4 ms·

I think there's been a large 'elitist' movement last few years on the web. People suggesting that anyone who even owns a TV is a mindless drone. The funny/ironi

by axod 17y ago

I think there's been a large 'elitist' movement last few years on the web. People suggesting that anyone who even owns a TV is a mindless drone. The funny/ironic thing is that often the people suggesting this are the same people who mindlessly sit in front of twitter/reddit etc watching rubbish all day. How this is any better is anyones guess. I'd be interested in TV owning situation for those with kids though. Not having a TV when you have kids is borderline abuse IMHO. Kids should have some exposure to popular culture, and be able to talk about the same stuff as their peers. It's like some people who use adblock though. They just love to tell you at absolutely every single moment that they "see no ads!", I guess because it makes them feel clever.

jgrahamc 17y ago
"The funny/ironic thing is that often the people suggesting this are the same people who mindlessly sit in front of twitter/reddit etc watching rubbish." That's me :-)
- axod 17y ago
  Slightly off topic now, but doesn't it seem right+proper that you have a TV license if you use BBC iPlayer?
  - jgrahamc 17y ago
    I looked into this carefully. I would need a TV license if I watched programs on the BBC iPlayer at the same time they are broadcast. Currently there is no requirement to have a TV license if you watch iPlayer programs after they are shown. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_not_require_a_tv_1.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_...
  - dtf 17y ago
    Yes. Though it would only be legally required for watching a live iPlayer stream. Not quite sure how the dudes in the vans (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NmdUcmLFkw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NmdUcmLFkw) detect this though.
cousin_it 17y ago
Not having a TV when you have kids is borderline abuse IMHO. For me, having a TV at home when I was a kid was borderline abuse. I've considered it the idiot box for as long as I can remember myself, which would be since about three years old. When I first moved away from my parents to live with my then-GF, she kinda wanted a TV but I firmly said no. I've never had my own TV and never will. I can't stand being in the same room with a running TV. I always ask to mute it at least; if that isn't possible, I leave the room or cover my ears. The issue isn't the noise; it's those horrible fake intonations that everyone uses on TV.
- axod 17y ago
  Come now. Is the internet really all that much better for people? seriously? You could easily call the internet the 'idiot net'. People under the delusion that their opinion matters, mindlessly posting inane useless comments like this one. Many of the biggest sites out there serve no real use other than to waste peoples time.
  - donaldc 17y ago
    One immediate difference that comes to mind is that the internet is a two-way medium, whereas television is a one-way medium. That doesn't mean that any given part of the internet will be better, but it does mean that the internet has the potential to be far better.
  - sree_nair 17y ago
    Totally Agree. It's Just another level of idiotisam. 90% of the time is wasted on the Net.
  - cousin_it 17y ago
    The Web has made me a better programmer, a better musician, a better debater, gave me a better understanding of mathematics, kept my English skills from rusting, and a lot more. Wikipedia or the instructional videos on YouTube are miles above TV in usefulness. Also, TV doesn't enable me to talk with intelligent people across the ocean. Would you exchange the Web for a TV with 1000 channels?
adbachman 17y ago
Not having a TV when you have kids is borderline abuse IMHO Then I say, "why would anyone want to force TV on their children", then you say, "I don't want to force it, you're misunderstanding". I feel like we've had this discussion before, you're trolling [1]. Borderline abuse is a serious accusation, but then I'd argue providing a child frequent and regular unrestricted access to TV (or internet) is borderline abuse, so maybe we're even. I don't think you're arguing that, though, I'm just strawmanning. My kids are as involved with pop-culture as any four and three year old should be, TV will never be necessary for that. As they grow TV is going to be less and less relevant (IMHO), so the point will be moot. Side note, just had a funny conversation with son last night trying to explain what a television station is (he watched "the spongebob movie" on Nick Jr. at the doctor's office), "it's like a website that shows movies all the time, but you can't choose them" was the best I could do. ([1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=503251 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=503251)
IsaacL 17y ago
Haha. I remember my Dad telling me that his Dad would never allow a TV in the house the whole time he was growing up - he used to read the TV listings in Radio Times (UK mag with both TV and radio schedules) so he could talk with his schoolfriends about programmes they'd seen, being too emberassed to admit he didn't own a TV. Whenever someone came to visit, he told them the TV was being repaired. Apparently soon after he left home at 18, my Grandad then went out and bought a telly, and soon after got the biggest satellite package he could. Anyway, I don't watch TV - where would I find the time for reddit and StumbleUpon if I did?

