This post has a link to a better description with graphics. The following thread is also informative.
What the original article (and you) aren't noting is that the same effect occurs when you shoot just a single photon or electron at the pinholes. A single photon can't go through multiple pinholes, can't interfere with other photons (since they aren't around), and can't be aware of where other photons might have gone. Yet the interference pattern still shows up. It is like the photons interfere with themselves.
I'm only an engineer, so my physics is all macroscopic and mostly F=dm/dt*v + m*dv/dt; I can't explain it to you very well, but the link I provided has physicists who can.
OK, so now that the site has finally loaded, I can see that this is a [not very funny] joke site. Seriously, I see that Timothy put on the headline that it is from the lighten-up joke dept, but if you are going to post a fake site on a supposed news site, at least make sure you bandwidth test it before posting. You could've had 200 of your closest friends load the site and see how fast it loads... scale that up by 3 orders of magnitude and you can determine that a joke that takes 20 minutes to load isn't all that funny.
Also, as a long-time reader of/., I'd prefer to keep the joke stories confined to Apr 1st.
Rambus is saying the REASON the prices were high is because the chipmakers colluded to keep them high. So Rambus is saying this log file happened:
Memory Maker 1: I don't want to pay royalties. Memory Maker 2: Neither do I. Memory Maker 1: We can raise prices to make Rambus expensive. Memory Maker 2: Let's do it. Memory Maker 1: Ok. . . . Memory Maker 1: Prices for RDRAM are now very high, and nobody is buying it. Memory Maker 2: Great, let's sell chips to companies making a cheaper solution that is almost as good. Memory Maker 1: Sounds good.
Whether or not that actually happened is what the case is about. I would venture to say that the truth is somewhere in between.
I'm sorry, but I was there when this happened... it wasn't the computer fire that made his room stink. It ALWAYS smelled like that. Just a guess, but it might have been the dirty underwear all over the floor. The smoke from the fire was a cool special effect, though... kind of like a visual representation of the smell coming from his floor.
How in the fuck can that last message be modded Overrated when IT WAS NEVER RATED IN THE FIRST PLACE?!
Then it got modded Offtopic?! It's completely Ontopic! You can submit a message/picture to be displayed by the lights during the show, and I posted what I wanted displayed. How in the fuck is that Offtopic? And how can a negatively modded post be Overrated?
Maybe it wasn't funny, but I shouldn't get punished for that. Hopefully those fucktard mods will get smacked down in metamoderation and their points taken away (if that is even how things work).
Asshats.
P.S. THIS post is offtopic, but it isn't overrated. The parent post was neither offtopic nor overrated.
I'm wondering if the poster or the editor even RTFA. I'm reading the forums, and most DO NOT love it. Most people are annoyed by it. They say it looks great, sure, but they say it is annoying to use in practice.
The big problem they are having is it doesn't switch native resolutions. Every time you change the channel or watch a new show that has been recorded, you have to change the output resolution. How many wives want to hit 10 buttons just to change the channel? Others are saying it isn't recording all of their season pass shows correctly.
They are optimistic, though, because the chips used in the TiVo should easily be able to fix the native res problem by a software update.
No, the $300 will not work. Sure, they'll be able to play TV on the wall fine, but they'll look like ass. For normal res TV, you need at least 800x600 to look good. If you plan on playing DVDs or HDTV stuff, though, you need at least 1024x768. For true HD, though, 1280 is needed. All of the projectors will scale down a higher res image to their native res, but you don't want that. Also, most higher res stuff like DVD and HD are widescreen, but most lower end projectors are 4:3. Using those for widescreen wastes resolution and, from some things I've read, isn't good for the projector.
You also need to worry about lumens depending on how dark your room is, lamp lifetime and cost, use for main TV or just a movie projector, fan noise, etc.
I would suggest a high lumen, 1024x768 projector with a widescreen native lens. If you need HD and are concerned about image quality, go for the 1280 res ones. The jump in price is enormous, but you don't have to worry about scaling, and less worry about widescreen native lens.
