For a while now I have been trying to reason out how to make the Olympics less of a drain. The only real solution I could come up with was perhaps having 5 permanent sites for summer games and 3 for winter games. The US, China, Russia, and a couple of sites in Europe could be the permanent sites for summer. Each country participating kicks in a bit of scratch to cover the event and the host country is specifically in charge of upkeep and readiness of the site when their turn comes around. The winter olympics should really be done where there is winter. Lillehammer was an ideal site, I think Denver could work and of course there are other sites, like maybe something in the alps that are the permenant sites for the winter games. Again each country kicks in a bit and the country hosting uses the funds to prepare the area for the games. I think its ridiculous that each host country is stuck with the entire burden of the games. This way you know what to expect from the venue, the infrastructure could be put in place well before the games instead of months before and the facilities would already be in place. Just my two cents, it just seems odd one country has to play so much just to host them when the burden clearly could be shared amongst the participating countries which sort of espouses the values of the Olympics anyway.
When historians look back from their police state future where everything is censored and everything offensive has been removed from everything, will this agreement be what they point to that starts the snowball?
This is a damn good idea actually, if the major companies embraced this I think they could shift to a more modern paradigm with better services....oh wait...there isn't as much money in that...last mile is hard....infrastructure stuff... Really I don't want to live in a world where interent is capped, speeds are crap and its overpriced, I would love to see that become not a thing. I think cable providers would do just fine if if they went to a more streaming based system for on demand TV consumption. Sure some crap channels are going to die...which is fine because they are crap.
I think this is also a testiment to the the increasing production quality of channels readily available over the air these days (ABC,NBC,FOX). Couple that with bite size snippets of highlights and quick conscise analysis readily avaiable on websites not called ESPN.Com, its the perfect storm. I cut the cord yesterday, my wife is perfectly happy with basic Sling TV for $20 (Lifetime movies...sigh...you know). I found it curious with all the talk of ESPN eventually having to go to a paid model for streaming online content that ESPN is on the basic lineup for Sling. They can massage the numbers all they want, but they still answer to shareholders and when the money coming in isn't there to justify how they do business, heads will roll at the top and they will be forced to adapt a new paradigm if they want to continue rule college football and the SEC.
I think opening up set top boxes to competition is a great thing. Most of the boxes I have gotten over the year have been cheap and poorly made. I have paid just a ridiculous amount of money renting from cable companies. Luckily I managed to convince my family to cut the cord. My bill will halve itself and I will be doubling my internet speed in the process. I feel kind of silly that I have wasted so much money over the years. Especially when the service I pay for has included blocked content, channel blackouts and other ridiculous things that should probably be illegal. $300/year in rental fees. Cord cutting equipment (Cable modem, new wirless router, digital antennas) was only a one time purchase of $180. So instead of paying and average of 140/month I will be paying 68/month (internet, hulu, netflix, amazon (if you break it down by month)) I am pretty excited about this.
I am actually cutting the cord tomorrow afternoon, had to sell my wife and kids on it, but in the end I showed them all the stuff they watch is readily available online. I got antennas for our TVs to pick up the excellent digital signal in our area. I paid 300 in rental fees a year for three years. I bought a cable modem, excellent wireless router and antennas for less than $180. I feel really silly that I spent so much money for really no good reason.
I read a lot of tech blogs like this and I can't help feeling a little discouraged how incredibly backwards this all is. Sometimes I imagine what it would be like to be the CEO of AT&T and completely 180. It just seems reasonable to me that if you offer a superior product (in terms of speed, reliablity, and price) that it would be easy to soak up customers looking for exactly that. Just think if the billions in subsidies AT&T received was actually used for infrastucture build out there would be a very real possiblity of 100Mbps for like 20 bucks. It seems backwards to me to not offer a product people would flock too and dominate the market that way instead of artificially raising prices in areas with no competition. I get it its a dog eat dog world and they have to squeeze as much out of the customers as they can to appease their share holders and board of directors. But it would seem to me, a long term play like superior infrastructure, excellent speed, nationwide availibity at a reasonable price would be even more lucrative than boning areas that don't really ahve a choice in provider. I refuse to believe this is naive on my part because this is totally doable.
I really feel like there is an opportunity here. I have always felt that if a company came along that actually cared about the quality of the connection folks are getting, offering cosumers the bandwidth to handle their streaming services and connected devices at a reasonable price now is the time to do that. Instead of focusing on profit for the first few years and funneling revenue into good infrastructure in a methodical manner, it would most certainly change the landscape of how business is done. Of course I could most certainly be a naive idiot who thinks the internet is something everybody should be able to afford access to. It just irritates me to no end that its ok for services to be so horribly delivered and how much they cost to be merely mediocre.
