75th Anniversary of Television 358
SpiceWare writes "In the summer of '21, Philo T. Farnsworth was struck by an inspiration after plowing a field. He transmitted the first television image six years later on September 7, 1927."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
75th Anniversary of Television
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re:whats up with the picture? (Score:2)
And came forth... (Score:2)
Oh cmon, you can agree!! There's NO reason the wayans brothers should have got that sitcom for christ's sake!!
Re:And came forth... (Score:2)
Seriously though what about shows like [In?] "Living Color"? That was a funny fucking show which showcased all their talents. They are a funny bunch, the Wayans Brothers show just had bad writing.
In 1927, when TV was invented . . . (Score:4, Funny)
Things haven't really changed since then.
Re:In 1927, when TV was invented . . . (Score:2)
Re:In 1927, when TV was invented . . . (Score:2)
Rough timeline:
Live TV -> Filmed TV -> Videotaped TV
Anyone care to fill in some dates?
Re:In 1927, when TV was invented . . . (Score:2)
The very first video recorder (black & white, of course) was demonstrated in 1951: "Ampex team led by Charles Ginsburg began work on a video tape recorder (VTR) in October; Bing Crosby Enterprises demonstrated an experimental 12-head VTR at 100 ips."
In 1956, CBS broadcast the first network television show with videotape Nov. 30, Douglas Edwards and the News, for West Coast delayed broadcast.
Of course, this was before Helical Scan (rotating heads, which we still use) was developed by the Japanese and first demonstrated by Toshiba in 1959. Sony marketed a helical scan VTR, the PV100 in 1961, which was adopted by American Airlines in 1964 for in-flight movies; Ampex sued Sony over it in 1966 (in 1960 Ampex shared VTR patents with Sony and Sony shared transistorized circuitry with Ampex).
It's impressive to see that U-Matic (3/4", composite video), the very first videocassette format, was introduced by Sony in 1969 and is still in use, although it's been superseeded on the institutional market by low-end Beta SP in the last 10 years and now DV.
Cheers,
-max
My goal for today... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, TV has given us some nice moments. But in between all those nice moments has been a high-volume sewer hose of cultural sludge. So my personal goal today is to convince everyone to not watch TV at all, at least for this day. Let's remind the Content Cartel that there are other options...
Re:My goal for today... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can always tell that a statement is meaningless when you can replace the key noun in it with a different word without changing the degree to which the statement is true. A statement that is always true, regardless of the subject, is dull and pointless.
Re:My goal for today... (Score:3, Funny)
"Well, Slashdot has given us some nice moments. But in between all those nice moments has been a high-volume sewer hose of cultural sludge."
Hey, you're right! It works for everything!
(edit: In retrospect, this post looks like an insult to you. Well, it's not. Thank god for the edit function.)
Re:My goal for today... (Score:2)
Re:My goal for today... (Score:2)
You can always tell that a statement is profound when you can replace the key word in it with a different word without changing the degree to which the statement is true. A statement that is always true, regardless of the subject, is universal and timeless.
.
Re:My goal for today... (Score:2)
De gustibus non disputandum est. I'd say the fractions are closer to one percent of one percent on both counts. If you think one out of every ten books is worth reading, you must not be looking at very many books.
Re:My goal for today... (Score:2)
WHOA!
See? It works for everything....
Sick (Score:4, Funny)
LEXX
Re:My goal for today... (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing is, because of the way programming works, nothing you'll ever learn on TV is really that in-depth. I'm really guilty of watching a lot of the History Channel, thinking I know a lot, then realizing that the show glossed over a lot.
Re:Excellent Post (Score:2)
I didn't even notice this until the Daily Show made fun of this. God, I love that show sometimes.
John Logie Baird in 1926 (Score:5, Informative)
On January 26, 1926 Baird demonstrated a fully working prototype of mechanical television to members of the Royal Institution at 22 Frith Street, Baird's residence and laboratory. This was the world's first demonstration of true television because it showed moving human faces with tonal gradients and detail. Far from perfect, the images flickered quite a bit, but the individuals on screen were fully recognizable.
Re:John Logie Baird in 1926 (Score:2, Informative)
The trick is that several different people where working on getting pictures through the air. Baird had one that never worked out. Sorta like the wright brothers didn't have the first aircraft, just the first proved to be start of usefull flight.
