What is Digg?143 Comments
- dallascorbin504, on 10/10/2007, -2/+42although i love my cable t.v., i honestly spend no more than 1-2 hours actually watching it.
- deadpixel621, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21It's also kinda sad, come to think of it. I remember, when I was a kid, my brothers and I would have no choice but to watch t.v together with our parents. Now that I'm thinking back on those days, we had some quality time. But now that there's the internet, I only see them in the hallway, on the way to my bathroom. I'm all for the *next big thing* of the internet, yet concerned that we're all becoming more distant from each other.
Eh. Fuggit. At least I can download free pr0n on my computer. - wiirdo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Vint Cerf probably didn't pay his cable bill. That's why his TV is dead.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12We get our news online and from recorded TV shows like 60 minutes. We buy and watch TV series like StarGate and Star Trek on DVD. We use a recording system to skip past the commercials. How can TV advertisers make any money from us?
- longhair, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15Glad I read this before I spent five thousand dollars on a new Pioneer Kuro plasma TV.. Thanks Google..
- thetayloreffect, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13I'll tell you what's dead!
Vaudeville!
You know what killed it?
The talking pictures that's what! - totorototoro, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Vint Cerf is now reduced to "Google Expert"? wtf?
- 60effects, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13Fine with me. I watch all I want on Laserdisc anyway.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Until we can have quality, RELIABLE streaming TV channels online, TV is hardly dead. As of now, however, most streaming videos are unreliable, poor quality, and you have to sit in your computer chair and watch it on your small (albeit, high-res) monitor as opposed to a large TV.
- spectatorr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11"Gramaphone expert says live music is dead"
"TV expert says books are dead"
"VCR expert says movie theaters are dead"
Uh..... When will people learn that new technologies rarely actually kill off old technology, except where the old technology is total crap (like CDs) - CkMaverick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9By putting the damn commercials on the DVD's and forcing us to watch them before we get to the main menu =/
- FearlessFreep, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8This morning I got up with my wife and kids to watch the lunar eclipse
- uhhhh, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10When I think of television, I think of motion pictures in the comfort of my home. TV is f far from dead, it is just evolving into a new, interactive, on-demand form.
- diblasio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7TV is dead. For nerds.
But so are a lot of things. - Ouze, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Does anyone else think it's ironic that on diggs front page 1, there is a story about how TV is dead because broadband internet will replace it, and on page 2, only about 20 stories away, was a front page digg story about how many americans do not have broadband access which is invariably required for even the poorest quality standard definition TV stream?
- way2muchsense, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9My observation is that the quality of TV in general is approaching that of AM radio after FM snarfed up all the rock music fans. Soon, the only people watching TV will be old people without computers.
- dunnylovehun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Well the TV itself isn't going to go away, just the system of shows and channels as we know it. Even if you're downloading shows it doesn't mean that you won't be able to view them on some awesome viewing apparatus. Just means that you'll be getting the shows you watch from iTunes.
- FuzzyBunny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Exactly what I was thinking. How do you go from 'Father of the Internet' to mere 'Google Expert'?
- kman004, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6someone doesnt watch sports
- Dysarthria, on 10/10/2007, -10/+15Agreed. I'm on the net 2 hrs at home. Last week I didn't turn on my TV for 3 days. Give me an a-la-carte cable package (20 channels tops - thats more than I need) with PPV/on-demand programming and a beautiful Tivo DVR and I'm set.
Dallas, I dug you back up to +1 - Moskie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Now we're dealing with semantics here.
Define "Television."
If you mean the physical object that is sitting in your living room, then I agree, that's not going anywhere. Content can get streamed to it via a computer (or device) connected to the internet.
If you mean the current industry that distributes content to you, via "channels," then that I disagree with you. Network affiliates and cable channels (in the traditional sense) will become antiquated, and sooner rather than later. - zdislaw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Antennas won't work on domesday. I'm pretty sure that the dome will block the signals. I assume everyone in Springfield had cable and that's how they still saw news reports from inside the dome.
- flea2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Funny how this was on the front page yesterday. Different source, same news.
- hokie47, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I like commercials. Otherwise how would I know what to buy?
- Kyderdog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4>total crap (like CDs)
Cause MP3's are SOoo much better quality...Records,8 tracks and Cassettes where bad, CD's are STILL Great.
Damn teens and 20 nothings.. - cyberscape2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Those damn talking pictures, taking away our vaudevillian joy.
