What's taking so long?

[EE_]

Why is it taking so long to fully intergrate the internet to TV?
I know you can connect your internet, but shouldn't it be mainstream by now?

Is it because "they" can't control the content/programming yet?

Another thing...
Why is there no virtual college classroom now, that allows you to get the same degree?
Imagine how the cost of tuition would drop when you no longer needed large universities and tenured professors?
Imagine how all students could be given the best education/information available worldwide?
Imagine if students could accelerate learning at their own pace?

Is it because "they" can't control the content/programming yet?

Technology is advanced to the point that trillions of dollars are moved around the world via the web.
Technology allows "them" to see all, track and collect all info.

Why are the most simple advancements taking so long?

[EE_]

Do we have to answer in the form of a question?

Would you like to answer in the form of a question?

[Dogman]

Questions are good, they can both answer and inquire at the same time, would you agree?

[MNeagle]

They haven't figured out how to make money from it yet? But yeah, control is huge I'm sure.

[chad]

they won't switch it until the revenue stream reaches the tipping point. same with vhs, cds, dvds, mp3, etc. when enough people abandon the platform and they can make 1% more money on the new stream, only then will they switch it.

[DMac]

Why is it taking so long to fully intergrate the internet to TV?
I know you can connect your internet, but shouldn't it be mainstream by now?

Is it because "they" can't control the content/programming yet?

Another thing...
Why is there no virtual college classroom now, that allows you to get the same degree?
Imagine how the cost of tuition would drop when you no longer needed large universities and tenured professors?
Imagine how all students could be given the best education/information available worldwide?
Imagine if students could accelerate learning at their own pace?

Is it because "they" can't control the content/programming yet?

Technology is advanced to the point that trillions of dollars are moved around the world via the web.
Technology allows "them" to see all, track and collect all info.

Why are the most simple advancements taking so long?

Yes.

[Golden]

Does a runner sprint out of bed upon waking?
Does a baker not knead the dough and stretch it out before baking?
Who remembers the vid of a baby touching pictures in a magazine like an i-phone?

It's happening. Enjoy the ride!

http://www.khanacademy.org/
http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
http://donewith.info/notes.html#education
http://creativecommons.org/
http://www.netzwelt.de/news/83581-interview-ralf-s-engelschall-deutsche-open-source-guru.html
http://www.svn.net/krscfs/A%20Leak%20From%20Our%20Universe%20to%20Another.pd f
http://yqyq.net/54402-Obrazovanie_Kibermira.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7106933.html

[EE_]

I wasn't totally honest with the original question...I already knew the answer.
I'm sure we could have had pure internet TV several years ago.
I totally believe the reason we don't, is because "they" are still working on a system to control content and are creating laws to censor info. The same reason applies for virtual Internet college. Eventually the world will wake up to the truth, but for now they can slow the process until "they' are ready for it.

This video pretty much explains it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQnHwZ1Uxo0&feature=player_embedded

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

Well there are probably multiple reasons. America is a big country, look how long it took us to make the switch from dial-up to "high speed" internet. Now realize that so-called "High Speed" internet is actually very slow for the speeds necessary to stream everything. In countries like Japan and Korea, relatively small countries geographically, it is very easy to run fiberoptics to the node, even to the home. For $40/month in Japan you get 100Mbps, a speed considered a "high powered commercial alternative" here in the US. Same in Korea, their pings in games are 3ms. So one thing is the physical size of America is physically limiting how fast the infrastructure becomes.

Another thing is the concept of early adopters (of technology) versus pinoneers. The people who own the content are NOT pioneers. .mp3's were already huge in 1996 and here we are 15 years later and these guys still haven't figured out their head from their tail on the matter, they don't control the platform, they don't take advantage of the platform, hell, they just figured out what the damn platform is last week. They're basically dinosaurs.

The innovators and pioneers were streaming stuff years ago, albeit at slow speeds and low resolutions. They were doing so illegally and slowly got shut down as the dinosaurs finally woke up and noticed. So we've actually regressed in terms of progress..


The last issue is an issue of incentive. They have no incentive to end televisions reign as king. You will notice that all cable boxes are all tiny computers now. Tivo, direct TV, DVR, all these things are just computers with a CPU and RAM. The cable company just has a database of shows and they stream them into these boxes, half of TV in many homes is essentially computerized already anyway.

Storage space has really come down in the last couple years, the home user can get a terrabyte of storage for about 50 bucks these days, it used to be an order of magnitude more expensive, and prior to that, wasn't available at any price.

These guys are basically idiots, they are sitting on thousands and thousands of episodes of shows that the masses want to watch, they are just sitting on them, if they digitized them and created a playground where any of them can be streamed, perhaps for a basic fee per week or month (people hate to pay by the item) they could improve their viewership by 1000%. But they don't think like that. Look how the netflix model is struggling to stay alive despite its massive, massive popularity.

Ultimately it is a bunch of dinosaurs clinging to the only business model they know because they are unable to adapt and they created the damn business model, so why change it. They created their own niche, they are refusing to leave it.

Meanwhile, in response to the corporate tightening of the screws (censorship, greed over content) many internet pioneers are currently working on creating a new internet, one which is unable to be censored. A side-effect of being unable to censor material may be that it will be infinitely more difficult for these guys to do copyright take downs in the future as well.

Since they failed to be early adopters or pioneers, there may come a time when they no longer control the infrastructure/hardware.

[Golden]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMh8oBdKkK4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMh8oBdKkK4
Uploaded by w3bfilm on Nov 10, 2011
::: a nice review by @CreatorsProject: http://bit.ly/sjDV13 ( thanx! )
::: video not avail on your mobile? Watch here http://dai.ly/seZSPz or http://bit.ly/u4TSli

Released on 11.29.11, http://INTERNETRISING.net is a digi-documentary investigating the evolving relationships between the Internet and collective consciousness of humanity. It provokes many questions about ancient and modern paradoxes of life, its pleasures and pains... and the gray area contrasts in between - but most of all it is meant to be an inspiring conversation starter.

"When wireless is perfectly applied the whole earth will be converted into a huge brain, which in fact it is, all things being particles of a real and rhythmic whole. We shall be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance." - Nikola Tesla

[keehah]

Why would the cable and internet company change to charge you one bill for the integrated service, when they can continue to charge you twice?

[Golden]

Why would the cable and internet company change to charge you one bill for the integrated service, when they can continue to charge you twice?

Why would you pay twice if you didn't have to?

[Glass]

I use a tv tuner card in a PC. I think I posted this before. I have epg, record 1 ch and watch another. Because it's a pc it has internet. whole bunch of other features, ad skip/cut, auto convert etc.

Eventually all tv will be streamed via "cable" which will be IP based. It should be eaiser in the US because the picture quality of TV is so poor it should take much less bandwidth, compression and so on to deliver the video.

Some compression algorithms are nothing short of amazing in that they can get a multi GB video file (HD dvd quality) down to about 200 Mb or so with little noticable degradation in quality. A lot of those compression formats are GPL so they are no good to the TV companies. They can't implement DRM on them so they need more bandwidth because their shitty compression is not good enough.

Some good points made here, Korea is a prime example. In australia they are building a $40 billion fibre to the home network which will cost more, deliver less free content and be 100% controllable as to what you can get off of the net. Then we will really start seeing some ISP profitability and an end to free speech on the net.