A continuous path, not boolean (Score:2)
It appears that *many* people and institutions had worked on the idea for several decades.
While there were many barely-working prototypes from everybody and their dog, the biggest obsticle seemed to be making it practical and relatively clear.
Farnsworth made some important improvements, but his stuff alone was not sufficient. (He had the best camera ideas IIRC, while RCA had the best TV tube ideas.) It took a combination of a lot sub-inventions and lots of tuning and fiddling to finally make it practical.
There was an article linked to by slashdot a year or so ago that talks about how lack of cooperation between those people with with best know-how probably slowed its progress. It seems eveybody wanted the whole pie for themselves rather than cooperate.
Re:John Logie Baird in 1926 (Score:4, Funny)
Re:John Logie Baird in 1926 (Score:2)
Paul Gottlieb Nipkow in 1884 (Score:2)
Re:Nothing matches dresden or hiroshima (Score:2)
Poor Philo couldn't even be recognized on TV. (Score:2)
Guests (Score:2)
Meanwhile 75 years ago yesterday Baird was... (Score:5, Interesting)
... at the University of Leeds in the UK demonstrating his video recorder and his stereoscopic television (3D TV to you and me).
Baird's [bbc.co.uk]recorder used an alumin(i)um disc rather like an LP running at ~80rpm to record the images. The machine, like his television, was an electro-mechanical affair build from bits including old hat boxes and bicycle parts. His machinery is exhibited at The National Museum of Photography, Film and Television [nmsi.ac.uk] a short way away from Leeds, in Bradford.
Whilst researching the links I found the NMPFT's TV heaven page and top ten list of requested television programs from the archives. The August list is below:
This says something about the visitors although you have to account for it being the school vacation.
Except it was a technological dead end. (Score:2)
The Farnsworth system was all electronic, which meant no moving parts and much more easily adapted to mass production. Farnsworth is truly the father of TV as we know it today.
Re:Except it was a technological dead end. (Score:2)
Baird *was* the first person to demonstrate a television system and I don't think this takes anything away from Farnsworth's superior system.
Look at it from a Babbage/Turing point of view.
babbage was first, but Turing was the father of the modern machines we now use.
Bairds recordings online here (Score:2)
(Baird did some of his initial experiments in the Park in my hometown in England - there was a plaque on the building)
And nutcase Britons are still at it [wyenet.co.uk]
Here's a gadget to convert modern TV to 30-line Baird [dircon.co.uk]
Re:Why Do So Many Americans Feel Like This? (Score:2)
Right now, I can't think of anything that's not massivly American and totally dominant.
You forgot biggest egos.
Seriously, if you think that everything American is faultless and that everything outside of the USA is useless then you really have a problem.
A few examples for you: gun control (or the lack of it), capital punishment, health care, failure to ratify the Kyoto treaty (which the Clinton administration agreed to but which oil-backed Bush ripped up immediately), environmental policy in general, failure to properly recognise the International Criminal Court, countless friendly fire, civilian and third party deaths during the Gulf War, in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and elsewhere, torpedoing United Nations fact-finding missions and investigations into unprovoked US military action overseas (including the Clinton admistration's cruise missile strike on a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory that produced a third of North Africa's medicine, not a chemical weapons plant as the US intelligence agencies mistakenly believed).
But you hear so much balanced coverage on those issues on CNN, ABC and MSNBC right?
I won't even bother providing you with a list of worthy inventions, etc from elsewhere - if you can't see that you're argument holds about as much water as a sieve then you're more myopic than I thought.
Every country has its faults - the US is no exception. If anything, the current Bush administration has succeeded in making America less popular overseas than ever before in just about every corner of the world.
Baird: Jan 1926 (Score:3, Insightful)
Baird gave his first public demo in Jan 1926. Campbell-Swinton had come up with the concept of television scanned, synchronised and displayed by electronic means in 1908. Baird's implementiation was very low cost in engineering terms - when the BBC used it for broadcasts they were able to use their audio transmitters. The BBC actually broadcast using Baird's system from 1932 to 1935. Mechanical scanning was based on Nipkow's ideas (a German - around 1884)
Baird was also the first to record television (on a wax disk). I think he also had a colour system. Mechanical scanning was not ideal, but it was all that could be done at the time and worked well enough for the BBC to broadcast using it. He can't just be written out of history.