Well, as impossible as the job might be, this position wasn't around during the Apollo days. The article clearly states that NASA didn't consider Lunar bugs to be much of an issue, since it is a very hostile place for life. It wasn't until the Viking landers leaving for Mars that this position was developed.
I absolutely will not go see the movie unless all of the below occur:
a) 85% of critics say it is amazing, not based on tech merits
b) 95% of my peers say it is amazing, not based on tech merits
c) I am impressed by the bittorrented download
After the second Matrix I made the same vow about the third. I still haven't seen the third in the theatre but did see that horrible movie via BT. I can't tell you how happy I am to not have paid $10 for that POS.
I'll BT Ep3, and if it passes my muster I'll pay to see it (I give money where money is due).
I also will not be buying these DVDs... I already have the movies in one format, so have no need for them in another. They'll be available in HD-DVD in a few years anyway.
Movies are NOT generally released on Thursdays. I don't know what country you live in, but in the U.S. they are released 89% of the time on Friday, and the other 9% on Wednesday (and those cases are usually blockbusters-to-be)... That is a made up statistic, but it has to be close. I think you might be confusing a 12:01 showing on Thursday (which is actually Friday) with an actual Thursday opening. Go to IMDb.com and see the Friday release dates. In a quick search around I couldn't find a Wed or Thur opening (even the new Harry Potter opens on a Friday in June). The LOTR movies were all Friday releases; Matrix Reloaded was Thur, while Revolutions was Wed; all three Harry Potter movies were/are Fri releases. Eps 1-3 are the only movies I can think of besides Reloaded that were Thur openings. "Premiers" don't count, either, since those are only in one theatre and just a celebrity press event. The movies are generally shown to critics earlier, too, so that doesn't count.
The purpose of Bittorrent is to take the load off the server and its bandwidth. If I only get 50% of the file from peers and have to get the other from the server, then I have just saved the server bandwidth. Think about it... they can pump out files twice as large as they normally could. And that is with only 50% peering; I see a few completed ones on the tracker. Also, I always thought that it downloaded random chunks (i.e. not in a continuous, linear chunk download), but someone replied to you saying it didn't. I'm fairly sure it does, though. If it does, then you could still get the second half from incomplete seeds.
ummm... sure, that will put the dpad on the left, but won't that put the screen under your palms instead of above your thumbs? Flipping the MPx would also either put the screen under your palms or to the right side or your hand. I have a treo600, with dpad in the center, so flipping does nothing (and since the buttons are close to the dpad, it is difficult to hit A and Right at the same time).
Unless you are talking about a hardware hack where you physically move the screen to the other side of the phone/pda... that is a little bit risky for me on a $600 piece of equipment.
Excuse me, but if you went through the trouble of going to court with this, why did you not take it all the way? I mean, you won $1000, why did you call THEM asking for satisfaction? Why not take further legal action? I'm sorry, but if a company owes me that kind of money, I'm going to get it.
The next part is even more unbelievable. As big as SBC is, I highly doubt that some low level bill supervisor cares about your lawsuit and complaints enough to perform highly illegal actions (of which you have written, documented proof in your bill). Even more ludicrous is that a high level manager would care about something so petty as $1000 to fuck with you. Then, even if this did happen, why did you not take those bills to the Better Business Bureau or to small claims court again?
All of this sounds like urban legend... even the $1000. I would guess that a judge would fine them the amount you paid to have your phone unlisted, then ordered them to take your name out of the next version of the phone book.
Does your lack of knowledge about the number of tumblers in your door lock make it easier for a thief to crack? No. Will I ever, EVER need to know how many tumblers or even that there are tumblers in order for me to use a lock? No. The exact same questions can be asked about your other stupid analogies.
