>With today's technology, it should be possible to have hundreds of channels per market.
Funny, the FCC just approved IBOC (In-Band, On-Channel) digital broadcasting. This effectively stretches the dial by allowing more stations through digital transmission. Unfortunately, the FCC approved it AS WRITTEN BY CLEAR CHANNEL et al. Hence we'll get 200 stations... of crap.
My conspiracy theory is that the radio conglomerates developed IBOC to kill satellite radio. If ya can't beat 'em, join 'em... then betray 'em.
>Combine this with reasonable ownership limitations and the situation would be much better for people who want choice.
I'm not holding my breath. I am reading music zines, alternative weeklies, and yes, downloading (fair-use) files. When I find a band I like, I shell out for a hardcopy.
>I'd hate to see a single station go down or be forced to let a bunch of staff go just because they are essentially forced to by a bill...
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit."
- Robert Heinlein, "Life-Line"
Ironically, this is a case of turning back the FCC clock to 1995.
>Why is it the government's job to ensure "diversity" and "level the playing field" for new competition to move in?
Because, in the FCC's OWN CHARTER (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf), their raison d'etre is as ombudsman for a public resource. That's right, radio spectrum is a common good. Hence station licenses.
>we, as listeners, constitute the "buyers" in the radio industry
QuickMBA, eh? My lord, you need to study the business model. The advertizers are the buyers, and we, as listeners, are sheeple on a platter. Why do you think Clear Channel has diversified into "traditional highway billboards to Times Square Spectacolor, taxi tops, shopping malls, mobile truck panels, buses and train station and airport advertising" and stadiums? CC says this in not so few words on their own site: "Selling teams are driven to package and sell various media and entertainment products across the company's multiple advertising platforms. Result: Integrated advertising and promotional programs that reach consumers and get results." (http://www.clearchannel.com/radio/) Hell, "Outdoor" comes before "Radio" on every page!
See also http://www.clearchannel.com/documents/press_releas es/052102ClearChannelAdvantage.pdf, "CLEAR CHANNEL WORLDWIDE LAUNCHES "CLEAR CHANNEL ADVANTAGE" ULTIMATE ONE-STOP SHOPPING FOR ADVERTISERS"
>In the end, if you're not happy with what you hear on the radio, change the channel!...to another Clear Channel station, or Infinity? Same sh*t, different MHz. In some markets, you can't even do that.
>I find it striking that/.ers who are constantly railing against organizations like the RIAA trying to restrict what they listen to immediately turn around and applaud government for attempting to do the same type of thing.
My, that's a lot of rope you've got there... webcasts, XM, et al ARE our way of turning the channel, since the radio knob doesn't do it anymore. Regardless of how you feel about Napster and cohort, "new media" are de facto adding choices, while "old media" are de jure entrenching business models.
We're getting off topic, so- You obviously have business training. You of all people should call a profit a profit, and not confuse principle with principal.
...if "pirate" radio stations what didn't mess with paid signals and emergency/airport bands were allowed.
They would have been, had micro-radio been approved by the FCC. But the big stations, of course, claimed micro-radio would interfere with their broadcasts despite being.4MHz away and under, like, five watts. And big stations can afford lobbyists.
Meanwhile, the FCC approves IBOC digital radio, approved as a blank check to the existing radio corporations that proposed it. IBOC is.2MHz away from existing stations.
For-profit stations have millions invested in licenses and transmitters. They don't want johnny pirate screwing up either their broadcast or their business model.
You miss locality... and people like that. ClearChannel is trying to do an XM like setup but with FM. They own tons of radio stations which they run all under one roof.. and they are all computer run
Aside from being contradictory, this is not strictly true. Morning DJs are of course syndicated nationwide; many others are multi-market; and pick up a newspaper or two to scan for local content. Some listeners have noticed DJs mispronouncing local names and making other geographic errors; in all likelihood the DJ is not even in the same time zone.