The Farnsworth article makes much of the claim that the idea ocurred to him when he was 14 (no evidence is offered - and what was needed was not the ideas - they were in place but the electronics to practically apply them) as it concedes that practical application postdated Baird's demo.
Nick
Little known fact: (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Little known fact: (Score:2)
You know, I've always suspected that but had no idea if it was true or not.
Thanks!
Farnsworth? Baird? Nipkow! (Score:2)
According to this [acmi.net.au], both Farnsworth and Baird were shown up Paul Nipkow, who patented television in 1884!
Oh, sure, smart people will point out that Farnsworth invented the device that became modern television, but Baird had a working television (of a completely different technology) before that, and that Nipkow's device wasn't really practical. Logical folks will realize that there is nothing new under the sun and all inventions are built upon the shoulders of giants.
But this is the internet, so forget smart and logical! Instead, I see a lot of people arguing without facts, a lot of name calling, and people blowing perceived slights against their country into calls for war. Blech.
Inspiration (Score:2)
"Man, I have way too much free time on my hands if I'm out doing something boring like plowing a field. I think I'll stop and build a magical box that does nothing but consume the excess time with which people are burdened."
Makes me wonder about the inspiration for a lot of other things. Beer, curling, AOL...
Re:Inspiration (Score:2, Interesting)
Think "scan lines".
The path that a plow follows in a rectangular field resembles the path that is traced out on the face of a video display. In fact if I'm not mistaken the first TV used a back-and-forth scan pattern instead of the current method.
Re:Inspiration (Score:3, Funny)
Well, likely he was thinking: "This sucks, I'd rather be watching Rosie"
Please give credits to the right person (Score:2)
A lot of things wouldn't exist without the help of this very first 'hacker'.
Re:Please give credits to the right person (Score:2)
Who invented TV? Who cares. (Score:2)
But every time someone mentions an invention it becomes an excuse to fight a patriotic war of words. Who invented the computer? Who invented the TV? Who did this, who did that.
Well I don't care. TV was an invention whose time had come. And it took people from all over the world to make it work. So let's celebrate the work of all the pioneers of the TV, and let's celebrate what we can acheive if we work together. And let's stop belittling the efforts of all the unknown helpers by attributing inventions to the efforts of just one man.
Was it really as amazing as you think? (Score:2)
Who invented the electronic camera btw?
seems to me... (Score:3, Interesting)
Moderation (Score:2)
and the American vs British discussion on general hygiene and the genetics of height was quite interesting.... how in the hell did that happen over a posting on the 75th anniversary of TV, anyway???
75 years? That much? (Score:2)
World Literacy Day (Score:3, Informative)
samuel morse? (Score:2)
Farnsworth did an all electronic scanner & display, which became the norm.
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:4, Interesting)
In my high school, (don't remember the exact class) the teacher had us read this long long article about how the brilliant David Sarnoff, created from scratch, the first cathode ray tube at the technology wonderland company RCA. I don't remember much detail, but it greatly glorified Sarnoff as "the father of television" and RCA as the company that brought moving pictures to every living room in America.
It sounded fishy to me, but I didn't bother looking further into it. As luck would have it, I ran across an article in an old Scientific American a week later that told the truth: Philo Farnsworth invented the cathode ray tube (as well as the tube that the first cameras used, can't remember the name) and RCA tried to steal the invention and patents from him.
I took a copy of the factual article to the aforementioned teacher who said he'd announce a correction to the class. Funny, though, he never did. I guess teachers don't like to be told they're wrong (even though it wasn't exactly his fault.)
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
He probably did not want to revise his lesson plans. He probably memorized the RCA version and didn't want to learn a new script.
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Perhaps.
One thing I just thought of this morning, I also remember seeing a video clip in that same class of some NBC reporter interviewing "the inventor of television," Sarnoff, where Sarnoff was explaining how the cathode ray tube worked and generally giving the same sort of spiel that was in the article I originally mentioned.
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Corporations have been acting badly for years. Personally, I would have paid him a nice sum, and hired him for a good salary.