In the past couple weeks I've had to act as phone support for friends trying to configure their IP address to use their network. To even USE a computer for what it is designed you need training. I can't tell you how many times my friends who use computers everyday have tried to email me an mp3 and have only sent their winamp playlists... or told me all of their files were deleted when Word or Excel couldn't find a file that was in the recent docs list.
These are basic tasks that can't be performed without knowledge of how the computer works. BASIC tasks. Do you need a manual to use your phone, TV, or remote? No. Do you need a manual to program phone numbers in memory, add new devices to a remote, hook up 20 cables for a home theatre system? Yes (for non-geeks). Advanced tasks are the only times when you need training. Basic tasks for a computer require training. If you don't know the modulation scheme for your TV or the ring voltage of your phone, can a hacker come in and destroy it? No. Just using a computer opens it up for malicious activity.
Even worse is the analogy people use with car engines. Sure, I don't know what the tension is supposed to be on my old cable clutch, or how much pressure is in the hydraulic clutch... but does that hinder my ability to use it how it was designed? No. Can you just put a 12 year old in the driver seat and expect that kid to a) know how to operate the vehicle, and b) not kill people when they do? No. You have to be trained to use a car for its basic function to be usable. Same with a computer. Its basic function is complex and requires knowledge to use correctly and responsibly.
I didn't want to delve into those tech details, but you are definitely correct. I was just trying to make a simplified model. I would also love to see a Sat engineer explain their bandwidth usage metering.
The other issue I didn't mention was that a popular channel like MTV would cost Dish/DTV more to buy than a smaller channel, so a smaller channel wouldn't need as high of a viewer base to justify it's transmission costs. The actual sats also have have more directed spot beams now, so Indiana would have roughly its own feed and California its own. Those two issues would help the per channel model, but I don't think it would help enough.
I question your reasoning. Dish does want it both ways, but I believe they have a right to. There is a real reason for them to do package pricing:
1) Since decoding is done at the customer's box, every single channel is broadcast to every single home. To add Nicktoons, they have to broadcast it to everyone, regardless of whether anyone wants it.
2) Each channel they broadcast takes up bandwidth to transmit, and bandwidth costs money.
3) Each channel costs the same in bandwidth to broadcast as any other channel, so the cost scales linearly with number of channels broadcast.
4) Since everyone would opt for roughly the same 10 to 20 channels, the very low rated ones wouldn't support themselves.
Dish/DTV/Cable MUST use package pricing, unless you want to pay something like $5/channel/mo. The price would be high since you not only have to pay for the channels you want, but have to support the channels only a few want. The other option would be to have variable cost channel pricing... MTV would only be $3/mo, while Nicktoons would be $7/mo. That would make it even less of an incentive to buy those obscure channels, though.
So, the problem becomes that once you can only buy the 10 channels you want, the low rated channels don't support themselves and get dropped. Now we have much less variety and fewer options. Sound familiar? Yeah, that is how radio is now. So you would be paying more money for less variety.
The reason Dish/DTV/Cable wants individual package selection from Viacom et.al. is that they would never purchase Nicktoons if they didn't have to. Providing it will add no new customers and nobody will want to pay extra for it. They will be paying for bandwidth of a channel that adds no revenue.
Picking a side should be easy and not silly... If there were no package pricing for Dish/DTV/Cable, they wouldn't have to broadcast Nicktoons and others nobody cares about, therefore lowering your bill. If there were no package pricing for you, the average customer bill would actually go up. Also, there are monopolistic concerns to help choose sides... you have the choice between Dish, DTV, Cable, real Sat dish, Voom!, and just broadcast. Dish, however has no choice in whether they broadcast different channels; they are FORCED to have certain channels.
Now, I would love to have individual channel selection, since I literally only watch 5 channels; and even at $5/channel my bill would lower. But anyone who isn't single will need at least 10 channels to satisfy others in the household.
P.S. Screw Viacom. If nobody wants to buy Nicktoons, it shouldn't exist. They are forcing Dish to sell a product Dish doesn't want to sell, because nobody wants to buy it. They are forcing Dish to either lose money or raise rates.