So, let me get this straight, I live in a market that is getting the vaunted glory that is GIGA FIBER!!! RAWR....however I also live a market that has an ATT internet cap. Perhaps I am making a something out of nothing, but doesn't it seem like you could potentially hit your cap super fast if one was to..oh I don't know, sign up for giga fiber with giga speeds? I don't know maybe I am just tired of reading story after story of how the money I earn to get things I want has less and less buying power because every little detail of every little thing has a price...that is calculated to maximize profit and things like service reliablity and customer support go out the window.
I would also like something measurable to gauge their performance as legislaters, every job I've had has come with some sort of metric I have to meet or excede. I would like to see tangible real world goals set for congress and if they don't make it, they aren't allowed to run again until they meet it. Also, no pay for life...that shit is ridiculous.
Look, I get it, business are out there to make money and grow and make more money and get more users and get more money and..and..and. I find it totally counterintuitive for them to dump on their customers however. Isn't there more money in the long play? For instance if you build out infrastructure and ensure there is enough capacity wouldn't that make people really want your product? Wouldn't that infrastructure eventually pay for itself with people coming over to use a superior product?! I may be naive in my thinking, but honestly if you treat customers well and make your product really good and affordable, wouldn't that in the end make a zillion dollars? There is a good chance I would be a horrible businessman, I like people, I want people to be treated well because that's how I want to be treated. Childish? Perhaps. But I see no reason why they couldn't make money and not be total chauch weasles in the process.
It would seem to me that the government is full of representatives that are largely ingnorant to modern technology. Sure they may know how to work a Blackberry or check their email, but with the larger more complex issues that are popping up, they seem woefully undereducated. The Goverment has proven time and again, they can't manage themselves. Federal agencies are no better. If I buy a product from a company, that product and any data in it is mine. Not the police's, not the Government, not the NSA. Encryption is pretty much a requirement these days (though I am blown away by the companies that come out and say OMG it wasn't encrypted...and oh yeah it was your financial and personal info...so basically a your ID on a silver platter for theft). WHY CAN'T THEY SEE THAT?!? If they are our most tech savvy agencies, why on Earth would they not understand the basics of why encryption is needed and why it should never ever have any kind of back door ever? Oh I'm sorry are you going to actualy have to do your homework and get warrants to access particular information based on evidence and credible suspicion. Sorry you have to do your job better....
And that's the honest truth, was in the Marine Corps for 8 years and they pounded the force continuum into our heads day in and day out. Police don't seem to realize that there are levels of escalation that can be avoided by simply asking what's going on.
Aside from the very obvious that she was not in compliance with state department protocols for email and electronic documents, how is this even a question at this point? The only reason I could fathom for having a private server is to keep unwanted eyes (read: Government, the Amercian Public, or Law Enforcement) from seeing what she was doing. I do believe time to rattle some cages. Also if this criminal investigation moves forward does she 1. Automatically drop out of the race for President? 2. What exactly is she facing if this goes to trial?
It all seemed shady from the jump, this will not end well.
So I am with WOW, and over the years I have come to trust them as they always fixed any problem I had quickly and politely. They have done something that blew me away when I discovered it. With their Ultra TV box (HDD for DVR, Wireless router, portal for the other digital reveivers in the house) they added a Netflix channel. I know right?! A channel...for Netflix!! I can now log into Netflix and gorge myself on content just by turning to channel 1500. I think this is fantanstic.
You really just hit the nail on the head right there. If they can't even produce documents that are known to exist, how can they be even remotely credible when it comes to handling cases that are often very senstive in nature. Curious if there is an audit process that can happen to clean this hot mess up.
What I would like to see
Is this how it starts...?
This is brilliant
So what's next?
They can massage the numbers all they want, but they still answer to shareholders and when the money coming in isn't there to justify how they do business, heads will roll at the top and they will be forced to adapt a new paradigm if they want to continue rule college football and the SEC.
Re:
Re:
Not a lot to like
Re: nah, that's not the real innovation
Sometimes
I am in the wrong business
This is some evil genius
Re: we only need 2 changes to fix congressional impropriety
Here is what I understand....
Maybe I'm just paying more attention
Re: Meanwhile...HAHAHA!!
Re: Re:
Integrity....
It all seemed shady from the jump, this will not end well.
Re: Re: cannibalizing customers
My ISP/Cable Provider feels differently
Totally Agree
More comments from Wickedsmack >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Wickedsmack.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt