Digital Transition

[Dreamstalker]

if you're poor to the point you can't afford a converter box, chances are you can't afford the internet. also, emergencey information across the internet only works if you happen to be on at the moment it's posted.

And know where to look, have a decent connection (which in the case of severe weather/another emergency may be slow or down), etc.

My apartment has some weird property where cell and radio transmissions can't get in from outside the building (if I want to use my cell phone at my place, I have to go sit on the sidewalk).

I always thought that a few analog channels should be maintained for news and emergencies.

[daleduke17]

I actually hadn't thought about the emergency broadcast system issue, nor weather reports.

So the real problem is how poorly this thing has been organized. The government should have focused on getting the converter boxes to those in isolated areas and/or the invalid first.

No, the government shouldn't have focused on GIVING anything out. The government shouldn't have to hold everyone's hand and baby everyone.


But, there could have been a gradual transition over a mass transition. Take the largest DMA (NYC) and the smallest (Glendive, MT) and work their way through all of them until the list is completed in the middle (Florence/Myrtle Beach, SC and Tallahassee, FL being the last two markets done). Granted, if done one pair a week, it would take two years to complete.

But, hey, get it all done at once. In five years, it will be a completely moot point.

[AdminAssistant]

Why did they even feel the need to do all this crap in the first place? That's what I've been wondering....

[Pedersen]

No, the government shouldn't have focused on GIVING anything out. The government shouldn't have to hold everyone's hand and baby everyone.

Well, consider this: The people this program is most assisting spent money on these televisions once, years ago. Often over $100. For these people, that $100 is a significant chunk of money.

And now the government is saying to these people "Hey, we're going to make that money you spent useless." This is a government action that is having a direct negative impact on a significant number of people. It's worse than just taking their money and giving them nothing back.

It's taking away something from these people that they worked hard for, and saying "Sucks to be you. Go spend money you don't have on something if you want to maintain your current lifestyle."

Not even improving: maintaining.

And that's the point of the program. It allows people to maintain their lifestyle in the face of a government mandate that would reduce their quality of life.

Oh, and here's the reply, I'm sure: "Well, you don't need tv!"

You're right, you don't need it. You also don't need a great car, a great home, etc. Instead, you've worked to get those things you have. Normally, you would be grandfathered in on any change. Consider emissions on your car, for instance: If the car is of a specific age, you won't have to adhere to the strictest emissions standards that the new cars do. But they can't do that with this transition, simply because of the fact that the signals go over the same segment of wireless spectrum. Everybody has to change over.

So, this program prevents the reduction in the quality of life for those who can't change over. And that, I think, is fair to everybody. Those who can afford it get the change over they want. Those who can't get the help to make the transition painlessly.

Why did they even feel the need to do all this crap in the first place? That's what I've been wondering....

It comes down to this: Digital broadcasts are able to use a smaller segment of the wireless spectrum to achieve the same results. This results in the possibility of more broadcasts simultaneously, allowing more channels. Digital also achieves better results in that smaller segment, allowing higher quality (picture and sound) broadcasts. The end result is a significant improvement in both broadcast quality and availability.

[daleduke17]

. Consider emissions on your car, for instance: If the car is of a specific age, you won't have to adhere to the strictest emissions standards that the new cars do.

Except in certain areas where your car has to be granted a permit (like the Chicago area). Car doesn't need to be any certain age. No permit, no tag.

$40.00 vs $300.00

Buy a converter and be done with it.

But, God forbid people have to update or upgrade. We need to stop being a nation catering to the unprepared in the population. This is No Child Left Behind on a large scale.

[Pedersen]

Except in certain areas where your car has to be granted a permit (like the Chicago area). Car doesn't need to be any certain age. No permit, no tag.

Nice way to ignore the point. Since you chose to do so, I'll try to spell it out in simple terms: When legal requirements come into effect that would make it illegal/impossible for you to continue to use something you bought, the law finds ways to grandfather you in on the grounds that they should not render your investment worthless.

In other words: Don't fuck over someone who has already spent money. This is well established legal tradition.

How many buildings in your city don't meet fire code? Hint: a lot, since they were built before the current fire code took effect and have not been renovated since.

