlike the downloads, I do see commercials now and then. Any efforts to make this more difficult will just drive me back into the download camp. Why oh why won't the media companies let me give them money? If they'd start using decent formats and ditch the DRM, the set-top box market would take off like DVD players did in the 90s. The synergy would end up creating wealth for all to the point where they wouldn't have to worry much about piracy, just counting money.
I almost gave up on this card (HD-5500) for the same reason and although I don't have a nice simple link for you, it turns out my problem was that I was trying to compiling the relative drivers as built in. They needed to be modules. Here are the kernel options that you need (I think this is all, but not sure):
Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video for Linux [M] Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video Capture Adapters >> Conexant 2388x [M] Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video Capture Adapters >> Conexant 2388x >> DVB/ATSC Support [M]
Also, if you're going to use this card in Myth, it appears to autodetect the correct card, but I had to use a generic ATSC option to get Myth to work with it. Other than that, I had no problems.
The pcHDTV website is awful and although I'm glad they've design a linux based card, they really deserve to go out of business for their total lack of support. One web page explaining some of this shouldn't be that difficult to put up. The forums are full of confused people on the verge of giving up completely. It's such a shame.
Are HBO/Showtime exclusive shows that much better than the OTA content?
Yes.
The problem is more that HBO has canceled a whole bunch of shows in the last few years and hasn't replaced them with anything anybody wants to watch. HBO's had a subscriber boon when the Sopranos came on the air and a lot of people stayed through Carnivale, Deadwood and Rome, but now people will be canceling in droves. I'm just waiting for the Sopranos to be up in a couple of weeks and I'll follow suit as well. I've been an HBO subscriber for over 20 years, but with no shows and DVDs for movies, it's time to call it quits. I'm sure that some HBO suit is explaining this all to another HBO suit and blaming the cancellations on piracy so that it won't appear to be their fault. I think this is how most DRM gets foisted on us.
Showtime is picking up steam though so I might sign up with them again. I've been ten years without due to the last time they canceled all of their shows. But their latest crop (Dexter, Weeds, Tudors, Bullshit) is finally up to HBO's former quality.
What I really hear you saying is that we have a very corrupt political process that allows certain rich people the ability to use the government to make themselves even more wealthy, at the expense of others. The money is not the issue, it's the laws. I personally don't think we'd have this extreme gap between rich and poor if there weren't the laws that the rich exploit through expensive lawyers and accountants. Outside of laws governing violence and stealing, the rest should go. Then we'd have a fairer playing field.
Also, when you said money is god here, I was thinking more about average people. People can get by here without starving, so they don't attach so much importance to it. In fact, it's frowned upon to do so. Whereas most of the rest of the world is in a rat race to either survive or appear as big shots to their family. I'm thinking of places like Asia and parts of Africa and the Middle East where personal/family status is of far greater importance and is usually linked to money.
If passed, this law enables the police to seize literally everyones computer.
And if seized, even if you're innocent, you will only be able to get your computer back through civil court, where the burden of proof is on you to prove that you're not a criminal. Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. Drug war forfeitures have snared many innocent people because the police department gets to keep what they take. The stories I've read are horrifying. It is perhaps the most corrupt area of law in America (that's saying a lot), a gross violation of the constitution and Gonzales wants to greatly expand this practice. Make no mistake this has less to do with protecting copyrights and more to do with having total control over your person and effects.
Civil asset forfeiture, as it pertains to drug law, has to do with preventing the dealer from profiting from criminal activity. How can this argument be made for attempted piracy? That would clearly be unconstitutional (not that it matters anymore) and it would exponentially increase police corruption. On the other hand, these kinds of laws (when abused as they always are) have a tendency to lead to revolution. Take away people's freedom and they shrug, take away their stuff and you have a fight. So maybe there is an upside. I would love to see the government run scared for a change rather than just making the world more an more miserable.
Dude, visit another country. Money is god everywhere. Much more so in many of the countries I've been to. And that reputation is hardly undeserved. It translates into food and shelter, you know, basic survival. Without it, we suffer. I'll never get why some people seem to hate money. Would a barter system be more convenient for you? Without money, there is no civilization. There is no bad in it. The only people who seem to think of money as bad are people who don't have to worry about it (i.e. parent-funded college kids and rich folk).
Criminalizing the whole population for something everyone does is so typical of dictatorships, let's not copy their ruthless style of governance anymore.
So your solution is to force those who don't copy to help subsidize the ones who do. It sounds like you are copying that ruthless style, in your own way.
I think I reject them out of disgust for all the people I see yapping on them in their cars at freakin' 8am in the morning. If you call me at 8am, somebody better be dead. I'm sure a percentage of these callers are on work related calls, but I think most aren't. Almost everyone I see in their car is on the phone at this time.
There are so many people who spend (what seems to be) their entire lives shouting into a cell phone. Is it really that hard to go a few minutes out of each day without talking? Are these peoples' lives that fascinating that they have to relate each and every detail? Is what they're saying so important that it can't wait for a face to face? And when do they find the time to do new things worth talking about? Cell phone use is clearly an addiction and although I have some pity, it's hard not to look down on an addict. I guess I know I'm old, when I just don't get it. But even when I was young, phone calls were a one minute affair to arrange a meeting. Only chics yapped on and on for hours. Must be a metro thing for the guys.
You know, outside of the east and west coast, pretty much everyone does have guns. Even the liberals. It's like owning a hammer. Yet the only time I've ever had a gun pulled on me was in NYC where no one I know owns a gun (that didn't border on being an antique). I drive very aggressively in Colorado, certainly pissing off people left and right (judging by their hand gestures) and nobody has threatened me here, despite every other car having a pro-gun bumper sticker. And although I suspect the numbers would be a wash in the end, why should I be prevented from defending myself to save drunken bar fighters?
I could not for the life of me think of a reason why you would watch a man with a gun walk in and start shooting your friends and NOT DO ANYTHING TO DEFEND YOURSELF.
I think part of the problem is due to gun ignorance. Contrary to what we learn in the movies, it's hard enough to hit a stationary target any distance away, much less a moving one. I recall a study where they tested cops firing at a stationary target ten feet away, while under some sort of stress and they were only able to hit their targets 6 out of 10 times on average. That's with training, at only ten feet away. If you come across a shooter, your odds are much better if you simply run, rather than sitting there, waiting for him to shoot you (assuming he's not right next to you). It may be scary, but what choice do you have?
Just about every story is about how the world is ending, mostly because of man-made global warming.
I really don't know what to believe when it comes to global warming, but it does come across right now as a fad to the point where I doubt the legitimacy of the claims. In my experience, serious problems go neglected while politician drone on about the inconsequential stuff. But who knows, this could be a first. It also seems like there are far more important environmental issues that are being brushed aside as a consequence.
I hear what you say about British media. I know they live on a island and all, but they seem completely obsessed with it over there to the point of hysteria. It's working out well for a physicist friend of mine who claims to have developed a free energy technique. Some British billionaire is flying him around all over Europe, wanting to fund him. I suppose if the claim is real, then some good will have come out of the hysteria after all.
I'm a very strong supporter of spoiler warnings, prior to the show airing, but if you're waiting to watch something on Tivo, either watch it already, or don't visit discussions about the show. It's far easier for you to manage than it is for everyone else to post spoiler warnings for any old show they've ever seen (which is really ridiculous if you consider it).
blew their budget on the occupation episodes to start the season. Does anyone remember how crazy those were? It is really difficult to build that many amazing sets for a series that is on a cable network.
Ummm, they were living in tents. I can afford that budget.
I've generally had the feeling that the show is actually going somewhere
RDM said he pulled that season finale game changer out of his ass halfway through the season. I'd say that's evidence of lack of direction. He doesn't know what to do and he's just making up wild twists. It's time for this one to go.
At the place where I work, we are on the verge of switching out our Solaris servers for Linux ones. I've been proposing for years using the "cost" argument. But in truth, I just hate the antiquated tools. When vi doesn't understand arrow keys or columns greater than 120, it becomes a drain on my productivity. So it's definitely costing them money in this case. It's about time Sun.