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2, Informative)
The pioneers of television were the Russians, Nipkow who invented a mechanical revolving scanning disk in 1884 and Rosing who used a cathode ray tube in 1907 to display images from a mechanical transmitter. In Britain in 1923, John Logie Baird began to demonstrate television transmission using Nipkow disks. In America, Rosing's student, Vladimir Zworykin, filed a patent for an electronic television system in 1923, but the project was dropped by Westinghouse and Zworykin had to wait for RCA to restart the project in 1930. Meanwhile, an Idaho schoolboy, Philo Farnsworth, invented an electronic system in 1922, and by 1927 had transmitted television images. So you cannot deny the fact that the first Television was in fact invented by Russians. Zworykin's iconoscope led to modern televison cameras and Zworykin's kinescope was the basis for the modern television picture tube. Note that Nipkow and Zworykin are two different people.
So in the end, we know who was the real inventor and who was just the contributor to the development.
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Re:Philo T. Farnsworth? (Score:2)
Of course there where people workng on the idea, but to say Farnsworth is not the father of electronic TV is like saying Fors shouldn't be credited for his automation and assemble process because he didn't invent the wheel.
Re:TV? (Score:3, Insightful)
Spending so much time in front of the computer is baaad. Watch some TV, get some culture, it'll be good for ya.
Re:TV? (Score:2)
Experience culture in real-time, forget the tripe broadcast on TV... get outside and soak up a little sunshine and real people...
CRT vs. LCD... (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Accurate Color Matching. Sorry, you just can't do this on an LCD. I understand that Plasma is a little better, but you can't beat CRT for color matching.
2. Multi-resolution Display. LCD's have a 'Native' display resolution for which their displays are best suited. Other display resolutions, if you can get them to work, just don't look right.
3. Brightness. LCD will *never* be as bright, nor have the brightness control of CRT. CRTS are also not prone to angle-washout-syndrome like LCD monitors are. CRTS have the same brightness regardless of which direction you're looking at them from.
In many cases... most probably... an LCD display is preferrable to a CRT. In my line of work, as a graphic artist, I'd sooner lop off a pinky than part with my big, beautiful, heavy, radiation-emitting CRT.
Re:CRT vs. LCD... (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't do it on a CRT, either, and you're a fool if you think you can. That's why the good lord almighty gave us proofs.
Back when I worked in printing, I used to do all my color corrections in greyscale mode. It's just too easy to get distracted by the colors on the screen. Even when you know, in your head, that they're not accurate, your eye tricks you. That's why you have to get the tone right using greyscale mode, then rely on your colorimeters to get the process mix right.
Re:Inspiration? (Score:2)
Re:Inspiration? (Score:2)
Re:Claimed (Score:5, Funny)
You, sir, are obviously an idiot. The weapon of choice for rampaging through public high schools is the semi-automatic handgun. Its small size makes it easy to conceal under clothing or in a bag or backpack. Weapons that fire 9mm rounds present a good compromise between power and magazine capacity, but for real effectiveness against targets at close range, go for the
What a moron.
Re:Claimed (Score:2)
Re:Claimed (Score:2)
Get the damn lyrics right, moggy...
Re:Claimed (Score:2)
And now I shall type for 20 seconds, becuause Slashdot won't let me submit the comment in just two or three seconds. It really sucks that I type quickly, but those are the breaks. I think that it must be twenty seconds by now, so I shall submit the comment. Wish me well.
Re:Claimed (Score:2)
Oh, and perhaps it's only the Americans I've met that are short. Actually, come to think of it, I know a woman from the US who's pretty tall.
Re:Claimed (Score:2)
fluoride (note the spelling please, previous posters) makes your teeth crumble and fall out, and discolours them.
Ten years growing up stateside I drank a lot of water, mostly boiled tapwater. One small cavity over 10 years. Ten years in Europe, I've had to have 3 root canals and a wisdom tooth pulled.
Yeah, that flouride really sucks.
BTW, you want short, fat and ignorant? Check out british and german tourists at your European summer resort of choice.
Re:quality television ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, France has about 600 broadcast TV stations. The UK has about 250.
The United States of America has more than 2,000, and that's just over-the-air stations. We also have over 9,000 local cable TV systems.
Do the arithmetic. The United States of America broadcasts over 96 million hours of television programming every year. There's enough room in America's cultural output for greatness and crap and everything in between, in volumes that would blow your narrow little mind.
A friend of mine just moved to the US from Australia. Not a small country, Australia. Twice the size of Europe. He and his family are bewildered by the sheer amount of everything we have in this country. Took him to a grocery store the other day. Our city is nowhere near a coastline, but we get seafood by the ton flown in every morning. The produce available in our markets comes from every corner of the world, and it's all fresh and unbelievably cheap.