"If the cost to distribute is the same, carrying lots of channels is the same as only carrying a few right?"
No, I meant that carrying one channel versus another is the same. Rough numbers might be: carrying 125 channels costs Dish $125, while carrying 126 would cost $126. Comedy Central costs $1 of bandwidth to beam to you and so does Nicktoons. Comedy Central might represent $1.50 in customer revenue for Dish (since so many people want it), while Nicktoons might only represent $0.50. Why would Dish want a revenue loser to take up their bandwidth?
They have to stream ALL channels at ALL times to ALL people. Streaming a single channel takes up X amount of bandwidth. Bandwidth costs money, so Dish would rather put fewer channels out there. Adding a channel that nobody watches costs them in bandwidth, but doesn't gain them any customers.
You are bitching because Dish and DTV are making you buy a package when you only want one channel? Well, what the hell do you think this squabble is about? Dish and DTV have to buy the whole package from Viacom just to get one channel. Dish and DTV want to pay Viacom per channel just as much as you (whether they want to allow you to pay per channel is different).
The reason Viacom won't do the PPC is that the number of people who will actively decide to pay for Nicktoons is much lower than that for Comedy Central... therefore it will be tough to support that channel. The reason Dish and DTV won't do PPC is that the cost for them to distribute Nicktoons is the exact same as Comedy Central. And they have to distribute it to everyone (just that everyone won't be decoding it), so if nobody buys it, why distribute it?
So, would you rather pay $2 per channel and only get the 30 or so channels you watch, or $40 and get 300 channels? I know I'd opt for the first. The problem becomes that lower rated channels can no longer support themselves. I don't know their stats, but I'm guessing Golf Channel is gone.
You can, or at least, you could with Sprint (pre-portability).
When I got my first cell phone, it was bought and billed to Indiana; but I requested a Los Angeles number since I would be living there for the summer. They allowed me to do that. When I moved back, I requested an Indianapolis number. After finishing school, I moved back to L.A. and still have my Indy number (but am billed in L.A.).
If the carriers are giving him problems, the obvious and simple solution would be for him to switch carriers NOW (before he moves), keep his old number, and just change billing addressses later.
Well, how about these analogies: Why would anyone pay to go skydiving? After the jump is over, do you still own that jump and can you make it again for free? No. After eating a meal at a nice restaurant, do you own the meal and can you eat it again? Not unless you are some kind of twisted sicko. Why go to a concert? You can't (legally) repeat that experience for free.
Music in the format Napster is selling is an experience, something that can't really be owned. You pay to enjoy music. What have you to show for the $1200 you paid for 10 years worth of music? Ten years worth of enjoyment. I've spent WAY more than that over the course of the past 10 years buying music. I have 300 cds sitting in my car right now (go ahead and steal them, as they are legal backups of the originals at home). This $10/mo guarantees you can listen to any freakin cd you want. I listen to music for 8hrs a day at work; that would be a lot of different artists to try out. Spending $120 on iTunes gets you 120 songs, or about 10 albums. With Napster I can get roughly 5 albums per DAY, or 1500 albums over the course of a year for that $120.
Now, to why I won't pay for this service... I spend a lot of time driving and need music in my car. If I can't stream the Napsterified songs to my car, then why would I pay for it? This is the realm of iTunes. The reason I won't pay for iTunes is that I already have 300 cds, so I can either pay them for the digital versions or spend the hours and hours to digitize them myself.
P.S. At least 2/3 of my 300 cds were bought used or from non-RIAA companies
Slashdot Mirror
This post has a link to a better description with graphics. The following thread is also informative.
What the original article (and you) aren't noting is that the same effect occurs when you shoot just a single photon or electron at the pinholes. A single photon can't go through multiple pinholes, can't interfere with other photons (since they aren't around), and can't be aware of where other photons might have gone. Yet the interference pattern still shows up. It is like the photons interfere with themselves.
