Slashdot Log In
FCC's Chairman Powell Starts Blog
Posted by
michael
on Sun Jul 11, 2004 04:02 AM
from the everyone's-doing-it dept.
from the everyone's-doing-it dept.
The Importance of writes "And he wants to hear from the tech community. 'I am looking forward to an open, transparent and meritocracy-based communication -- attributes that bloggers are famous for!' Powell said on his blog. But does he really get blogging? He says he 'need[s] to hear from the tech community as we transition to digital television.' Perhaps we could discuss the broadcast flag? If you want to leave some comments on his blog, I suggest you do it before Howard Stern mentions it on his radio show."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
(Michael Powell's) First Post (Score:4, Funny)
"Dad keeps calling me all the time. It's always 'Iraq' this and 'Iraq' that. He's so annoying sometimes. I swear. Ooo! On another note, I did get my belly button pierced this past weekend! It is soooo cute!"
Re:(Michael Powell's) First Post (Score:3, Funny)
"Dad is so cool, I sometimes dress up in his old army clothes, they're rad! Oops, if you're reading this, don't tell him that, he'd be mad, might even ground me
"I wish the State Dept. had a 'take your kid to work day', that would be so coo
Re:(Michael Powell's) First Post (Score:2)
Buisness blog (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Buisness blog (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because most blogs are people who somehow managed to set up a Blogger or Livejournal account and only use it to talk about boring useless stuff no one cares about doesn't mean all blogs have to be that way.
Thats a new one... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thats a new one... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
I see it now... (Score:3, Funny)
"1) Remove the broadcast flag. 2) ??? 3) Profit."
"I wanted to post something on your blog about beowulf clusters, but couldn't think of anything."
"The FCC sucks."
Re:I see it now... (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, and in Soviet Russia, the flag broadcasts YOU!
Re:I see it now... (Score:3, Funny)
Overthrow Corporate Rule (Score:3, Insightful)
Monday's Blog Entry... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Better hurry. (Score:5, Funny)
It would also probably be a good idea to do it before this gets mentioned on Slashdot.
Oh, wait...
too late (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.howardstern.com/boards/showthread.php?t =6353 [howardstern.com]
i dunno how busy
howard et all are on vacation (for another week i think). when he gets back, i'm sure it will get mentioned. hopefully the rest of his fans can keep it civil (heh) on the fucktard's blog
Re:Better hurry. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
holy crap thisis funny (Score:2, Funny)
Eric Idle on the FCC (Score:5, Funny)
Don't we already have a Powell? (Score:5, Informative)
In related FCC news, they just passed an order lessening the restrictions on the unlicensed 2.4Ghz and 5.8Ghz frequency bands.
The news release [fcc.gov] (pdf) says that this order removes roadblocks keeping deployment of next generation (longer range) Wi-Fi and Bluetooth devices.
There is also a statement [fcc.gov] from Chairman Powell himself (more pdf)
-Cary
Fairfax Underground [fairfaxunderground.com]: Where Fairfax County comes out to play
Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortunately, expect Mr. Powell's blog to be spammed by every idealogue around. Already some pointless jabber about the FCC's "indecency" issues have popped up, some merely wrappers for political bashing. If only that was the worst that it will get..
Re:Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah, where's the GNAA when you need them? Wait, what?
Re:Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, because anybody who can handle seeing a naked tit on TV and who dislikes the obvious restrictions on free speech made with stupid excuses like covering those hemispherical mammary glands up is obviously just a jabbering idiot who is really just after s
Re:Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:2)
If Powell actually follows the posts, Internet idealogues won't be the only ones posting: expect paid lobbiests. Readers (and Powell) will want to carefully consider the backgrounds of any regular, articulate, well-versed commentors. Of course, if such people do post, the public will be well-served: maybe we can personally examine the lobbying process. That would be a wonderful.
Now if only I could get paid for posting on slas
Re:Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:2)
An example of an excellent blog from someone in power is that of Mark Cuban (www.blogmaverick.com) who owns the Dallas Mavericks. Very open and candid discussion of his business past, his dealings with the NBA and his team, etc. A great read, IMHO.
Re:Nice idea, prepare for the abuse (Score:2)
Re: FCC's "indecency" (Score:2)
Perhaps so, but spamming every attempt at a discussion on other things won't achieve anything.
