It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Senate passes bill to delay digital TV switch

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 09:41 PM

Originally posted by denynothing
Wow that does sound like an absolute mess, could legal action be pursued in this matter?

As a matter of fact, there was a lawsuit brought upon the FCC by the NAB and SBE society back in 1999. The lawsuit was settled when the FCC changed the format rules from anything goes to a specific number of approved formats, but this did not solve the multi-format problem. It only reduced it from having 14 different formats to the current 8.

However, it doesnt end there.

As you might be aware, some manufacturers of receivers are rolling out digital tv's capable of resolutions that go well into 1440x900 and higher. This requires the use of an "up-converter" or "up-scaler" circuitry in the tv or converter box...and that alone brings the price up.

But the other problem is that you can only up-scale a picture by so much before you end up with a mess of pixilated garbage, just like it is to try to upsize a 640x480 picture to a 1024x760 picture. You begin to see the individual image pixels. The same is true with digital video.

In fact, many consumers have complained when they get that fancy brand new digital widescreen tv home and upscale a low resolution video source and it looks worse than it did on the older set!

Had there been a set standard from day one, like the 1024x768p standard, there wouldnt be all this mess going on. Its easy to upscale a 1024x768 video to a 1440x900 video without alot of pixel artifacts. However upscaling a 724x460p signal to a 1440x900 introduces alot of pixel artifacts.

And unfortunately, most networks such as Fox, transmit at 724x460p resolution. ABC transmits at 1024x768p, and CBS at 1024x768i.

But that is just the networks. Most broadcasters will match their local video bitrates and resolutions to their network they are affiliated with, but they too must incorporate up-scalers and down-scalers and even analog 525 NTSC to digital conversion encoders.

By the time you see your local news anchors on your screen, chances are good that their image is captured by a digital camera, probably a 720x480 camera that has to be upscaled to fit the network switch at 1024x768p feed, and needs to be re-scaled so that the switch is smooth and does not cause your digital tv to freeze between switching video sources. Also, not all commerical material is at the same resolutions either, so all of that has to go through conversion and up-scaling or down-scaling before it even reaches the STL signal that feeds the transmitter!!

Plus with the continuation of the analog transmitter signal, all that digital stuff must be converted back to analog video and audio for the analog channel.

Nice..isnt it! Its basically one huge cluster pixel!


[edit on 26-1-2009 by RFBurns]

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:18 AM
reply to post by RFBurns

Depending on the manufacturer of the converter box, some work better than others when using indoor antennas such as rabbit ears. However, keep in mind that most of the digital signals are in the UHF band, and very few will remain in the VHF upper Ch 7 thru 13.

Is the US not on a cable system????

These digital and HDTV boxes transmit as well as receive. Just like most cable boxes now, they are IP addressable and therefore can communicate with someone outside your home.

When I had a problem with my cable box I called the cable company and they did a search of my settings on the box. Even told me that I had a movie that hadn't been paid for, it hadn't gone through as being viewed on the system. Your cable box automatically orders movies; sends data down stream to the cables node.

Each box is identified with a unique address and therefore like each computer on the internet is accessible for whatever the box can do. Send video data downstream so they can advertise according to room content. Monitor a microphone attached. Or it can broadcast signals such as the Silent Sound Spread Spectrum(SSSS)

“A silent communications system in which nonaural carriers, in the very low (ELF) or very high audio-frequency (VHF) range or in the adjacent ultrasonic frequency spectrum, are amplitude- or frequency-modulated with the desired intelligence and propagated acoustically or vibrationally, for inducement into the brain, typically through the use of loudspeakers, earphones, or piezoelectric transducers. The modulated carriers may be transmitted directly in real time or may be conveniently recorded and stored on mechanical, magnetic, or optical media for delayed or repeated transmission to the listener.”

US Patent #5,159,703 — Silent Subliminal Presentation System


The government creates back doors for all electronic devices.