I'm only an engineer, so my physics is all macroscopic and mostly F=dm/dt*v + m*dv/dt; I can't explain it to you very well, but the link I provided has physicists who can.
I'm on lite mode, you insensitive clod.
Seriously, I turned off those icons in my prefs, so I didn't see the python foot.
OK, so now that the site has finally loaded, I can see that this is a [not very funny] joke site. Seriously, I see that Timothy put on the headline that it is from the lighten-up joke dept, but if you are going to post a fake site on a supposed news site, at least make sure you bandwidth test it before posting. You could've had 200 of your closest friends load the site and see how fast it loads... scale that up by 3 orders of magnitude and you can determine that a joke that takes 20 minutes to load isn't all that funny.
/., I'd prefer to keep the joke stories confined to Apr 1st.
Also, as a long-time reader of
If Lindows lost to MS, then Megway is certainly going to be sued by (and lose to) the Segway guys.
/.ed already, so I have no idea how viable their product is.
Of course, there are 2 comments and the site is
You've got the chronology wrong.
Rambus is saying the REASON the prices were high is because the chipmakers colluded to keep them high. So Rambus is saying this log file happened:
Memory Maker 1: I don't want to pay royalties.
Memory Maker 2: Neither do I.
Memory Maker 1: We can raise prices to make Rambus expensive.
Memory Maker 2: Let's do it.
Memory Maker 1: Ok.
.
.
.
Memory Maker 1: Prices for RDRAM are now very high, and nobody is buying it.
Memory Maker 2: Great, let's sell chips to companies making a cheaper solution that is almost as good.
Memory Maker 1: Sounds good.
Whether or not that actually happened is what the case is about. I would venture to say that the truth is somewhere in between.
I'm sorry, but I was there when this happened... it wasn't the computer fire that made his room stink. It ALWAYS smelled like that. Just a guess, but it might have been the dirty underwear all over the floor. The smoke from the fire was a cool special effect, though... kind of like a visual representation of the smell coming from his floor.
How in the fuck can that last message be modded Overrated when IT WAS NEVER RATED IN THE FIRST PLACE?!
Then it got modded Offtopic?! It's completely Ontopic! You can submit a message/picture to be displayed by the lights during the show, and I posted what I wanted displayed. How in the fuck is that Offtopic? And how can a negatively modded post be Overrated?
Maybe it wasn't funny, but I shouldn't get punished for that. Hopefully those fucktard mods will get smacked down in metamoderation and their points taken away (if that is even how things work).
Asshats.
P.S.
THIS post is offtopic, but it isn't overrated. The parent post was neither offtopic nor overrated.
Mine would have to be:
(up arrow) (up arrow) (down arrow) (down arrow) (left arrow) (right arrow) (left arrow) (right arrow) B A Start
I'm wondering if the poster or the editor even RTFA. I'm reading the forums, and most DO NOT love it. Most people are annoyed by it. They say it looks great, sure, but they say it is annoying to use in practice.
The big problem they are having is it doesn't switch native resolutions. Every time you change the channel or watch a new show that has been recorded, you have to change the output resolution. How many wives want to hit 10 buttons just to change the channel? Others are saying it isn't recording all of their season pass shows correctly.
They are optimistic, though, because the chips used in the TiVo should easily be able to fix the native res problem by a software update.
No, the $300 will not work. Sure, they'll be able to play TV on the wall fine, but they'll look like ass. For normal res TV, you need at least 800x600 to look good. If you plan on playing DVDs or HDTV stuff, though, you need at least 1024x768. For true HD, though, 1280 is needed. All of the projectors will scale down a higher res image to their native res, but you don't want that. Also, most higher res stuff like DVD and HD are widescreen, but most lower end projectors are 4:3. Using those for widescreen wastes resolution and, from some things I've read, isn't good for the projector.
You also need to worry about lumens depending on how dark your room is, lamp lifetime and cost, use for main TV or just a movie projector, fan noise, etc.