Re: FCC's "indecency" (Score:2)
The topic at hand was Powell's blog, not this thread.
Entries (Score:5, Funny)
Tuesday, 7/6/04: "Had a meeting with *beep* who's skirt was a little higher then it should've been, showing off her *beep* and making me want to *beep* *beep* her all night long!"
Weds., 7/7/04: "Took the *beep* for a walk around the *beep*. Cashed a check at the store and purchased *beep*, *beep*, and *beep*. Thought the missus might like that!"
Scratching my head... (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone else question the way this is being termed? After all, if I contribute maybe 10 articles to a news site, does that make my work there constitute a blog?
Ambigious terminology and Blurred boundaries (Score:3, Informative)
I guess you can attribute that perceived confusion to two reasons.:
Many terms lose their meaning over time, or take a new meaning altogether. This is most often seen in Corporate Marketing speak, and in Politics. Someone will use a catchy term to mean a new thing they are trying to push (for economic or political gain). Think about "user friendly" for instance, or "N-Tier" in the marketing of IT. In politics, linguistics is also used this way, as Chomsky and others pointed out.
Out of respect for Powell (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Out of respect for Powell (Score:2)
Simple message from tech community... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Simple message from tech community... (Score:2)
Sigh, he doesn't have a clue does he? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sigh, he doesn't have a clue does he? (Score:3, Insightful)
The airwaves belong to the people.
Yes, and don't you think that the best way to be sure that the people have reasonable access to the airwaves, without clutter and interference, is to provide some rules (regulations) for access? The roads belong to the people, but without traffic lights, things would be a mess.
Government belongs to the people. All content created at taxpayer expense should be in an open format, n
The people sold out (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that some of the old independents started to use research and play to the lowest common denominator. And people actualy liked it, so more followed and soon the people that knew how to play this game best bought more stations. And more people tuned in. And more independents decided to ca
Re:Sigh, he doesn't have a clue does he? (Score:3, Informative)
Right. However, the airwaves are also a public good -- it's not very feasible to isolate radio waves within a particular region on any kind of a large scale.
Generally, the way we deal with public good problems (clean air, littering in a park, etc) is by establishing rules and regulations that enforce universal cooperation (and thus makes all members of the system win out), which is pretty much what the FCC is for.
Content belongs to the creator. If my first steps were
You did well until "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!" (Score:5, Interesting)
You already have those rights. Turn the fucking TV or radio off, or, change the channel.
Please, don't encourage the government to "protect the children".
Parent
Selected blog format inappropriate? (Score:5, Interesting)
There are a couple of format changes that I'd suggest.
First, threading is just plain going to be necessary for any forum of this size. It's not reasonable to expect people to track interleaved discussion -- and it's efficient to allow the public to correct errors in posts and to associate related information, instead of forcing readers to skim through many, many comments that comprise a series of interleaved discussions.
Second of all, moderation, or some similar system could be helpful. Slashcode is a popular codebase to allow moderation, but the structure only partly deals with moderation abusers -- those that attempt to moderate up viewpoints that they agree with, rather than those that they believe to be correct. Slashcode has a good deal of popularity mostly on forums with communities that generally agree with each other on overall issues. I don't believe that there are any forum moderation systems that try to identify "clusters" of posters that moderate each other up (perhaps this is a research project waiting to happen, if no companies are already working on such a thing). Instead of all posts being assigned a global scalar value representing "goodness", there'd be N identified clusters, and "goodness" from the point of view *of each of those clusters*. Doing so would be interesting, as it might be easier to find the "best arguments" for a particular side, and could deal better with more lobbying-oriented environments like this.
I'm not sure whether the "let's slap some viewpoints on a blog" idea is directly from Mike Powell or whether it originated with a staffer -- I find it exciting, and a good sign when it's coming from the FCC. Thanks again to whoever originated the idea, and to Mike Powell for trying it out.
I'm not going to register and log in there... (Score:2)
Dear Mr. Powell:
Like many Americans, I take great exception to your recent punishment of broadcasters like Howard Stern. I don't care for his show at all, but I'm rather more apalled at the idea of a bureaucracy deciding what anyone may or may not say on the air, than any of Mr. Stern's infantile, scatalogical utterances.