Even non-morning DJs don't have to be local. With enough cash and stations, you get a "reverse time-shift" console, and record a whole aftenoon's worth of song names, segueways, and patter in an hour. Once, a West Virginia corporate station was scrambling to recover from a fault. They operate by streaming a feed from some national office, and there were like two people in the station's building.
If I like a station, within a year they switch the format to Mexican radio.
Standard conglomerate-radio tactic. Enter a market, buy up as many stations as possible, then concentrate each into whatever pigeonhole the marketing department says. If you still have excess stations, spin them off into non-competing formats (sports, news, Spanish). If another conglomerate has split the prime spectrum, skew formats to prevent overlap.
This is not so that you, the listener, have a nice choice of presets. This is to become one-stop shopping to advertizing agencies. You want to plug Cadillac? Try our Oldies station. You've got Nissan XTerras? Dude, Xtreme 101!!! Radio is about delivering "eardrums," just as the web was about delivering eyeballs a few years ago.
I'm guessing that you liked the independent radio stations, and some conglomerate was just taking its time buying or converting them.
You got to the moon first, so what? Did you achieve anything once you got there?
And your science background is...? You appear to know some, so I'll let it go.
We sent a geologist to the moon, Jack Schmitt. We found massive quantities of titanium and aluminum (useless as anything, of course). We left seismographs and laser retroreflectors, which added evidence to relativity (equivalence) and helped constrain the Newtonian constant.
My science background: work for NASA. And no, I don't think the 2010 date is realistic, personally.
Conventional wisdom is aptly named because most people aren't wise. NASA spends a few percent of its budget on educational efforts because most people...umm, most taxpayers...don't have a clue.
Sorry, blockers are illegal in Britain and most US states I believe...pretty sure about New York banning them. And I don't expect any action with Powell in charge of the FCC.
As a longtime bicyclist and current motorcyclist, let me say shut up about THE F\/[$\| STEERING WHEEL already. First, it's a concept. It's not actually going to hit the showrooms. Second, it's reconfigurable. You can brake with your sphincter for all I care.
Third and most important, _who_says_a_wheel_is_ natural? Squeeze brakes and tilt steering have been on bikes since BEFORE CARS EXISTED. If you're too lazy to pick up another UI (and I suppose driver's ed was the torture of the damned?), that doesn't mean the platform's invalid or unworthy. In fact, safety experts would rip out the wheel in a heartbeat if a marketable substitute existed; fewer people would die of chest injuries.
I already use fuel cells. Bicycles are powered by mitochondria.
No, the tolerances in a car were tightened _because_ it's watercooled. Parts had to have space when aircooled because they would expand too much. Hence watercooling allowed more precise engine parts. Tight tolerances now reduce emissions and noise. Some are worried that tighter emissions regs will kill aircooled motorcycles.
On-topic: Surely there must be some combination of enhanced airflow (i.e. Mac Cube power brick) and natural convection loop that can at least handle small PSUs. Or do the manufacturers not trust us to orient them properly?
Of course you feel gypped. This is a human-interest story about what "people like you and me" do in their spare time. Hence the headline drew you in. Once you plop down the 50 cents, lotsa luck finding any actual info.
Lame stories like this are why alternative media (fansites, alternative weeklies, zines, P2P, slashdot) exist.
On-topic: I'm planning an alcohol intake fogger for my motorcycle. "Intercooling," octane boosting, and emissions reduction in one fell swoop. I can refill at most drugstores, and the only modification to a stock part is a hole.
...AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, British Telecom, etc. - will soon begin to find its weighty physical and capital infrastructure too expensive to maintain in the face of innovations like cognitive radio, ad hoc networks, mesh...
Hmmm, independent backbone... you mean like, independent radio? The FCC shot down micro-radio,
claiming interference with existing stations. It then gave us IBOC, a corporate giveaway.
Don't tell me I'll get broadband from my neighbors. I don't even get a hand-wave, let alone a carrier
wave. And the FCC certainly doesn't stay up nights worrying about your walls, rain, or spectrum in the
crowded GHz band.
