Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Leap Towards a Career in Ethical Hacking with 60+ Hours of Prep Toward CISM, CISA, & More Certification Exams at 95% off ×

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 1) 157

Underwriting and sponsorship are the briefest of ads. It's because people won't open their wallets, and electricity, facility, and meager salaries add up to money.

The FCC also has to ensure that there is staff to review and enforce licensing, the engineering that goes behind it, and the ongoing management of spectrum, as well as common carrier infrastructure, telephony, etc. None of this stuff comes free.

It's not ClearChannel that's made licensing expensive; an act of Congress allowed networks to own more than their fair share, and then this created a money-making opportunity to conglomerate and share resources, while dumbing down content to suit some MBA's target. The good turf was bought up and subsumed into a pit of trash radio.

Who to blame: Congress, for allowing the conglomeration and monopolizing of the airwaves by too few organizations. They allow this with telcos, wireless carriers, and many other industry segments.

The license expense, however, is real. It does take money to run the FCC. Without it, there'd be chaos. This isn't to defend the FCC, rather, to explain that licensing isn't a trivial, go to the license branch sort of activity. I can bounce a beam off the moon from my back yard as a ham radio operator. But I can't do this: run a pirate station-- without consequences. Spectrum management is non-trivial. There are many competing factions wanting spectrum. On a cable, or via the Internet, there is much "spectrum".

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 1) 157

It's more complicated than lobbying. In the late '40s and early '50s, FM was just born. The FCC gave a few stations incredible turf-- unknowingly setting them up for high future asset value.

Tall antennas and a lot of power gave them reach. Reach gave them advertising power. Spectrum was set aside for public use, educational use at first, then non-commercial use. Political agenda aside, community radio can be marvelous. So are LPFM stations. The lifeless crap we listen to is driving ClearChannel, Emmis, and others, right into the ground. People cutting cable have also killed local TV stations, and with good reason. We have alternatives.

I cut my cable long ago. There are a few local decent public media stations in my area, and I listen to them, and they're relevant, if not with their own constant underfunding problems. They play great mixes, have local news, and are focused on their community, because they don't take ads.

Every single licensed stations has a community advisory board, and you can send your complaints-- even about programming-- to the FCC, where indeed they're required to read them, and make stations address them.

I believe that the motives of most pirate stations is ego, with a dash of community focus added as ostensible motivation.

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 1) 157

You need community radio. Such stations really do respond to local tastes and needs. IMHO, NPR is corporate media, although not as awful as ClearChannel, Emmis, etc.

Starting a community station takes vision, but they do well because as you cite, they fit the local needs, not the automated crap today. Get one of these, rather than the pirate version. Eventually, it's more sustainable for the community.

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 1) 157

It's true that many stations have enormous strength and tall antennas, a historical domination process. But there are many low-power stations, struggling to be heard, especially in the high school, college, community, public media, and specialty areas.

Your assessment of what pirates covers only ones that think about what they're doing. Many do not. You can make an FM station from an Arduino, put a cheap 100w amp on it, a crappy antenna, and interfere with licensed stations for quite a radius.

I disagree with your assessment highly, and as an engineer, find the loose-and-fast mentality to be like I said: not civil. Licensed stations pay a lot of $$ for engineering studies subsequently submitted to the FCC to ensure lack of interference. Not a pirate alive does the same thing. It's all about them and their perceived entitlement.

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 3, Informative) 157

Rich? No.

Think about community public radio stations. Consider those that make investments into for-profit ones, too.

Like other confined resources, there is only so much spectrum. It's juvenile to believe that a 100w station doesn't interfere with others.

Yes, some stations trade for major bucks. It's called: business. Still others are community supported.

Want the facts? Grow up and understand how we got here, and that the radio waves aren't a private little party. Wanna be a DJ? You can be. Wanna serve your sense of community? You can. There are lots of legal indy radio stations out there. They play by a set of rules designed to allow sharing of the airwaves, through the same set of rules that all people to have FM receivers and HD receivers with great audio fidelity.

People that live within the constraints of civility understand the need for rules-- because there are lots of people that desire to do whatever the fuck they want for any reason they want, e.g. uncivil behavior. I don't believe in mandated conformance but I do believe in civil rules regarding finite resources.

Comment Re: Sounds like a good time to get in on the game (Score 1, Troll) 157

No, this is NOT about ClearChannel's revenue, it's about the fact that the 100w station's signal wanders for a far wider, uncontrolled range, then interfering with the fringes of others that have paid for lots of engineering plans, capital infrastructure, and the operational expenses in hopes of a profit from their station.