- directive0, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You raise a fantastic point, the more we resist commercials the harder they will try to inject them into our media, usually with annoying and frustrating results.
- cmadach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So lemme get this: a creator of the Internet says that TV is dead because the Internet will essentially pwn it out of existence. This just reeks of subjectivity. In other news, cattle farmers say vegans are worthless hippies.
- RawOysters, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3TV is far from dead. They will become a little more like computers by switching to Internet Protocol, which they will have to do to get the bandwidth they will need with the advent of HD.
- FuzzyBunny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3RTFA? Hell, he didn't even read the summary.
- Wogger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Haven't the "experts" been saying this for awhile now?
Notice it's a Google expert saying that TV is dead, not a TV expert.
Imagine a TV expert saying "Google is dead" and then you'll see what I mean.
I think we're still pretty far away from TV being dead, what with all the DRM issues and pervasiveness of analog TV. - NJank, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3you wasteful wasteful man
- Jwoey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I can stream live sports on my computer, but it looks like ***** compared to hdtv. Unless they can catch up in picture quality (and reliability for live stuff), I'll stay in my living room.
- MacGyver2210, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3How many people sat through the 3-minute mountain dew 'puppet show' commercial at the beginning of the Transformers movie? That sucked a lot, I almost left because of that.
- wawilli, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I think it's a safe bet that only Google could do this.
- Ventolin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I'm constantly running into people who are shocked when I tell them I don't own a TV. I thinkl this is a good thing but it will be a long long long time before it happens.
Plus, I don't want to go to the bar and watch the Astros on an iPod. - MacGyver2210, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Don't be a symantic *****. It is a TV Set, yes, but he isn't watching Television - he's watching YouTube from a game console.
- pgup, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2This is what the 18-25 year old (and possibly higher) age bracket has been saying/implying for the past year or two. The companies that fully integrate cable TV into a nice package for web use will remain while the rest will die off slowly.
- MacGyver2210, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Great, more 'Rascal' powerchair commercials and ads with Tom Bosley advertising for Diabetes supplies.
- FearlessFreep, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't think I'd want to go to a bar just to watch the Astros anyway...
- op12, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's why you're going to start seeing more of what's already appearing...ads before online videos and commercials before a DVD starts (the ones that you can't skip). Granted that money's not necessarily going to TV advertisers, but they'll always find a way to stick an ad in front of you.
- cwilli14, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2what the hell would go in front of the couch??
- bromac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Way to have a TV measuring contest. My first TV was a 14" Toshiba flatscreen CRT. Guess what? I DID have fun watching movies on it. Pictures showed up just fine!
24" screens at 1080p would look much nicer than your 56". You're going to look like a bigger tool in a few years when NEC, Samsung, etc. start releasing their wall-sized screens.
Your 50" screen is only a quarter of the 103" substrates they're cranking out now. If you want to feel materially superior, get a unnecessarily large truck. Picks up more chicks at least. - bjs3171, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25 minutes? uh, no. if the net's going to replace my tv, i better be watching moving pictures instantly. and by instantly i mean real time standards not, a second of moving and then 2 mintues of buffering.
- georgetds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I would imagine the instant the broadcast companies realize that the market has shifted, the downloadable content will dramatically jump in quality. Many of us are "streaming" it from our cable companies already, it is not like it would be a big jump in technology to just change the method from current broadcast style to a downloadable style.
- MacGyver2210, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Dying, perhaps?
Dieing == Sheet metal machining process. - c0ldfusi0n, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It was obvious this was gonna happen sometime. Versus a medium that users can CHOOSE what content they want to watch/read/see and a medium that IMPOSES its content (often HIGHLY subjective) onto its users, the winner is clear.
- Senturion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think a differentiation needs to be made here between "television" and the current broadcast system.
"Television" will never really go away, our current scheduled broadcast system might. - georgetds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2If everyone who had cable or satellite was willing to pay $250 a year, there still would be commercials to make even more money still. They whole system is profit driven. The only question in my mind is when the profits will dwindle enough from the current system to make switching to downloadable content worth while.
- thescimitar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Zachary is right, advertisers pay good money to get their client's products into interstitials and media placement. Films, television shows, these mediums have a high degree of specificity for demographics, and advertisers can position their client's products in exactly what their target demographic consumes. As traditional placement decreases, it's likely you'll see an increase in product placement and interstitial advertisements.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 138 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is