I would suggest a high lumen, 1024x768 projector with a widescreen native lens. If you need HD and are concerned about image quality, go for the 1280 res ones. The jump in price is enormous, but you don't have to worry about scaling, and less worry about widescreen native lens.
Well, as impossible as the job might be, this position wasn't around during the Apollo days. The article clearly states that NASA didn't consider Lunar bugs to be much of an issue, since it is a very hostile place for life. It wasn't until the Viking landers leaving for Mars that this position was developed.
I absolutely will not go see the movie unless all of the below occur:
a) 85% of critics say it is amazing, not based on tech merits
b) 95% of my peers say it is amazing, not based on tech merits
c) I am impressed by the bittorrented download
After the second Matrix I made the same vow about the third. I still haven't seen the third in the theatre but did see that horrible movie via BT. I can't tell you how happy I am to not have paid $10 for that POS.
I'll BT Ep3, and if it passes my muster I'll pay to see it (I give money where money is due).
I also will not be buying these DVDs... I already have the movies in one format, so have no need for them in another. They'll be available in HD-DVD in a few years anyway.
Movies are NOT generally released on Thursdays. I don't know what country you live in, but in the U.S. they are released 89% of the time on Friday, and the other 9% on Wednesday (and those cases are usually blockbusters-to-be)... That is a made up statistic, but it has to be close. I think you might be confusing a 12:01 showing on Thursday (which is actually Friday) with an actual Thursday opening. Go to IMDb.com and see the Friday release dates. In a quick search around I couldn't find a Wed or Thur opening (even the new Harry Potter opens on a Friday in June). The LOTR movies were all Friday releases; Matrix Reloaded was Thur, while Revolutions was Wed; all three Harry Potter movies were/are Fri releases. Eps 1-3 are the only movies I can think of besides Reloaded that were Thur openings. "Premiers" don't count, either, since those are only in one theatre and just a celebrity press event. The movies are generally shown to critics earlier, too, so that doesn't count.
The purpose of Bittorrent is to take the load off the server and its bandwidth. If I only get 50% of the file from peers and have to get the other from the server, then I have just saved the server bandwidth. Think about it... they can pump out files twice as large as they normally could. And that is with only 50% peering; I see a few completed ones on the tracker. Also, I always thought that it downloaded random chunks (i.e. not in a continuous, linear chunk download), but someone replied to you saying it didn't. I'm fairly sure it does, though. If it does, then you could still get the second half from incomplete seeds.
ummm... sure, that will put the dpad on the left, but won't that put the screen under your palms instead of above your thumbs? Flipping the MPx would also either put the screen under your palms or to the right side or your hand. I have a treo600, with dpad in the center, so flipping does nothing (and since the buttons are close to the dpad, it is difficult to hit A and Right at the same time).
Unless you are talking about a hardware hack where you physically move the screen to the other side of the phone/pda... that is a little bit risky for me on a $600 piece of equipment.
Excuse me, but if you went through the trouble of going to court with this, why did you not take it all the way? I mean, you won $1000, why did you call THEM asking for satisfaction? Why not take further legal action? I'm sorry, but if a company owes me that kind of money, I'm going to get it.
The next part is even more unbelievable. As big as SBC is, I highly doubt that some low level bill supervisor cares about your lawsuit and complaints enough to perform highly illegal actions (of which you have written, documented proof in your bill). Even more ludicrous is that a high level manager would care about something so petty as $1000 to fuck with you. Then, even if this did happen, why did you not take those bills to the Better Business Bureau or to small claims court again?
All of this sounds like urban legend... even the $1000. I would guess that a judge would fine them the amount you paid to have your phone unlisted, then ordered them to take your name out of the next version of the phone book.
Does your lack of knowledge about the number of tumblers in your door lock make it easier for a thief to crack? No. Will I ever, EVER need to know how many tumblers or even that there are tumblers in order for me to use a lock? No. The exact same questions can be asked about your other stupid analogies.