How about, instead of wasting your time trying to protect your content from being copied, you spend a little time making sure that you have content to protect? You know, like not canceling all of your shows (Carnivale, Deadwood, Rome, Sopranos, etc). I've been a loyal HBO subscriber practically my whole life, but I'll be canceling in a few more weeks cause of short sighted management at HBO. I'm sure I'm not the only one and I'm also sure that some HBO bonehead like this guy will just blame the cancellations on piracy. HBO has done more to piss off it's customer base these past few years than any other network. This just seems like an effort to deflect peoples attention from their real problems.
It actually came out in an unrelated federal court hearing that the march was staged by a paid FBI informant. It's interesting to know it made some people angry about free speech though. Makes you wonder.
Slashdot Mirror
A big problem I see with the different distribution methods out there is how to fund the production of the good shows.
I've always wanted to see a sort of TV stock market where viewers can directly fund the shows they like in exchange for a piece of the DVD sales. It seems a lot less risky than the actual stock market. For instance, if Joss Whedon (Buffy, Firefly, Angel) were to put out another show, it would be guaranteed a full run because people, who don't even like his shows, would invest after seeing the DVD sales for his previous shows. The outdated Nielson concept would go away completely. Shows like Star Trek would never go off the air (not that that's a good thing) as long as there's one ultra-rich Silicon Valley valley geek who was a fan. Networks wouldn't have to deal with fan backlash when a show is canceled cause the fans would have no one to blame but themselves. It really is a near-perfect business model, but the networks (and all corporations these days) are control freaks more than they are capitalists. Sometimes you need to let go in order to get back.
And there is a cost to downloads as well. There are pay services that make it easier than using torrents, then there are the extra hard drives you need cause a 45 minute TV show is over a gig. Blank DVDs to back it all up. The time and effort as well. I figure I'm paying more to download certain stuff all because I want a little flexibility. But overall, it would cost me less if I can just give the money directly to the media companies. They'd rather try to coerce the money out of my, rather than provide something that I would gladly pay for.
The irony is, that I'm back to using rabbit ears again because of a pcHDTV card and unlike the downloads, I do see commercials now and then. Any efforts to make this more difficult will just drive me back into the download camp. Why oh why won't the media companies let me give them money? If they'd start using decent formats and ditch the DRM, the set-top box market would take off like DVD players did in the 90s. The synergy would end up creating wealth for all to the point where they wouldn't have to worry much about piracy, just counting money.
I almost gave up on this card (HD-5500) for the same reason and although I don't have a nice simple link for you, it turns out my problem was that I was trying to compiling the relative drivers as built in. They needed to be modules. Here are the kernel options that you need (I think this is all, but not sure):
Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video for Linux [M]
Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video Capture Adapters >> Conexant 2388x [M]
Device drivers >> Multimedia Devices >> Video Capture Adapters >> Conexant 2388x >> DVB/ATSC Support [M]
Also, if you're going to use this card in Myth, it appears to autodetect the correct card, but I had to use a generic ATSC option to get Myth to work with it. Other than that, I had no problems.
The pcHDTV website is awful and although I'm glad they've design a linux based card, they really deserve to go out of business for their total lack of support. One web page explaining some of this shouldn't be that difficult to put up. The forums are full of confused people on the verge of giving up completely. It's such a shame.
Are HBO/Showtime exclusive shows that much better than the OTA content?
Yes.
The problem is more that HBO has canceled a whole bunch of shows in the last few years and hasn't replaced them with anything anybody wants to watch. HBO's had a subscriber boon when the Sopranos came on the air and a lot of people stayed through Carnivale, Deadwood and Rome, but now people will be canceling in droves. I'm just waiting for the Sopranos to be up in a couple of weeks and I'll follow suit as well. I've been an HBO subscriber for over 20 years, but with no shows and DVDs for movies, it's time to call it quits. I'm sure that some HBO suit is explaining this all to another HBO suit and blaming the cancellations on piracy so that it won't appear to be their fault. I think this is how most DRM gets foisted on us.
Showtime is picking up steam though so I might sign up with them again. I've been ten years without due to the last time they canceled all of their shows. But their latest crop (Dexter, Weeds, Tudors, Bullshit) is finally up to HBO's former quality.
What I really hear you saying is that we have a very corrupt political process that allows certain rich people the ability to use the government to make themselves even more wealthy, at the expense of others. The money is not the issue, it's the laws. I personally don't think we'd have this extreme gap between rich and poor if there weren't the laws that the rich exploit through expensive lawyers and accountants. Outside of laws governing violence and stealing, the rest should go. Then we'd have a fairer playing field.
Also, when you said money is god here, I was thinking more about average people. People can get by here without starving, so they don't attach so much importance to it. In fact, it's frowned upon to do so. Whereas most of the rest of the world is in a rat race to either survive or appear as big shots to their family. I'm thinking of places like Asia and parts of Africa and the Middle East where personal/family status is of far greater importance and is usually linked to money.
If passed, this law enables the police to seize literally everyones computer.
And if seized, even if you're innocent, you will only be able to get your computer back through civil court, where the burden of proof is on you to prove that you're not a criminal. Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply here. Drug war forfeitures have snared many innocent people because the police department gets to keep what they take. The stories I've read are horrifying. It is perhaps the most corrupt area of law in America (that's saying a lot), a gross violation of the constitution and Gonzales wants to greatly expand this practice. Make no mistake this has less to do with protecting copyrights and more to do with having total control over your person and effects.
Civil asset forfeiture, as it pertains to drug law, has to do with preventing the dealer from profiting from criminal activity. How can this argument be made for attempted piracy? That would clearly be unconstitutional (not that it matters anymore) and it would exponentially increase police corruption. On the other hand, these kinds of laws (when abused as they always are) have a tendency to lead to revolution. Take away people's freedom and they shrug, take away their stuff and you have a fight. So maybe there is an upside. I would love to see the government run scared for a change rather than just making the world more an more miserable.
While I'll stand behind the war in Iraq, I'll march against stupidity like this. Expanding the DMCA is a joke.
I don't know, maybe the DCMA will prevent us from copying that war in Iraq over to Iran.
Money is god here.
Dude, visit another country. Money is god everywhere. Much more so in many of the countries I've been to. And that reputation is hardly undeserved. It translates into food and shelter, you know, basic survival. Without it, we suffer. I'll never get why some people seem to hate money. Would a barter system be more convenient for you? Without money, there is no civilization. There is no bad in it. The only people who seem to think of money as bad are people who don't have to worry about it (i.e. parent-funded college kids and rich folk).
Criminalizing the whole population for something everyone does is so typical of dictatorships, let's not copy their ruthless style of governance anymore.
So your solution is to force those who don't copy to help subsidize the ones who do. It sounds like you are copying that ruthless style, in your own way.
I think I reject them out of disgust for all the people I see yapping on them in their cars at freakin' 8am in the morning. If you call me at 8am, somebody better be dead. I'm sure a percentage of these callers are on work related calls, but I think most aren't. Almost everyone I see in their car is on the phone at this time.
There are so many people who spend (what seems to be) their entire lives shouting into a cell phone. Is it really that hard to go a few minutes out of each day without talking? Are these peoples' lives that fascinating that they have to relate each and every detail? Is what they're saying so important that it can't wait for a face to face? And when do they find the time to do new things worth talking about? Cell phone use is clearly an addiction and although I have some pity, it's hard not to look down on an addict. I guess I know I'm old, when I just don't get it. But even when I was young, phone calls were a one minute affair to arrange a meeting. Only chics yapped on and on for hours. Must be a metro thing for the guys.
I don't need my broadband connection and wireless router running all night even if I leave my computers up.
Actually, I'm gonna need you to keep that connection up at night. My spambot cron job isn't scheduled to run until 3am.