There are few locales in the US that aren't highly constrained for new licensees of even LPFM stations. This is about your ego and assholery, not about a supposed fanboi pirate project.

If you want to podcast or stream, have at it. Enjoy. Lots of those. Tell your friends. Let the three stations that suck in your area fail. Buy one. Do the real work, the real job, pay the real money as an investment, and get the real reward of a following and perhaps profit.

Comment Re:Its useless junk (Score 1) 359

You can kludge anything.

In each case, you get exactly what I stated, don't you?

Enjoy. This is Apple. If they wanted it, it would be done in a finger-snap. Note that it is not. Their hubris matches that of their competition at the top. They're all that way, and they all suck.

Linux/GNU/etc actually overcomes such things, not that they're targeted at civilians. Apple? They're fixated on their ecosystems, and screw the rest-- until a loud enough hue and cry makes them relent. Until then, they're the same monoliths as the rest. By the way, does Apple pay you or do you just rope off an arm, fill the syringe up with Apple, and inject directly into a vein each day?

Comment Re:Its useless junk (Score 1) 359

Open? You said Open?

No, it's a license, because it's closed source. But hey, open up a flash drive on your Linux box. Reads and writes. Now, do this with the same drive on MacOS. Oh, dear, RO you say?

You can open up an Android device as a logical drive under Windows and Linux, but not MacOS. Same answer.

Yes, you can mount shares-- but that's because of SAMBA, which works because of the incredible efforts of sane people, and actual help from Microsoft, who got tired of being bashed (pun intended).

NFS3 is another long, sordid story. Wait, I'll use my Xserve! Oh, wait.....

Comment Re:Its useless junk (Score 1) 359

In some yes, but when it comes to ACTUAL interoperability, there is a long list of stuff that they simply ignore. Take for instance: NTFS. Android. NFS3.

I own and use a Mac. I have an iPhone and a Samsung S3. I have Windows servers, and Windows VMs (and many others). Direct experience says: you live in a monolithic world, and don't actually use a very wide variety of stuff on a daily basis, or you wouldn't come to this conclusion.

Comment Re:Its useless junk (Score 1) 359

They gain part of the trustworthyness deliberately. They very highly control, to the exclusion of compatibility with non-Apple *stuff*, their ecosystems, building walls around them, and letting all other competitors play second and third fiddle to their infrastructures.

It's delicate, as you mention. It's by design. It also fails smell tests in so many areas where the first bit of heterogeneity is required. They are ruled by their contracts with the media companies-- which they initially developed and evolved, to their credit. Their devices functionality, however, is directly controlled by a delicate balance of the RIAA, MPAA, their developers, and their draconian control of their supply chain.

The trustworthyness, when viewed in light of the rest of the world, is the RDF. When looked at from an outsider, or partial insider's perspective, they are quite fallible, rarely make apologies, and then blurt crap like the iWatch, Apple TV, make recent working products obsolete (like the iPad1), and their visionary halo, while very hard fought-and-won, comes at the cost of many, many problems. They control their press with military precision, and are about as open and forthcoming as their enemy, the NSA/FBI.

Comment Re:Its useless junk (Score 1, Interesting) 359

Were it only true.

Apple is really good at directing their energy towards their intended end-user. They're not interested in businesses or bulk-buyers like the governments of the world because it's not their philosophy, counter to that of Microsoft-- which targets developers and business.

This magical layer of trust and customer schmoozing is at the very heart of what Apple does well. They are monolithic, and don't want their OS (as an example) used on other hardware, because they want to control the "experience".

The RDF that's imbued by their "just works", support mechanisms (creaking as they are), retail, are all designed to make customers trust them, and whatever they come out with next. In the case of the iWatch, and the constraints imposed on Apple TV by their media partners, they've cracked their trust. The iWatch isn't jewelry, isn't very functional (what can you do in the space of wrist-enabled device, after all?), and was poorly speculative. The reason there's no FM radio inside an iPhone is that they'd lose iTunes revenue, and the RIAA makes NO MONEY when you listen to a song on the radio, and so the radio is their odd enemy.

Apple ignores other products handily. Go ahead and try to connect it to Windows in a Windows meaningful way. Same answer with Android phones, or many, many other products. Apple is a master at controlling their ecosystems in the extreme, and making people love it because, hey, stuff works and it's "kewl". They invented zero of what they sell, but their are emperors of refinement and ecosystem. Their halo and legend and trust constitute the RDF, and that RDF is cracking because their dogged leader is gone, and they've become leaden and less able to attract outstanding talent because other organizations have figured out the means to attract really smart and enabled people.

Slashdot Top Deals

All science is either physics or stamp collecting. -- Ernest Rutherford

Working...