In the past couple weeks I've had to act as phone support for friends trying to configure their IP address to use their network. To even USE a computer for what it is designed you need training. I can't tell you how many times my friends who use computers everyday have tried to email me an mp3 and have only sent their winamp playlists... or told me all of their files were deleted when Word or Excel couldn't find a file that was in the recent docs list.
These are basic tasks that can't be performed without knowledge of how the computer works. BASIC tasks. Do you need a manual to use your phone, TV, or remote? No. Do you need a manual to program phone numbers in memory, add new devices to a remote, hook up 20 cables for a home theatre system? Yes (for non-geeks). Advanced tasks are the only times when you need training. Basic tasks for a computer require training. If you don't know the modulation scheme for your TV or the ring voltage of your phone, can a hacker come in and destroy it? No. Just using a computer opens it up for malicious activity.
Even worse is the analogy people use with car engines. Sure, I don't know what the tension is supposed to be on my old cable clutch, or how much pressure is in the hydraulic clutch... but does that hinder my ability to use it how it was designed? No. Can you just put a 12 year old in the driver seat and expect that kid to a) know how to operate the vehicle, and b) not kill people when they do? No. You have to be trained to use a car for its basic function to be usable. Same with a computer. Its basic function is complex and requires knowledge to use correctly and responsibly.
I didn't want to delve into those tech details, but you are definitely correct. I was just trying to make a simplified model. I would also love to see a Sat engineer explain their bandwidth usage metering.
The other issue I didn't mention was that a popular channel like MTV would cost Dish/DTV more to buy than a smaller channel, so a smaller channel wouldn't need as high of a viewer base to justify it's transmission costs. The actual sats also have have more directed spot beams now, so Indiana would have roughly its own feed and California its own. Those two issues would help the per channel model, but I don't think it would help enough.
Any Dish/DTV techs want to respond?
I question your reasoning. Dish does want it both ways, but I believe they have a right to. There is a real reason for them to do package pricing:
1) Since decoding is done at the customer's box, every single channel is broadcast to every single home. To add Nicktoons, they have to broadcast it to everyone, regardless of whether anyone wants it.
2) Each channel they broadcast takes up bandwidth to transmit, and bandwidth costs money.
3) Each channel costs the same in bandwidth to broadcast as any other channel, so the cost scales linearly with number of channels broadcast.
4) Since everyone would opt for roughly the same 10 to 20 channels, the very low rated ones wouldn't support themselves.
Dish/DTV/Cable MUST use package pricing, unless you want to pay something like $5/channel/mo. The price would be high since you not only have to pay for the channels you want, but have to support the channels only a few want. The other option would be to have variable cost channel pricing... MTV would only be $3/mo, while Nicktoons would be $7/mo. That would make it even less of an incentive to buy those obscure channels, though.
So, the problem becomes that once you can only buy the 10 channels you want, the low rated channels don't support themselves and get dropped. Now we have much less variety and fewer options. Sound familiar? Yeah, that is how radio is now. So you would be paying more money for less variety.
The reason Dish/DTV/Cable wants individual package selection from Viacom et.al. is that they would never purchase Nicktoons if they didn't have to. Providing it will add no new customers and nobody will want to pay extra for it. They will be paying for bandwidth of a channel that adds no revenue.
Picking a side should be easy and not silly... If there were no package pricing for Dish/DTV/Cable, they wouldn't have to broadcast Nicktoons and others nobody cares about, therefore lowering your bill. If there were no package pricing for you, the average customer bill would actually go up. Also, there are monopolistic concerns to help choose sides... you have the choice between Dish, DTV, Cable, real Sat dish, Voom!, and just broadcast. Dish, however has no choice in whether they broadcast different channels; they are FORCED to have certain channels.
Now, I would love to have individual channel selection, since I literally only watch 5 channels; and even at $5/channel my bill would lower. But anyone who isn't single will need at least 10 channels to satisfy others in the household.