Slashdot Mirror
>With today's technology, it should be possible
to have hundreds of channels per market.
Funny, the FCC just approved IBOC (In-Band, On-Channel) digital broadcasting. This effectively stretches the dial by allowing more stations through digital transmission. Unfortunately, the FCC approved it AS WRITTEN BY CLEAR CHANNEL et al. Hence we'll get 200 stations... of crap.
My conspiracy theory is that the radio conglomerates developed IBOC to kill satellite radio. If ya can't beat 'em, join 'em... then betray 'em.
>Combine this with reasonable ownership
limitations and the situation would be much
better for people who want choice.
I'm not holding my breath. I am reading music zines, alternative weeklies, and yes, downloading (fair-use) files. When I find a band I like, I shell out for a hardcopy.
>I'd hate to see a single station go down or be forced to let a bunch of staff go just because they are essentially forced to by a bill...
"There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit."
- Robert Heinlein, "Life-Line"
Ironically, this is a case of turning back the FCC clock to 1995.
>Why is it the government's job to ensure "diversity" and "level the playing field" for new competition to move in?
s es/052102ClearChannelAdvantage.pdf, "CLEAR CHANNEL WORLDWIDE LAUNCHES "CLEAR CHANNEL ADVANTAGE" ULTIMATE ONE-STOP SHOPPING FOR ADVERTISERS"
...to another Clear Channel station, or Infinity? Same sh*t, different MHz. In some markets, you can't even do that.
/.ers who are constantly railing against organizations like the RIAA trying to restrict what they listen to immediately turn around and applaud government for attempting to do the same type of thing.
Because, in the FCC's OWN CHARTER (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf), their raison d'etre is as ombudsman for a public resource. That's right, radio spectrum is a common good. Hence station licenses.
>we, as listeners, constitute the "buyers" in the radio industry
QuickMBA, eh? My lord, you need to study the business model. The advertizers are the buyers, and we, as listeners, are sheeple on a platter. Why do you think Clear Channel has diversified into "traditional highway billboards to Times Square Spectacolor, taxi tops, shopping malls, mobile truck panels, buses and train station and airport advertising" and stadiums? CC says this in not so few words on their own site: "Selling teams are driven to package and sell various media and entertainment products across the company's multiple advertising platforms. Result: Integrated advertising and promotional programs that reach consumers and get results." (http://www.clearchannel.com/radio/) Hell, "Outdoor" comes before "Radio" on every page!
See also http://www.clearchannel.com/documents/press_relea
>In the end, if you're not happy with what you hear on the radio, change the channel!
>I find it striking that
My, that's a lot of rope you've got there... webcasts, XM, et al ARE our way of turning the channel, since the radio knob doesn't do it anymore. Regardless of how you feel about Napster and cohort, "new media" are de facto adding choices, while "old media" are de jure entrenching business models.
We're getting off topic, so- You obviously have business training. You of all people should call a profit a profit, and not confuse principle with principal.
...if "pirate" radio stations what didn't mess with paid signals and emergency/airport bands were allowed.
.4MHz away and under, like, five watts. And big stations can afford lobbyists.
.2MHz away from existing stations.
They would have been, had micro-radio been approved by the FCC. But the big stations, of course, claimed micro-radio would interfere with their broadcasts despite being
Meanwhile, the FCC approves IBOC digital radio, approved as a blank check to the existing radio corporations that proposed it. IBOC is
For-profit stations have millions invested in licenses and transmitters. They don't want johnny pirate screwing up either their broadcast or their business model.
You miss locality... and people like that. ClearChannel is trying to do an XM like setup but with FM. They own tons of radio stations which they run all under one roof.. and they are all computer run Aside from being contradictory, this is not strictly true. Morning DJs are of course syndicated nationwide; many others are multi-market; and pick up a newspaper or two to scan for local content. Some listeners have noticed DJs mispronouncing local names and making other geographic errors; in all likelihood the DJ is not even in the same time zone. Even non-morning DJs don't have to be local. With enough cash and stations, you get a "reverse time-shift" console, and record a whole aftenoon's worth of song names, segueways, and patter in an hour. Once, a West Virginia corporate station was scrambling to recover from a fault. They operate by streaming a feed from some national office, and there were like two people in the station's building.
