Formula one

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 13:20:28 +0200, Martin wrote:

Perhaps if all this stuff was left to ITV and others, the licence fee
could be reduced and the BBC could focus on quality programmes of the
sort that don't attract advertisers.

Your comment shows a basic lack of knowledge -- reality shows and soaps
are comparatively inexpensive to produce -- it is quality programmes
particularly period dramas, wildlife documentaries etc which are very
expensive to produce.

So if you want the BBC to drop the cheap junk from its schedules and
replace it with quality programming, you should be prepared to pay
more for a broadcast TV receiving licence.

On Monday, August 1st, 2011 at 07:35:26h +0100, John Legon explained:

J G Miller wrote:
On Sunday, July 31st, 2011 at 15:31:19h +0100, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote:

Or
d) Why time?

Now that is a much more profound question.

If there was no time, would motion be possible?

Without time, there would be nothing to move, so the question doesn't
arise.

So that would appear to answer the question "Why time".

From one perspective, time exists in order that its existence may be questioned.

And then there is the matter of how time can flow at different "rates" depending
on the frame of reference of the observer -- just how slow or fast can it flow?

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:22:17 +0000 (UTC)
J G Miller wrote:

On Monday, August 1st, 2011 at 12:43:32h +0100, Davey wrote:

Canadian TV is good

Some of it is, but most definitely not all.

Apart from visits to Toronto, when I could watch other stations, our
Canadian TV supply was limited to CBC-Windsor.

Perhaps you are saying that because CBC moved
Consternation Street from the daytime wilderness
to prime time?

Coronation Street never figured in my viewing habits. The wife's, but
not mine. She hated it when they killed Emmerdale (Farm).

I miss it.

You know you can still watch The National every weekday via
the CBC web site.

And since the change in format of The National about 2 years
go, many viewers have complained that its news contents and
quality has been considerably dumbed down.

And in other news, Lloyd Robertson is retiring as anchor of
CTV News on September 1st, 2011

http://www.thestar.COM/news/canada/article/833971--top-ctv-anchor-lloyd-robertson-to-retire-next-year


When Peter Mansbridge retires, that will be a sad day. I hope he is
still there?

It was our way of staying sane while living near Detroit.

With such a little Englander attitude like that, no wonder you
had to move back to the land of Thatcher, Blair, and Brown.

Whatever attitude you attribute to me, the truth is still that we got
far more useful news from CBC than from the US networks, in a shorter
time. I did not move back here because of anything that Blair or Brown
did, far from it, although I will give Blair credit for keeping Brown
out of No. 10 for as long as he could, and to Brown for keeping us out
of the Eurozone. But that is unbalanced by his sale of the Gold Reserve
at the worst possible time, if there was indeed a good time to do it at
all.

British TV is going the way of American.

Really? There is less US content on the BBC networks
and ITV network and even C4 than there was in the 70s
or 80s.


I wasn't talking about content, but the format of the
programs.

Certainly in presentation style, the BBC has adopted
wholesale the bad habits of US commercial television
with credit squeezing, ipp banners, voice overs about the next
program before the current program has finished etc etc.

Exactly what I was referring to, thanks, and not just the BBC.

Thankfully most European broadcasters on the mainland do
not vandalize their TV shows in such a manner.

They are lucky over there, then. But I have no intention of moving
again, and certainly not for the TV presentation.
--
Davey.

On Monday, August 1st, 2011 at 15:31:46h +0100, Davey wrote:

Apart from visits to Toronto, when I could watch other stations, our
Canadian TV supply was limited to CBC-Windsor.

And not SRC Windsor or TV Ontario or Global TV?

When Peter Mansbridge retires, that will be a sad day. I hope he is
still there?

Easy enough to find out with just a left mouse click

http://www.cbc.CA/thenational/watch/

The National was never the same after Cyril Knowlton Nash left though.

In my opinion, the best anchor was the substitute/weekend George McLean.

Whatever attitude you attribute to me, the truth is still that we got
far more useful news from CBC than from the US networks, in a shorter
time.

All depends on what you define as useful though. I would certainly agree
that CBC provides much better international news coverage than the US
domestic networks, but the average American usually does not find
international news useful or even interesting.

Who won the NBA, NFL, MLB game for their favorite team is what really
counts above anything else.

I did not move back here because of anything that Blair or Brown

You were pining for the Blessed Margaret then?

I wasn't talking about content, but the format of the programs.

Well I think we agree on that point to a large extent.

Although remember that Big Brother was an invention of TV in
The Netherlands by Endemol for RTL and that the "Idol" format
was invented in the UKofGB&NI for the ITV network.

Exactly what I was referring to, thanks, and not just the BBC.

The reason I mention the BBC was because unlike ITV which has a
commercial reason to chase ratings and use such tactics, there
is absolutely no justification for the BBC to do the same.

If fact it was because the BBC hired people from commercial
TV that these practices were foisted upon viewers eg Jay Hunt from
channel 5 on becoming BBC-1 controller stepped up the frequency
and prominence of IPPs to the same manner as used on Five,
best remembered for the cartoon Norton defacing Doctor Who incident.

But I have no intention of moving again, and certainly not for
the TV presentation.

But you could buy a satellite dish, receiver, and rotor instead.

I wonder who does actually own Sky these days

The largest stockholder at 39,1% is News Corporation.

Other investors are various banks and financial institutions,
including Cripsin Odey


You're absolutely certain it's not Confused.com? That's all that seems
to be on whenever I switch on. SWMBO seems to find something to watch
though.

R.

J G Miller wrote:
On Monday, August 1st, 2011 at 07:35:26h +0100, John Legon explained:
J G Miller wrote:
If there was no time, would motion be possible?

Without time, there would be nothing to move, so the question doesn't
arise.

So that would appear to answer the question "Why time".

From one perspective, time exists in order that its existence may be questioned.

As I see it, matter is a function of space and time. Because the
forward and backward going vibrations of matter in space/time are in
anti-phase and cancel out, the sum total of everything in the universe
is, and always has been, absolutely nothing.

And then there is the matter of how time can flow at different "rates" depending
on the frame of reference of the observer -- just how slow or fast can it flow?

It's all relative, isn't it?

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:22:17 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

Certainly in presentation style, the BBC has adopted
wholesale the bad habits of US commercial television
with credit squeezing, ipp banners, voice overs about the next
program before the current program has finished etc etc.

They used to do this more but I don't see this on BBC TV programmes I
watch nowadays (except credit squeezing). But then I don't watch much
TV any more.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:27:52 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 13:20:28 +0200, Martin wrote:

Perhaps if all this stuff was left to ITV and others, the licence fee
could be reduced and the BBC could focus on quality programmes of the
sort that don't attract advertisers.

Your comment shows a basic lack of knowledge -- reality shows and soaps
are comparatively inexpensive to produce -- it is quality programmes
particularly period dramas, wildlife documentaries etc which are very
expensive to produce.

So if you want the BBC to drop the cheap junk from its schedules and
replace it with quality programming, you should be prepared to pay
more for a broadcast TV receiving licence.

I would be (prepared to pay more to get better programmes).
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 13:20:28 +0200, Martin wrote:

Personally I really enjoy the F1 and I've very annoyed about this
move.

Me too, although I am lucky enough to be able to receive F1 free from
alternative broadcasters.

Which broadcasters?
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 04:13:10 +0100, John Legon wrote:

As I see it, matter is a function of space and time.

Independent of, or via its relationship with energy?

Because the forward and backward going vibrations of matter in space/time are in
anti-phase and cancel out

I do not see how you arrive at the observation.

the sum total of everything in the universe
is, and always has been, absolutely nothing.

Which prompts the question, if the universe contained nothing,
would it exist, ie is the universe a container or is the universe
merely the sum total of all the objects?

It's all relative, isn't it?

Indeed so, but the question still stands and thus would it
be possible to stop time completely or only approach it,
like approaching absolute zero on the thermodynamic temperature
scale but never reaching it) for an observer in their frame of reference?