by axod 17y ago

jgrahamc 17y ago

"The funny/ironic thing is that often the people suggesting this are the same people who mindlessly sit in front of twitter/reddit etc watching rubbish." That's me :-)

axod 17y ago
Slightly off topic now, but doesn't it seem right+proper that you have a TV license if you use BBC iPlayer?
- jgrahamc 17y ago
  I looked into this carefully. I would need a TV license if I watched programs on the BBC iPlayer at the same time they are broadcast. Currently there is no requirement to have a TV license if you watch iPlayer programs after they are shown. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_not_require_a_tv_1.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_...
- dtf 17y ago
  Yes. Though it would only be legally required for watching a live iPlayer stream. Not quite sure how the dudes in the vans (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NmdUcmLFkw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NmdUcmLFkw) detect this though.

cousin_it 17y ago

Not having a TV when you have kids is borderline abuse IMHO. For me, having a TV at home when I was a kid was borderline abuse. I've considered it the idiot box for as long as I can remember myself, which would be since about three years old. When I first moved away from my parents to live with my then-GF, she kinda wanted a TV but I firmly said no. I've never had my own TV and never will. I can't stand being in the same room with a running TV. I always ask to mute it at least; if that isn't possible, I leave the room or cover my ears. The issue isn't the noise; it's those horrible fake intonations that everyone uses on TV.

axod 17y ago
Come now. Is the internet really all that much better for people? seriously? You could easily call the internet the 'idiot net'. People under the delusion that their opinion matters, mindlessly posting inane useless comments like this one. Many of the biggest sites out there serve no real use other than to waste peoples time.
- donaldc 17y ago
  One immediate difference that comes to mind is that the internet is a two-way medium, whereas television is a one-way medium. That doesn't mean that any given part of the internet will be better, but it does mean that the internet has the potential to be far better.
- sree_nair 17y ago
  Totally Agree. It's Just another level of idiotisam. 90% of the time is wasted on the Net.
- cousin_it 17y ago
  The Web has made me a better programmer, a better musician, a better debater, gave me a better understanding of mathematics, kept my English skills from rusting, and a lot more. Wikipedia or the instructional videos on YouTube are miles above TV in usefulness. Also, TV doesn't enable me to talk with intelligent people across the ocean. Would you exchange the Web for a TV with 1000 channels?

adbachman 17y ago

Not having a TV when you have kids is borderline abuse IMHO Then I say, "why would anyone want to force TV on their children", then you say, "I don't want to force it, you're misunderstanding". I feel like we've had this discussion before, you're trolling [1]. Borderline abuse is a serious accusation, but then I'd argue providing a child frequent and regular unrestricted access to TV (or internet) is borderline abuse, so maybe we're even. I don't think you're arguing that, though, I'm just strawmanning. My kids are as involved with pop-culture as any four and three year old should be, TV will never be necessary for that. As they grow TV is going to be less and less relevant (IMHO), so the point will be moot. Side note, just had a funny conversation with son last night trying to explain what a television station is (he watched "the spongebob movie" on Nick Jr. at the doctor's office), "it's like a website that shows movies all the time, but you can't choose them" was the best I could do. ([1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=503251 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=503251)

IsaacL 17y ago

Haha. I remember my Dad telling me that his Dad would never allow a TV in the house the whole time he was growing up - he used to read the TV listings in Radio Times (UK mag with both TV and radio schedules) so he could talk with his schoolfriends about programmes they'd seen, being too emberassed to admit he didn't own a TV. Whenever someone came to visit, he told them the TV was being repaired. Apparently soon after he left home at 18, my Grandad then went out and bought a telly, and soon after got the biggest satellite package he could. Anyway, I don't watch TV - where would I find the time for reddit and StumbleUpon if I did?