If I like a station, within a year they switch the format to Mexican radio.
Standard conglomerate-radio tactic. Enter a market, buy up as many stations as possible, then concentrate each into whatever pigeonhole the marketing department says. If you still have excess stations, spin them off into non-competing formats (sports, news, Spanish). If another conglomerate has split the prime spectrum, skew formats to prevent overlap.
This is not so that you, the listener, have a nice choice of presets. This is to become one-stop shopping to advertizing agencies. You want to plug Cadillac? Try our Oldies station. You've got Nissan XTerras? Dude, Xtreme 101!!! Radio is about delivering "eardrums," just as the web was about delivering eyeballs a few years ago.
I'm guessing that you liked the independent radio stations, and some conglomerate was just taking its time buying or converting them.
You got to the moon first, so what? Did you achieve anything once you got there?
And your science background is...? You appear to know some, so I'll let it go.
We sent a geologist to the moon, Jack Schmitt. We found massive quantities of titanium and aluminum (useless as anything, of course). We left seismographs and laser retroreflectors, which added evidence to relativity (equivalence) and helped constrain the Newtonian constant.
My science background: work for NASA. And no, I don't think the 2010 date is realistic, personally.
Conventional wisdom is aptly named because most people aren't wise. NASA spends a few percent of its budget on educational efforts because most people...umm, most taxpayers...don't have a clue.
Sorry, blockers are illegal in Britain and most US states I believe...pretty sure about New York banning them. And I don't expect any action with Powell in charge of the FCC.
As a longtime bicyclist and current motorcyclist, let me say shut up about THE F\/[$\| STEERING WHEEL already. First, it's a concept. It's not actually going to hit the showrooms. Second, it's reconfigurable. You can brake with your sphincter for all I care.
Third and most important, _who_says_a_wheel_is_ natural? Squeeze brakes and tilt steering have been on bikes since BEFORE CARS EXISTED. If you're too lazy to pick up another UI (and I suppose driver's ed was the torture of the damned?), that doesn't mean the platform's invalid or unworthy. In fact, safety experts would rip out the wheel in a heartbeat if a marketable substitute existed; fewer people would die of chest injuries.
I already use fuel cells. Bicycles are powered by mitochondria.
No, the tolerances in a car were tightened _because_ it's watercooled. Parts had to have space when aircooled because they would expand too much. Hence watercooling allowed more precise engine parts. Tight tolerances now reduce emissions and noise. Some are worried that tighter emissions regs will kill aircooled motorcycles.
On-topic: Surely there must be some combination of enhanced airflow (i.e. Mac Cube power brick) and natural convection loop that can at least handle small PSUs. Or do the manufacturers not trust us to orient them properly?
Of course you feel gypped. This is a human-interest story about what "people like you and me" do in their spare time. Hence the headline drew you in. Once you plop down the 50 cents, lotsa luck finding any actual info.
Lame stories like this are why alternative media (fansites, alternative weeklies, zines, P2P, slashdot) exist.
On-topic: I'm planning an alcohol intake fogger for my motorcycle. "Intercooling," octane boosting, and emissions reduction in one fell swoop. I can refill at most drugstores, and the only modification to a stock part is a hole.
...AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, British Telecom, etc. - will soon begin to find its weighty physical and capital
infrastructure too expensive to maintain in the face of innovations like cognitive radio, ad hoc networks, mesh...
Hmmm, independent backbone... you mean like, independent radio? The FCC shot down micro-radio,
claiming interference with existing stations. It then gave us IBOC, a corporate giveaway.
Don't tell me I'll get broadband from my neighbors. I don't even get a hand-wave, let alone a carrier
wave. And the FCC certainly doesn't stay up nights worrying about your walls, rain, or spectrum in the
crowded GHz band.