P.S.
Screw Viacom. If nobody wants to buy Nicktoons, it shouldn't exist. They are forcing Dish to sell a product Dish doesn't want to sell, because nobody wants to buy it. They are forcing Dish to either lose money or raise rates.
"If the cost to distribute is the same, carrying lots of channels is the same as only carrying a few right?"
No, I meant that carrying one channel versus another is the same. Rough numbers might be: carrying 125 channels costs Dish $125, while carrying 126 would cost $126. Comedy Central costs $1 of bandwidth to beam to you and so does Nicktoons. Comedy Central might represent $1.50 in customer revenue for Dish (since so many people want it), while Nicktoons might only represent $0.50. Why would Dish want a revenue loser to take up their bandwidth?
They have to stream ALL channels at ALL times to ALL people. Streaming a single channel takes up X amount of bandwidth. Bandwidth costs money, so Dish would rather put fewer channels out there. Adding a channel that nobody watches costs them in bandwidth, but doesn't gain them any customers.
You are bitching because Dish and DTV are making you buy a package when you only want one channel? Well, what the hell do you think this squabble is about? Dish and DTV have to buy the whole package from Viacom just to get one channel. Dish and DTV want to pay Viacom per channel just as much as you (whether they want to allow you to pay per channel is different).
The reason Viacom won't do the PPC is that the number of people who will actively decide to pay for Nicktoons is much lower than that for Comedy Central... therefore it will be tough to support that channel. The reason Dish and DTV won't do PPC is that the cost for them to distribute Nicktoons is the exact same as Comedy Central. And they have to distribute it to everyone (just that everyone won't be decoding it), so if nobody buys it, why distribute it?
So, would you rather pay $2 per channel and only get the 30 or so channels you watch, or $40 and get 300 channels? I know I'd opt for the first. The problem becomes that lower rated channels can no longer support themselves. I don't know their stats, but I'm guessing Golf Channel is gone.
You can, or at least, you could with Sprint (pre-portability).
When I got my first cell phone, it was bought and billed to Indiana; but I requested a Los Angeles number since I would be living there for the summer. They allowed me to do that. When I moved back, I requested an Indianapolis number. After finishing school, I moved back to L.A. and still have my Indy number (but am billed in L.A.).
If the carriers are giving him problems, the obvious and simple solution would be for him to switch carriers NOW (before he moves), keep his old number, and just change billing addressses later.
He is also a major component of Chappelle Show comedy.
YEEEEEAAHHHHHHH
OKAAAY
What?!
What?!
What?!
What?!
YEAAAAAAHHHHHHH
Well, how about these analogies:
Why would anyone pay to go skydiving? After the jump is over, do you still own that jump and can you make it again for free? No. After eating a meal at a nice restaurant, do you own the meal and can you eat it again? Not unless you are some kind of twisted sicko. Why go to a concert? You can't (legally) repeat that experience for free.
Music in the format Napster is selling is an experience, something that can't really be owned. You pay to enjoy music. What have you to show for the $1200 you paid for 10 years worth of music? Ten years worth of enjoyment. I've spent WAY more than that over the course of the past 10 years buying music. I have 300 cds sitting in my car right now (go ahead and steal them, as they are legal backups of the originals at home). This $10/mo guarantees you can listen to any freakin cd you want. I listen to music for 8hrs a day at work; that would be a lot of different artists to try out. Spending $120 on iTunes gets you 120 songs, or about 10 albums. With Napster I can get roughly 5 albums per DAY, or 1500 albums over the course of a year for that $120.
Now, to why I won't pay for this service... I spend a lot of time driving and need music in my car. If I can't stream the Napsterified songs to my car, then why would I pay for it? This is the realm of iTunes. The reason I won't pay for iTunes is that I already have 300 cds, so I can either pay them for the digital versions or spend the hours and hours to digitize them myself.
P.S.
At least 2/3 of my 300 cds were bought used or from non-RIAA companies