nullprogram.com/blog/2009/07/28/
First, let me note that I don't watch television. At least not in the
sense of sitting on the couch, turning it on, and flipping through the
stations. I can't stand the compressed audio, the constant, loud
commercial interruptions, and general lack of control over my
viewing. VCRs, and more recently PVRs, have mitigated these last two
points, but not enough to grab my interest.
The way I see it, there are four ways to access television. Here is
the matrix,
For an "acceptable" situation we have cost-free television, but with
advertising, in broadcast and streaming television. And in the
opposite "acceptable" situation we have ad-free television, but with a
monthly fee, in premium television. I think these two are acceptable
compromises. Someone else can foot the bill, or you can foot the bill.
In a few cases, such as viewer-supported television like PBS, it's
both cost-free and ad-free. This is pretty nice. You can have your
cake and eat it too.
However, most television is only legitimately available in the
worst case situation! Not only do you have to pay to access it, but
one-third of it is annoying, unwanted advertising. This is awful, and
it is one reason why I choose not to participate.
Luckily, there is another "best case" option which provides quick
access to most television shows of the world: peer-to-peer
file-sharing. Unfortunately, it doesn't include live television, and
it's usually not quite legal. We have the technology to distribute
large amounts of data to huge numbers of people at practically no
cost, but a bunch of old, out-of-date laws stand in the way. It's a
shame. I think this
quote by "muuh-gnu" sums it up well,
We have 2009. Everybody and their dog has a computer, which is
designed to copy stuff. Also we have broadband which is, again,
designed to ... move stuff around the world. So is what you're
actually pointlessly advocating is that we collectively should
... actually what? Abstain from using a common technology in
order to make absurdly archaic 50's business models of
"manufacturing and selling single copies" viable in day and age
when everybody can manufacture and distribute those copies
themselves?
It's a good thing some bad laws don't get in the way of progress
too much.