Your commission has vastly outlived its usefulness. Why don't you get a real job?
John Randolph,
Cupertino, California
Re:I'm not going to register and log in there... (Score:2)
Yeah, that'll work. Actually, thank you for not registering to the FCC site and posting. Your's isn't the sort of response we need.
Ads in the middle of his blog (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the first posts. (Score:3, Funny)
Hah. (Score:3, Insightful)
specifically the internet community, the ones who protest against the broadcast flag the most, think he's gonna listen to you? no.
Think he thinks you'll listen to him? yes.
Pretty much doing this to "make us understand and accept" the broadcast flag more than likely.
The first blog post is pretty much about the FCC itself, so he's prolly trying to get people to see the fcc as a buncha good guys who are trying to protect people from themselves and any questionable material that may make them question their corporate overlords and the government, and to ensure that we pay our dues to them as well.
I might sound paranoid, but just looking at the first post, it's gona be nothing but a propaganda blog to try to make those who read it go with what the fcc wants to do.
Apparently, he understands the value of unlicensed (Score:3, Interesting)
Adding more unlicensed spectrum would potentially allow for more than three non-overlapping channels (1,6,11) in 802.11b/g. Having a few more ISM bands could be VERY useful.
what kind of communication? (Score:3, Interesting)
I accidentally read "mediocrity-based communication". Sounds about right for most blogs (with a few notable exceptions).
This is great... (Score:2)
Interview Him (Score:2, Insightful)
mediacracy (Score:2)
I wanted to post this... (Score:3, Insightful)
-----------------
Mr. Powell, welcome to blogging, and as one respondent noted, "Welcome to Hell".
I wanted to post my comments regarding FCC regulation, digital TV (and associated DRM measures), and indecency - if for nothing else than to establish my position with you and with the community on where I stand on these issues. If you note, they fall very much in line with what others have written here.
I am a "tech savvy" (actually, that is an understatement) citizen of this country. I am also a voter.
Regarding regulation, I understand that for the public airwaves, there must be some form of regulation, otherwise, in the end, the airwaves would be filled with nothing but static, as station after station stomped the commons with overlapping broadcasts. Whether it is TV or radio, the result would be the same; an unlistenable (or unwatchable) morass of grey static.
However, the current situation and regulations make it impossible for a truely free market to exist. Current licensing fees and regulations make it impossible to easily and cheaply set up low power FM radio stations (even in markets where such stations could be set up without interference). This has left commercial radio (like ClearChannel) the only choice in most markets, which isn't a choice at all. National Public Radio (NPR) also struggles with these regulations.
The situation with television is even worse. While startup costs have always been a limiting factor for small (independent) television stations, those costs
have dropped rapidly in recent years, allowing the possibility for someone to broadcast a TV station from their home. However, licensing costs, fees,
paperwork, and other FCC regulation issues have made it impossible for such services to become available.
In a way, cable TV was an attempt to get around this issue, and in some ways, it has succeeded. By confining the "airwaves" to a coax broadcast medium, and utilizing a different spectrum for broadcasting, many more channels could be delivered to the consumer's door. This availability of channels has spawned the concept of "niche" channels - it seems now if there is an interest, there is a channel (or two, or more) for it. The content for these channels is created by privately owned companies (and the networks) who sell through distribution channels to the cable broadcasters. It isn't a perfect solution, but it is what we have.
The internet is rapidly changing all of this. The internet was originally developed as a "network of ends", where everything connected to this network was "smart", but the network itself remained "stupid" - its only job to shuffle around the packets of information via openly developed and published protocols. Such a network is inherently robust by its nature and structure.
A network of "smart" endpoints means that anyone can become (in concept) a broadcaster. I, or anyone else, can for instance, build a server (serving web pages or anything else), and put it on the internet, and others can find it and read (and/or download) information off of it. It is a different way of distributing information: Instead of the "push" model of traditional broadcasting, the internet is based on the "pull" model, where those that want information must seek it out and request it from the servers. This model has proved itself to be very popular. Content "pushing" has been tried for the internet, but the popularity of such implementations bombed very quickly. The population of the internet has spoken, "pulled" content is what we want.
Consumers have long requested this model for television: Pay-Per-View programming is