Another CNN press release from September 3, 1999 reveals that Microsoft operating systems include a back door that allows the National Security Agency to enter systems without permission of the owner. Andrew Fernandes, a cryptography expert that works for Cryptonym, says, “It turns out that there are really two keys used by Windows; the first belongs to Microsoft, and it allows them to securely load (the cryptography services), the second belongs to the NSA. That means that the NSA can also securely load (the services) on your machine, and without your authorization.”


Here is something from Canada that shows what they have in mind as in access to a back door to your home.

7. The operational requirements in respect of transmission apparatus are that the telecommunications service provider operating the apparatus have the capability, in accordance with any regulations, to do the following:
(a) enable the interception of communications generated by or transmitted through the apparatus to or from any temporary or permanent user of the provider’s telecommunications services;

(b) isolate the communication that is authorized to be intercepted from other information and provide the intercepted communication to authorized persons, including
(i) isolating the communications of the person whose communications are authorized to be intercepted from those of other persons, and
(ii) isolating the transmission data of the person whose communications are authorized to be intercepted from the rest of the person’s communications;

(c) provide information that permits the accurate correlation of all elements of intercepted communications; and
(d) enable simultaneous interceptions by authorized persons from multiple national security and law enforcement agencies of communications of multiple users, including enabling
(i) at least the minimum number of those interceptions, and
(ii) any greater number of those interceptions — up to the maximum number and within the time provided for in the regulations — for the period that an agency requests in accordance with any regulations.

If Cda is looking at this then the US has it already secretly working. Hell Cda probably has it too. They just ask to get permission to do what they are illegally doing anyways. LINK

I think people have to start thinking beyond what they think they know about the capabilities of our technologies. These boxes obviously have a second purpose other than giving you a better signal to watch the boob tube with.


posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:49 AM
well i think its a big scam anyway with analog i could pickup 4 channels clearly all the time with digital converter box it finds 9 digital channels but only 2 of them are watchable the rest are pixelated scrambled up mess. the weird part is the 2 good channels come from 50 miles away. but in the messed up category of channels 1 is only transmitted from 4 miles away but is totaly messed up. i thought these digital signals were supposed to be better quality .

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 03:41 AM
I wish they would just switch already. How long in advance do people need?

Those that are worried about the switch just don't watch T.V. then.

High Def is awesome.

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 07:22 AM
reply to post by RFBurns

Any chance they will increase the signal strength? I live near a giant granite mountain, we get poor reception. I bought a converter box months go and only got really clear PBS Stations. The other stations are gone, which has been the hassle, getting a large antenna to pick up the networks.

Any chance they will work on that? And there are a fair amount of people that don't have cable/satellite, I gave it up years ago due to cost, and never went back. But a lot of older people don't use it either.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by Sonya610]

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:32 PM
reply to post by wolf241e

Just an update..1-28-09...House defeats bill to delay digital TV transition.

Republicans succeeded in scuttling bill to delay analog to digital switch.

Here's a piece of the article;

updated 1 hour, 8 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Bucking the Obama administration, House Republicans on Wednesday defeated a bill to postpone the upcoming transition from analog to digital television broadcasting to June 12 — leaving roughly 6.5 million U.S. households unprepared for the switchover.

The 258-168 vote failed to clear the two-thirds threshold needed for passage in a victory for GOP members, who warn that postponing the transition from the current Feb. 17 deadline would confuse consumers.

House Republicans say a delay also would burden wireless companies and public safety agencies waiting for the spectrum that will be vacated by the switchover, and create added costs for television stations that would have to continue broadcasting both analog and digital signals for four more months.

Link to


posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 07:28 AM
ooooh june 12th... thats like.. reverse blackjack.. "21" the date of 21 and 22 implicated in the telegraph blackjack comic.

wonder if that's the final upgrad the people need before the "big plan" goes into effect?...

so that everyone gets an eyefull...


new topics

<< 1   >>

log in