How many cars are on the road that don't meet current emissions standards? Hint: a lot, since they were bought before the current emissions standards took effect.

How many analog televisions that were purchased well before the upgrade to digital became a possibility will be able to receive the new broadcasts without a converter box? Hint: none, since they were not built with the digital reception in mind.

The government has mandated a change that not everybody can afford. The change will completely destroy the value of some things that have already been bought by the people who cannot afford the change. Without these boxes, the people will be fucked.

$40.00 vs $300.00

Buy a converter and be done with it.

Perhaps you could actually look at some of these people in question? For at least some of them, $40 is a hardship. $40 is the difference between eating and not eating for the next week. Or being able to get to and from work. For some people, $40 won't even be noticed. They pull that out of their couch as loose change. These people already have tv's that can receive digital.

Those people who can't afford the $40? They're going to have their quality of life reduced, and the value of one of their possessions destroyed, simply so that others who have more money can benefit.

Kind of callous, don't you think?

But, God forbid people have to update or upgrade. We need to stop being a nation catering to the unprepared in the population. This is No Child Left Behind on a large scale.

No, this is "Let's not fuck over people who can't afford this upgrade." I hope I'm never one of those same people, since with attitudes like this one showing up, I can count on getting kicked while I'm down for no better reason than I'm down, and others can kick.

[daleduke17]

I did not ignore the point. There are areas that require EVERY vehicle, regardless of when it was made, to adhere to certain standards. If the vehicle doesn't meet those standards, the owner isn't able to drive it.

Plus, $40.00 isn't that hard to come up with. Set some change aside every week and it will add up. Plus, those prized possessions will still be useful in some way.

So the nation is changing how TV is done? Life will still go on. Maybe people will realize that the whole world isn't just what happens on the television.

What happens when the people not able to afford the upgrade "have" to buy a new tv (their old one breaks, for example), then what?

[TheRoo]

I would be curious to find a locality that requires emission standards on all older vehicles. The first mass produced catalytic converter came on the market in the early 70s, and by 1975, the US required all vehicles sold here to have one. Without the cat, there is no way a car could make any emissions standards. Are you suggesting that there are areas that require cars made before that time to be retrofitted with a catalytic converter? The only area I ever lived in that had emissions testing was Minneapolis. All cars made before 1975, including my 1970 VW microbus, were exempt.

Another point on the digital transition is that now that each TV station takes up less bandwidth, the FCC will be able to sell more slices of our airwaves to more entities, including municipal WI-FI systems. The FCC will be making more money on this deal, and I think it's only fair to compensate those of us who still watch TV over the air.

[Sylvia727]

Plus, $40.00 isn't that hard to come up with. Set some change aside every week and it will add up. Plus, those prized possessions will still be useful in some way.

Setting aside one dollar a week will still take 10 months to come up with enough money for the converter boxes. Nearly a year without the function of something they've paid for, which is unjust. To those on fixed or low incomes, even a dollar a week may be more than they can spare. A dollar a week might be the difference between powdered and real milk, or it might be the gas to go visit a family member. To those on really low incomes, a dollar might be their food budget for one day. Should the poor fast on Sundays every week for ten months simply because the government destroyed the value of their possessions?

The people who can afford the $40 generally don't need converter boxes, since they've already bought nicer, newer tvs and/or pay for cable/satelleite.

So the nation is changing how TV is done? Life will still go on. Maybe people will realize that the whole world isn't just what happens on the television.

Goodness, yes. All the people who can't afford converter boxes are just lazy couch potato slobs who do nothing but watch soap operas and eat candy all day long. None of them work two jobs just to make rent and put food on the table, none of them have handicaps that prevent them from working, and none of them deserve to enjoy what little entertainment can be derived from the equipment that they purchased.

What happens when the people not able to afford the upgrade "have" to buy a new tv (their old one breaks, for example), then what?

Then they go to Goodwill and buy another tv for $10 or $15. They scrimp and save for a quarter of the time it would take them to afford the converter boxes. It is an isolated incident, instead of an organized nationwide event, and it happens through the blind efforts of Lady Luck and Lord Entropy, not through the callous disregard of their government.