You know, outside of the east and west coast, pretty much everyone does have guns. Even the liberals. It's like owning a hammer. Yet the only time I've ever had a gun pulled on me was in NYC where no one I know owns a gun (that didn't border on being an antique). I drive very aggressively in Colorado, certainly pissing off people left and right (judging by their hand gestures) and nobody has threatened me here, despite every other car having a pro-gun bumper sticker. And although I suspect the numbers would be a wash in the end, why should I be prevented from defending myself to save drunken bar fighters?
I could not for the life of me think of a reason why you would watch a man with a gun walk in and start shooting your friends and NOT DO ANYTHING TO DEFEND YOURSELF.
I think part of the problem is due to gun ignorance. Contrary to what we learn in the movies, it's hard enough to hit a stationary target any distance away, much less a moving one. I recall a study where they tested cops firing at a stationary target ten feet away, while under some sort of stress and they were only able to hit their targets 6 out of 10 times on average. That's with training, at only ten feet away. If you come across a shooter, your odds are much better if you simply run, rather than sitting there, waiting for him to shoot you (assuming he's not right next to you). It may be scary, but what choice do you have?
Just about every story is about how the world is ending, mostly because of man-made global warming.
I really don't know what to believe when it comes to global warming, but it does come across right now as a fad to the point where I doubt the legitimacy of the claims. In my experience, serious problems go neglected while politician drone on about the inconsequential stuff. But who knows, this could be a first. It also seems like there are far more important environmental issues that are being brushed aside as a consequence.
I hear what you say about British media. I know they live on a island and all, but they seem completely obsessed with it over there to the point of hysteria. It's working out well for a physicist friend of mine who claims to have developed a free energy technique. Some British billionaire is flying him around all over Europe, wanting to fund him. I suppose if the claim is real, then some good will have come out of the hysteria after all.
But we'd have to check them out through webcams, being too pale to step into the light.
I don't think it serves any purpose to use half-baked, unreasearched theories to blame everything short of a supernova on global warming.
I had a good response to you, but I forgot what it was. Damn these global warming related memory lapses.
I'm a very strong supporter of spoiler warnings, prior to the show airing, but if you're waiting to watch something on Tivo, either watch it already, or don't visit discussions about the show. It's far easier for you to manage than it is for everyone else to post spoiler warnings for any old show they've ever seen (which is really ridiculous if you consider it).
*** SPOILER WARNING ***
Kristin Shepard shot J.R.
oh yeah and...
Fonzie survived the shark jump.
*** END SPOILER WARNING ***
blew their budget on the occupation episodes to start the season. Does anyone remember how crazy those were? It is really difficult to build that many amazing sets for a series that is on a cable network.
Ummm, they were living in tents. I can afford that budget.
Huh? Did you SEE the season 3 finale?? Oh well.
I did, and it's the primary reason this news doesn't sadden me. Exodus Pt. II however, that was TV at its finest.
I've generally had the feeling that the show is actually going somewhere
RDM said he pulled that season finale game changer out of his ass halfway through the season. I'd say that's evidence of lack of direction. He doesn't know what to do and he's just making up wild twists. It's time for this one to go.
...but since they don't have 48 hours, they'll do it in 12.
At the place where I work, we are on the verge of switching out our Solaris servers for Linux ones. I've been proposing for years using the "cost" argument. But in truth, I just hate the antiquated tools. When vi doesn't understand arrow keys or columns greater than 120, it becomes a drain on my productivity. So it's definitely costing them money in this case. It's about time Sun.
How about, instead of wasting your time trying to protect your content from being copied, you spend a little time making sure that you have content to protect? You know, like not canceling all of your shows (Carnivale, Deadwood, Rome, Sopranos, etc). I've been a loyal HBO subscriber practically my whole life, but I'll be canceling in a few more weeks cause of short sighted management at HBO. I'm sure I'm not the only one and I'm also sure that some HBO bonehead like this guy will just blame the cancellations on piracy. HBO has done more to piss off it's customer base these past few years than any other network. This just seems like an effort to deflect peoples attention from their real problems.
Neo-Nazis have a right to march in Cincinnati
It actually came out in an unrelated federal court hearing that the march was staged by a paid FBI informant. It's interesting to know it made some people angry about free speech though. Makes you wonder.