Recent comments in /f/television

wkomorow t1_j6e6w6p wrote

The FCC does know. They are the ones that told me solar inverters are except from section 15 part b of their regs. We have suppression and shielding and cancellation on the inverters and the antenna. Engineers have been out. The only solution that would work is ground install of the antenna, because the issue is localized to the roof. I would lose several stations in a ground install, we did several tests. The only solution is replace all 24 inverters. Not worth it given I mostly watch TV at night, when there is no interference.

2

Oh_hey_a_TAA t1_j6e6mb7 wrote

I had seen people in here recommending Z Nation, and I'd had an itch for a dystopian narrative and I enjoy the undead as a mechanism to discuss the human condition so I tried it - it was fucking atrocious.
The next time that I saw someone in here discussing it I asked about it, and they said 'no no that's trash, but you should try Black Summer, the prequel, MUCH better' yada yada... Again, having free time and an itch ... Again, completely lackluster and disappointed.
I don't understand the appeal of the direction of production, obviously the acting delivery is niche at best, and even if you enjoy campy stuff this is questionable. I just ... I just don't know what people see in it. I guess maybe these are the same people that kept the Walking Dead on the air for so long maybe.

2

resorcinarene t1_j6e6jka wrote

Wow, sorry your reading comprehension is limited. Dude stated this:

> Yes, i made a comment with inaccurate financial numbers on a reddit post.

That's what I said. His subsequent explanation was basically a justification of why he made up numbers. I agree that the penalty is too little, which was made clear by the following:

> $500,000 isn't enough...

Somehow, dude still replied to emphasize that his point was still valid because the numbers are large. Where did I disagree that $500K wasn't enough, again? I didn't.

Point is that neither you or numbers guy know how to read, or read too much into whatever I wrote. And yet somehow, I'm the one being harangued lol

Don't expect much from Reddit XD

edit: also, he didn't come with numbers. These are the actual numbers: https://investor.foxcorporation.com/reports/quarterly-reports

1

Locutus747 t1_j6e5925 wrote

Yea I usually try to give shows I may be interested in based on premise 3-4 episodes to grab me assuming I’m at least mildly entertained. may watch less if I’m really not enjoying the first few.

The thing is there is just so much content to watch and other things to do not tv relayed that it doesn’t make sense to watch shows you don’t enjoy in the hope it may get better down the line

2

hoxxxxx t1_j6e536d wrote

i like the idea behind scaling up traffic tickets for someone's wealth/income, a few countries do that and it make sense. should happen with a lot of fines or else the fines don't even matter.

like that walmart heiress that keeps getting duis. what a dui in the end, like 20-30k? that's literally nothing to her. there is no incentive to change her behavior. but that amount is absolutely devastating to a working or lower-middle class person, achieving it's goal.

14

Oh_hey_a_TAA t1_j6e513u wrote

It's literally how Netflix engineers their content, down to the writing and direction. The inclusion of "second screen consideration" in it's content development is why sooo much of their stuff is just middling waste of bandwidth.

That's the primary way on which it's affected content.

1

akaMichAnthony t1_j6e3vou wrote

You’re not wrong, but they also have been giving away $100,000 every week for an NFL pick’em contest. Which I’m pretty sure is just data collection racket at its core anyway. So what’s another $500,000.

If any business is able to just print it’s own money, it’s the NFL and it’s broadcast partners. I would not be at all shocked if it was 100% intentional.

8

ArkyBeagle t1_j6e3hi1 wrote

> which has too much interference on it.

Edit: I'm being very literal about "interference" here but hopefully, the other pathologies are spelled out.

That doesn't sound right. That should be licensed bandwidth. I can easily see simply R squared loss or multipath being a problem ( multipath rejection being the one killer feature of 3.0 ) but if anybody's emitting on that band, I'd bet the FCC would like to know.

They'll take it less seriously than HF/UHF interference on aviation comms of course.

Then again, 7 is at the edge of a band plan.

https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/areas/interference-resolution

1