I think you foreign types often fail to grasp just how big and how affluent this country is. Our culture dominates the world not because it's better or worse, but because there's just so much of it.
This is, of course, a good and righteous thing. Manifest Destiny is no myth, my friends.
Re:quality television ? (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, Australia is a small country when you look at population. It has less than 20 million for a country the size of continental USA. You may not be able to get seafood in a market in Alice Springs (central Australia), but the restaurants in central Australia will have it on the menu. Food is cheap in Australia. Most of it is produced in Australia.
As for television in Australia, there are only 5 broadcast channels. Pay-TV is having a hard time here. I wouldn't get it. Why would I when all the good American programs are on free-to-air. Our TV stations can show what American broadcast stations wouldn't dare (South Park, Sex In The City, Six Feet Under, Queer As Folk, to name a few). We also get good British programs. More channels doesn't always mean there's better programs to watch.
The higher they fly... (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you US type often fail to grasp the long and old culture most country in the world has, and how BIG the world is outside the US. Your *Media* dominate the world not because it is better, worse or there is more, that is because it is CHEAPER. But your culture don't dominate the world, that is unless you count media/Mac-donald restaurants as a culture. Most people don't take consumer-society as being a culture. Only the US do that.
Re:quality television ? (Score:2)
Re:quality television ? (Score:2)
This [auslig.gov.au] should set you straight. Australia is not twice as large as Europe. It is, in fact, smaller than Europe.
Re:quality television ? (Score:2)
My source is the CIA World Fact Book, but I'm too lazy to link. Google it. It describes the US as being about 2-1/2 times the size of western Europe, and Australia as being slightly smaller than the continental US. So although I wasn't clear, my figures were pretty close to being accurate.
...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Money?" (Score:3, Insightful)
Your use of the phrase "foreign types" represents a racist labeling of everyone and anyone who isn't a U.S. citizen. It's evidence of your inability or unwillingness to see the world as it really is. I don't give much credence to fears of U.S.-inspired
globalization efforts (much of that seems to be an effort to ensure that the poor and underdeveloped stay poor and underdeveloped) but your thoughts serve as evidence for those who do.
Likewise your approving reference to "Manifest Destiny", a discredited and equally racist concept that, in a contemporary context, would support U.S. seizure of territory beyond it's current borders.
As I am sure others will point out, Australia is not twice the size of Europe. Australia is smaller; indeed, it is the smallest continent. And, compared to Europe. it is largely unpopulated.
The variety and quality of programming on U.S. television is determined by the number and independence of the production companies creating that programming, not by the number of individual stations broadcasting that programming. This reflects the nature of the U.S. television industry. There is good programming on U.S. TV, but there is also an increasing surfeit of cheap tabloidesque programming that exists only because it increases the profit margin of that particular corporation. I haven't lived in France, but I have lived in the UK. On average, UK programming is more varied and interesting than U.S. programming precisely because the UK TV industry is not a mirror image of the U.S. industry.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
Actually, it represents a tongue-in-cheek, mocking labeling of everyone and anyone who isn't a US citizen. Which everybody else on Slashdot obviously understood. I'm stunned that you didn't pick it up from the "Manifest Destiny" remark, if nothing else.
As I am sure others will point out, Australia is not twice the size of Europe.
And as I've pointed out, the mistake was mine for not being more clear, but I wasn't wrong. The US is roughly 2-1/2 times the land area of western Europe, and Australia is slightly smaller than the continental US. The figure of "twice the size" stands; I accidentally omitted the word "western," which changed everything. My source is the CIA World Fact Book, but I'm still too lazy to link. Ain't I a stinker?
The variety and quality of programming on U.S. television is determined by the number and independence of the production companies creating that programming, not by the number of individual stations broadcasting that programming.
And what do you think determines the number of television production companies? The size of the market, you idiot. A bigger market obviously means more providers trying to serve that market. Somebody has to fill those 96 million hours a year. Obviously a lot of it is going to be junk. But there's a huge amount of great and wonderful stuff. Even if only one percent of one percent of that is worth watching, that's still nearly 10,000 hours every year of quality stuff.
On average, UK programming is more varied and interesting than U.S. programming
Nope. It's just that there's less programming in the UK, by a factor of about 30. You can find quality TV programming any hour of the day and night in the US, if you're willing to take the time and trouble to look through a thousand channels. Or, if you're clever, if you program your TiVo to do it for you.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
"Mocking" and "labeling" anyone because they aren't U.S. citizens is a classic example of racism in my book.
