RoldGold

hmm, I didn’t type that twice, I dunno what happened there…

Well.. the drunk guy essentially had an Adwords sign on his chest proclaiming at least some knowledge of a topic Paul was pondering.

Well.. the drunk guy essentially had an Adwords sign on his chest proclaiming at least some knowledge of a topic Paul was pondering.He couldn’t avoid clicking… but since the drunk dude didn’t get 2cents for the referral, he didn’t care.

The world must be starting to appear like one long Seinfeld episode to Paul.

I think eventually he’ll snarkly slam the door on people that begin to say “Just Google…” and become the old man on the porch that knows what he knows and knows what he knows is right.

Obviously that’d be great, but we don’t have dumb pipes and net neutrality yet.

That does bring up an interesting comparison…

I’m sure a satellite provider is seen as having their own satellite, dishes for customers and land based transmission. Even if there aren’t physical wires between their assets, they’re still they’re assets.

An internet based service would be dependent on someone elses assets to transmit… not saying I lean one way or the other, but it is an interesting situation.

I’d be more curious to see what would happen to internet pricing if something like this were to become widespread. All a cable provider would need to do to keep customers is make sure the bundled price of TV and internet is less than single internet and TV service from elsewhere.

Not to mention data caps, terms of service, and other “gotchas” that the cable companies can throw like wrenches in the machine of progress.

Yeah that’s how it is in the U.S. too, “illegal filesharing” is just stupid talk for piracy/copyright infringement/not knowing enough about the tech yet being in charge of said tech in some way.

Agreed. Maybe opinion is to harsh a word for my presumption about some Jews, which obviously wasn’t 100% accurate.

Oh I don’t, I fully understand there are probably crazy Jews just like crazy Christians, Buddhists, anything else….

I just had no idea about some of the stuff mentioned in the article. I was taken aback.

This is a great article.

I’m not Jewish, or religious at all. I always held an opinion of Jews to a certain standard as being these learned people that value education and rational thought.

…this definitely knocked my opinion of Jews down a peg because of the things that apparently everyone but me knows about being Jewish.

Same location might be a simple coincidence… but if you, as a technology writer, can honestly say the announcements coming out of this benefit anyone other than ISPs and content providers, then we’ll have a pretty fundamental difference of opinion.

It doesn’t seem strange to anyone but me that company A would say “Hey we have these new products that would benefit our money making tactics by working with standard X” while at the exact same time regulatory body A says “we’re in favor of standard X for unknown reasons”… and that just happens to be going on in the same building?

…AND company A is already supposedly being looked at by regulatory body A for proposing things that are based on standard X…

I guess I’m weird.

/s

Yeah so Verizon and Comcast get together in Boston and for some reason the FCC shows up for business announcements?

There is something very wrong going on here.

Hmm. There’s something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear.

I have a feeling it’s lobbying though…

Things like this is why we, as consumers, need to take a firm stance with net neutrality.

The ISP is trying to become the data pipe and the content provider, generally bad news bears.

I find that as a web developer, the web has been moving in the wrong direction with ads, social integration, accounts, etc.

The fact that there are so many tools available to trim the fat only reinforces that feeling. We wouldn’t need apps that make websites readable if the website was readable from the beginning.

Agreed, data needs to move back to a flat rate/pay per use model. Buckets simply don’t make sense for anyone.

Correct, thanks for pointing that out. I would edit that if I could…

Your argument isn’t logically valid. The person isn’t in trouble for stealing (at least primarily), he’s in trouble for “sharing” ie: distributing copyrighted material that he doesn’t own and does not have rights to redistribute.

It’d be like giving the 8 year old who stole a chocolate bar from the supermarket a life sentence because he found a way to make perfect duplicates of the chocolate bar and give them away free of charge. Now presume that the recipe for the chocolate bar was a copyrighted trade secret, which the 8 year old doesn’t have the rights to duplicate. The 8 year old would be competing directly with the chocolate bar creators with their own product for a lower price. It’s not fair.

IMO, the only way these cases would make any sense is if they knew how many people he shared the songs with, at least at that point they could argue they potentially missed out on a particular dollar amount… instead of these randomly chosen dollar amounts.

Actually, broadcasters are forced to air certain things. In the event of a national emergency the government takes over the airways as a primary means to communicate with the general population. Remember that test a while ago that didn’t work so well? It’s never actually been used, but the government put that stipulation in there. Anyone can run a network, provided they play by the rules.

The same goes with roads in the U.S. Primarily they are a military transportation tool, that we as citizens get the advantage of using for daily life. In the event of an emergency, you get out of the way and let the tanks get where they need to be. That’s how it works.

If the EAS system is activated (used to be EBS) a network MUST air it (I believe there is a time limit they’re supposed to abide by or something, but I don’t really know all the details). With the downtime they’re allowed to capitalize on the benefits of the technology, broadcasting football games and being paid to display beer commercials, etc.

I believe this is what the OP was getting at… and like I said, I don’t necessarily agree with what I believe he was getting at.

Wow! Yeah, everyone look up that case!

They may not be hindering new technology directly, but think about “the internet” and how it can distribute content like video cheaper, easier and more conveniently than previous technologies.

Then ask yourself: Why we aren’t running as fast as we can to get all our broadcasting needs migrated to this new-fangled medium?

Exactly, there are definitely parallels there.

Wasn’t the Zediva thing because they were compressing/transcoding it so they could get the content small enough to actually be usable over a regular internet connection? That act is strictly against copyright, which I believe is what the movie studio actually sued them for, copyright. It’s been a while so I may not have that exactly correct, but I thought there was something else going on there.

Using an antenna to pick up OTA TV broadcasts doesn’t require a license, that’s the whole point.

Aereo is leasing it’s customers an antenna, which they can access via the internet.

…and spectrum is?

I don’t necessarily agree with the OP, but your retort is equally absurd. These companies aren’t streaming their broadcast, they’re streaming their shows laden with ads as another form of generating money, not as a way to inform the people in the event of an emergency.