The converter boxes are a necessity, and the government should be paying for them, at least for those who suffer from economic hardship. However, the government botched up the handling of this transition. They started announcing this back in 2007(?), so they had plenty of time to plan it better and make sure that the poor and the elderly were taken care of first. Instead, they dillied around and now what should have been just another stage of technological progress is a controversy for those who love to hate the disadvantaged.

[daleduke17]

The converter boxes are a necessity, and the government should be paying for them, at least for those who suffer from economic hardship. However, the government botched up the handling of this transition. They started announcing this back in 2007(?), so they had plenty of time to plan it better and make sure that the poor and the elderly were taken care of first. Instead, they dillied around and now what should have been just another stage of technological progress is a controversy for those who love to hate the disadvantaged.

On the flip side, the people we are talking about had almost two years to get money set aside for a converter box. We're not even talking about the coupons that would take $40.00 off the purchase price. So, it equals out.

[The Shadow]

How could you not know it was going to happen? There's no excuse for it.

Unless I've missed something, my understanding is that there are still a lot of people who haven't got their coupons even though they applied well ahead of the date and within a reasonable time frame...so now there's a backlog. That's why they've extended the deadline to June. So it's not necessarily because people have been lazy or stupid that this is happening

And to those of you who are prepared, I have a hard time understanding what all the fuss is about. This won't affect you in any way. You'll still get TV as you always have, it just means that you'll be receiving analog broadcasts for a bit longer. I've already hooked up my box. I'm not American, but in Canada we have access to all the major U.S networks so we had to prepare for this as well, even though we don't officially go digital here until 2011.

[AdminAssistant]

And to those of you who are prepared, I have a hard time understanding what all the fuss is about. This won't affect you in any way.

Well, it just expands how long we have to keep hearing every 5 minutes how to 'convert' from various TV celebrities.

[Greenday]

The converter boxes are a necessity

Since when has TV been considered a necessity? I was unaware of this development. Food, water, shelter, those are necessities. TV? I think I'd piss my pants laughing if someone told me seriously that they couldn't live without TV. And as such, I don't understand why the hell my tax money is being wasted on this?

Oh, and as far as how $40 might be the difference between eating that week or not, why the hell would anyone place the importance of TV as high as food where that's even a decision? If $40 is the difference between eating and not eating, TV is NOT an issue. And as I said, if it is, there's something wrong with your thinking processes.

[The Shadow]

Since when has TV been considered a necessity?

That's not what she said and you know it. She meant that the converter boxes are necessary if people want to receive TV signals without having to go out and buy a new digital-ready TV.

Also I have to say I find it somewhat strange that those of you who *are* ready are bitching and complaining about having to wait another four months for something that doesn't really affect you, (because you'd still be able to watch TV either way) and yet you're accusing OTHER people of not having their priorities straight?

Let's see...the people who aren't ready for the switch can go without TV because it's not a necessity, but those of you who are find it intolerable that you won't be seeing digital broadcasts when you originally expected!!?

Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.

Well, it just expands how long we have to keep hearing every 5 minutes how to 'convert' from various TV celebrities

Oh boo hoo. If that's what you consider to be a major inconvenience and hardship then you've got a pretty good life.

[AdminAssistant]

Since when has TV been considered a necessity?

As has already been pointed out - information. Weather, news, EBS. Those who can't afford converter boxes also probably can't afford (or don't have access to) the internet.

I used rabbit ears when I lived in KC (got about 15 channels from them) - and I would have been PISSED if the switch had happened when I still lived there. Basically, either 1) wait for 'government coupons' (because those systems always work out soooo well), 2) shell out $40 (or more) for a converter box, which I frequently did not have, or 3) get cable (even more expensive).

While I did have internet (and therefore access to emergency information), what it boils down to is - you used to get this for free*, but for *various reasons* we are now requiring you to shell out money for the same service that used to be free. Um, this makes sense? Because it doesn't make any damn sense to me.

I just love this "Screw the poor!!" attitude. I mean, seriously? There are a lot stupider things to spend taxpayer money on, IMO.

*Okay, taxes, I know. I don't make enough to pay taxes.