Thats just stupid. When Im president, I will just do away with that funny business. Im still going to raise taxes to 90 percent, but im not redistributing that to anybody but me.
I dont know much about the cable tv industry or its actual infrastructure obviously On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > It IS delivered to the customer via the ISP, but it's encrypted due to > content / rebroadcast rights blah blah blah > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:44 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm > <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, I learned something. I just assume all content was only delivered > to > > the service provider, and then the service provider handed it to the > > consumer via their delivery infrastructure. That would make more sense to > > me. > > > > > > I just never saw entertainment (internet included) as being something > worthy > > of any federal attention > > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> It's a bit of a mess really. > >> > >> You have inbound content feeds or peering, which is often encrypted. > >> This hits their different "content servers" in your network that you > >> often have no control over. A customer ONT has a list of channels and > >> encryption keys programmed into it, and it sends off a bunch of > >> multicast join requests for the content to these content servers. The > >> content is end-end encrypted. You're kind of a dumb pipe in this > >> scenario. > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm > >> > >> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > maybe i misunderstand how this works, I assumed the service provider > >> > gets > >> > the content, however they get the content, then delivers the content > on > >> > their own system to the set top box. Are you saying the content > provider > >> > delivers the content directly to the consumer set top box currently > just > >> > transiting the service provider network? > >> > > >> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com > > > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I have no idea what you just said. > >> >> > >> >> Currently, content providers are using proprietary DRM (in many > cases) > >> >> to send content feeds. > >> >> > >> >> For instance, we have 5 content providers and our own sat farm now. > >> >> Each one has a different demarc box for encryption and keys, and we > >> >> have to manage keys for content for each user and each set top. It's > a > >> >> fucking nightmare. We also are limited to a handful of set tops that > >> >> will work with their systems. > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:24 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm > >> >> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > Forcing providers from using proprietary technology on their > >> >> > infrastructure > >> >> > to maximize performance of their service into hammering a square > peg > >> >> > into a > >> >> > round hole so everybody has a square peg will not turn out well. It > >> >> > will > >> >> > however ensure that digital theft becomes a much simpler process, > so > >> >> > thats > >> >> > always good. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:16 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> If you actually read the FCC document, I cannot help but thinking > >> >> >> this > >> >> >> is > >> >> >> almost forcing al la carte on the cable providers. Looks like > good > >> >> >> stuff to > >> >> >> me. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> From: That One Guy /sarcasm > >> >> >> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 9:44 AM > >> >> >> To: af@afmug.com > >> >> >> Subject: [AFMUG] ot: this is our priority? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/04/15/obama-is-urging-the-fcc-to-open-up-the-cable-box-so-you-can-watch-tv-how-you-really-want/ > >> >> >> > >> >> >> First world problems. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see > your > >> >> >> team > >> >> >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your > >> >> > team > >> >> > as > >> >> > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your > team > >> > as > >> > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as > > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.