Quality TV is in the eye of the beholder. My experience has been that the ratio of "good" to "rubbish" is higher on UK television than it is in the U.S. I attribute this to a production model that is not as tied to advertising revenues as is the U.S. model. I'm not ignoring the fact that much UK TV is supported by advertising, nor am i ignoring that fact that some U.S. programming is not supported by advertising. I am, though, taking note of the fact that BBC programming is supported by license fees, not advertising. That, and the fact that they are not married to the 13- 0r 26-show production run allows them to take risks with programming that commercial and public TV in the U.S. won't take. In the U.S., if the show doesn't sell product or new cable subscriptions, it disappears.
The size of the market might attract more people trying to make money from TV, but, as in most profit-driven media, the trend will be to copy other programming that is already makeing money for its advertisers. Thanks to that, we have multiple shopping channels, multiple informarcials, multiple cop shows, multiple "reality" shows, etc.,etc.
By the way, sorry you had to resort to the gratuitous "idiot" insult. Its use is in keeping, at least, with your admitted sloppy writing.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
In any case, the difference between nationalism and racism is so small it's almost invisible.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
Natinalism is not patriotism. Racism can be defined as believing in the inferiority of others who do not share your racial or ethnic components. Nationalism can be defined as believing in the inferiority of others who do not share your nationality.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
He was making a generalized statement about the behavior of "foreign types" based solely on their status as "foreigners". I consider the phrase itself just as racist as "white types", "black types", "Asian types", "American types", etc.
That's the kind of wooly-headed liberal thinking that leads to grandmothers being patted down at airports. Making sound, well-informed decisions based on experience means observing trends. If I burn my hand on three ovens in a row, I'll learn to be afraid of ovens. Likewise, if (for example) people of Arab extraction blow up three buildings in a row, I'll learn to keep a closer eye on people of Arab extraction. That's racial profiling, and it's very controversial. It's also smart. It's very easy to look back on events like the internment of Japanese Americans in the 1940's and shake our heads, but don't conclude that just because people went to unreasonable extremes then that their motivations were flawed.
People fall naturally into groups. There are old people, young people, white people, black people, tall people, short people. Within a group, you often-- not always, but often-- find trends of behavior and personality. I find that people who aren't from American tend to have certain opinions and beliefs in common. So I'm going to note this, and use this information.
Don't like it? Fine. Call me a racist. Doesn't bother me a bit, because I know better.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:2)
I don't have any problems with the first and third bullets in that definition. But, consider the number of people killed in the name of nationalism by those who appropriate the word for their own political ends. In line with the second bullet, it's historically been easy for thugs with guns to wrap themselves in nationalism.
So, when I hear someone described as a nationalist, I'm more likely to think of them as a "thug with a gun" than as a legitimate patriot.
Re:...Then He Said, "How Much is That in Real Mone (Score:3)
Likewise your approving reference to "Manifest Destiny", a discredited and equally racist concept that, in a contemporary context, would support U.S. seizure of territory beyond it's current borders.
You're damn right! Sovereignty is a privilege, not a right. Look at Germany after World War II. Did we just hand the keys over to the German people again and pack out? Hell, no. Five years of occupation by the US, along with the UK and France, resulted in the formation of the Federal Republic, which has become one of the strongest, most modern countries on Earth. Essentially the same thing happened between '45 and '52 in Japan.
Let's compare this to a recent sequence of events. We smashed the oppressive and illegitimate Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Where were our occupation forces? Where were the parades through Kabul? Who's the provisional governor of Afghanistan? Where's Douglas MacArthur when we need him?
Nope. Instead of occupation and support, all they got was a loya jirga. Now, less than three months later, they're back to assassination attempts and bombings. There's no political system in Afghanistan, because nobody has taken the time to build one. Countries with no tradition of democracy can't just be handed a get-out-of-oppression-free card and expected to build their own country with it. They have to be taught.
That's why I oppose the proposed invasion of Iraq. If my country would go all the way with it-- marching into Baghdad, removing Hussein from power, and setting up a provisional occupation government for a period of not less than five years-- I'd be all for it. But I'm afraid that's not what's going to happen. Crushing the Hussein government without building a strong new government in its place would just destabilize things even further.
If we did it right, occupying whole swaths of the Third World would be the best thing for everybody concerned. There are countries where corruption and lawlessness are the rule, not the exception. These kinds of societies can't possibly be expected to govern themselves in any effective manner. As I've said many times before in this forum, democracy can't work without a universal respect for and observance of the law. In countries where there is no law-- only anarchy or dictatorship-- the seeds of democracy will find no purchase.
Get in there with a hundred thousand troops armed with M-16s, MREs with the little packages of M&Ms in 'em, and copies of the Declaration of Independence. Force 'em to live under the strict rule of martial law for a few years, then gradually give them the ability to govern themselves. In fifty years, we'll all be buying expensive stereos and luxury cars imported from that economic superpower, Afghanistan.
Bet your ass I'm for the seizure of territory outside our current borders. Somebody's gotta show these people how it's done. I don't see the French rushing to do it. Do you?
Store shelf is only half the story (Score:2)
What is readily available are things which are easy to transport around (food, VCR's, toys). However, many things are rather costly in comparison with such shippable items. For example, housing and medical care are quite costly in many places in the U.S. relative to store-shelf goods.
Re:quality television ? (Score:2)
And a common European failing is to think that you can get 3 good channels. Won't happen unless you socialize television. Oh, wait....
It's better to have 2000 channels, each of which being outstanding some of the time, than to have 3 channels that are always mediocre. Let the cream rise to the top, and then skim, baby, skim.
Re:There's lies, damn lies, and statistics... (Score:2)
Thanks for pointing it out, though.
Re:Nice spelling (Score:2)
Main Entry: anniversary
Pronunciation: "a-n&-'v&rs-rE, -'v&r-s&-
Function: noun
1 : the annual recurrence of a date marking a notable event
2 : the celebration of an anniversary
vs....
The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the Dictionary search box to the right.
Suggestions for Annaversary:
1. anniversary
Re:Nice spelling (Score:2)
You and the original AC must have had the same teacher. It seems beyond belief that such an utterly aberrant and downright wrong spelling would be passed down through multiple teachers by accident. Much more likely that it came from the same source.
Re:Nice spelling (Score:2)
He spells "wierd" constantly and it shits me.
Re:Nice spelling (Score:2)
Re:Yanks and Yuropeans (Score:2)
Re:Yanks and Yuropeans (Score:2, Insightful)
That being said, anyone worth his salt knows that great inventions/discoveries have been made in European nations and in the United States. I, being American, don't believe that we're the fount of all wisdom and invention, but I think that we do some neat things sometimes. And some stupid things sometimes. So does wherever you live, I'm sure.
Now, if you don't mind, I think I'll skip the looking in the mirror suggestion in your post, because I'm not a particularily handsome person. Oh yeah, and, um, get bent.
Re:Yanks and Yuropeans (Score:2)
You're so right. As an American, I definitely feel that I live in a completely un"civilised" part of the world, certainly compared to our morally upstanding big brother, Europe.
I mean, frankly, of course Europeans are the pinnacle of civilization in this world. Could a people who was not civilized been able to rape and pillage India, China, and Africa so effectively through colonization? Would an uncivilized people been able to so efficiently mass-murder civilians during WWII? These great deeds are clearly a sign of a superior civilization.
MK Gandhi was once asked what he thought of Western civilization, and he said "I think it would be a very good idea." He was talking about you, shithead. Not us.
I grant you that we've done some crazy things in this world, but it pales in comparison to the British Empire, Napoleon, and the Third Reich. Get off your high horse, please.
Re:Yanks and Yuropeans (Score:2)
Give it time, my friend, give it time.
Loose translation: I concede that Europeans have been, throughout history, the most bellicose and warmongering people the world has ever known, raping and pillaging for their own wealth, but you guys did some irritating things lately, and.. uh... you're gonna... I bet you're gonna do bad stuff too one day!
Puh. Fucking. Leez.
HDTV (Score:2)
Re:Transmitted the first television image (Score:2)
> demonstration) was Felix the Cat in 1946.
No, since they used wireless near-live TV during the Olympic Games 1936.
Fax machine influence? (Score:2)
I have read that France had fax machines in the mid 1800's using a line-by-line scan process. I wonder how much of this influenced TV attempts. TV is essentially "fast, repeated faxing" in concept.
Re:Well Happy Birthday!... (Score:2)
Re:Well Happy Birthday!... (Score:2)