

Why TV Lost (2009) - bound008
http://www.paulgraham.com/convergence.html

======
whatusername
PG - Were/Are you talking about the death of the big screen here -- or just
the network/broadcast/cable distribution?

Because I think I still see a place for the lean back screen. Effectively you
have 3 screens in your life of decreasing importance.

First is the personal one. It's 3-4 inches and is in your pocket where-ever
you go. Occasionally you might even speak into it and use it as a "Phone".

Second is the creative screen. This is the bigger screen at your desk where
you do work. Not everyone needs one - but for serious work a larger screen
plus relevant input devices are important. (This is the lean-forward screen)

Third is the lean-back/consumption screen. This is for consumption and
specifically -- consumption sharing. It will likely have a number of
'computers' attached to it: maybe an xbox and appletv. This is for group
entertainment (kinect/wii games, etc) and for in-person social media sharing
(watchign a movie with your partner)

// I see tablets falling between 2 and 3. It's the replacement of the
clipboard and a partially social consumption device.

While the third screen there is much less important than the first two
(especially #1), I feel it still has a place.

~~~
jonhendry
He's talking about distribution, watching on some network's schedule, etc.

------
bbuffone
TV and the way it works didn't lose. I live in beijing for extended periods of
time with nothing more than an internet connection and I can't wait to get
home to watch TV, Movies, Sports...

The way TV works is far better than the internet was, which is why the
internet has adapted more to the TV model then the other way.

1.) Produced content is better than un-produced content -> This holds true on
the internet. Hackers News itself is successful because it is produced. Even
though the community produces the content it is still produced. I can also
find a million @pg - "I focus on the content" comments.

2.) Scheduled release of content -> One of the good things about being 12
hours ahead in beijing is that I wake up and all the content is ready for me
to consume in the morning the rest of the day, provides little new content
allow me to focus easier on my daily task then be interrupted by this tweet or
news article. Sure you want to watch what you want when you want but we knew
then 30 years ago when the VHS recorders came up.

3.) Large screens are better than small -> This is definitely true, watching
content on little screens isn't that enjoyable, neither is watch horrible
quality videos on youtube. Online content catchs up in terms of quality people
will watch it on large screen TVs.

4.) 500 channels and nothing on -> I browse about 10 websites out of the
Millions on the internet, compare this to TV where I watch 20 channels out of
the 500 that is on my TV.

Seems like TV and the way it works is being "Copied and Localized" to the
internet.

~~~
Egregore
I don't have a TV at home because it's a total time sink. When I want
something to watch I find it on Internet and it's much easier to look things
on Internet.

------
angrycoder
I think in the long run, the Internet lost. All the idiots that were content
watching TV have migrated here. So much for the cool cyberspace future we were
all dreaming about 20 years ago.

~~~
kkowalczyk
If you define Internet as "place only accessible to me and my snotty
Intellectual compadres" then yes, it's lost. I'll go even further: it never
actually existed.

I don't even want that Internet of yours, where only your vision of cyberspace
future is a valid one. I much prefer the current, egalitarian Internet, that
everyone can put to use without the need to ask your permission or acceptance.

Some tweet inane thoughts and some contribute to the biggest, multi-lingual,
freely licensed encyclopedia in the world.

Some use it to spread government propaganda and some expose uncomfortable
government secrets on a scale that has never been done before.

Some express their annoyance with number of idiots in general populace and
some spend hours writing useful software and making it available for free,
with source.

The Internet is a messenger, not the message. That Internet is doing quite
well, my friend, and it's only getting started.

~~~
krakensden
It did exist, in the very, very early beginning it was accessible only to
professors, grad students and the like at a few high quality universities.

~~~
JulianMorrison
...who used it to UUCP-mail each other ASCII porn.

------
edanm
"Copyright owners tend to focus on the aspect they see of piracy, which is the
lost revenue. They therefore think what drives users to do it is the desire to
get something for free. But iTunes shows that people will pay for stuff
online, if you make it easy. A significant component of piracy is simply that
it offers a better user experience."

I find this even truer than when I first read this article.

In the past month (since buying my iPhone), I've bought many, many
applications+games for the iPhone, and yesterday I discovered the magic of
buying ebooks from Amazon for the Kindle app.

On the other hand, I can't buy music/tv shows online (I'm in Israel, Apple
doesn't have the licensing deals here), which means I have to either give up
on the music or go buy it at the store. Or listen to it on YouTube. Guess what
happens most often?

------
rokamic
Last year it looked obvious that we were heading to streaming of on-demand
digital video as the primary means of delivery. Although that may still be
where we are heading, I see dark clouds in our future.

The "TV vs. On-Demand" comparison (if that was what Mr. Graham was referring)
is less an issue now. I propose that what few saw then as a problem, is a
looming one now. In other words, it's not so much "TV vs. Streaming/On-
demand/digital/or whatever." It's that the old players, "TV", are now
positioning (and are by far in the lead) to control the digital streaming of
video from the internet.

Huge, deep pocket, long established trades, corporations, and/or markets are
not supposed to gain control of emerging trades and markets. That is for new
business to handle, and by which new business come into their own. (by
advantage of being more lean, fast, knowledgeable about new tech/markets,
better in-tune, etc) So that eventually the greatest of those new business's
themselves become dinosaurs and are so replaced. This way business, knowledge,
and technology progress.

Not to say that a "dinosaur" could not have this effect. Just less likely, and
the likelihood I suspect will mathematically decay over time. (as the
corporation becomes larger and less agile)

~~~
bad_user
Some people worry too much.

This happens every time: new technology disrupts existing players, which in
turn try to use their money / influence to do something about it. Then skilled
people fight back with newer innovations.

News at 11.

For example, do you know how easy it is to bypass China's firewall?

    
    
         (1) setup free usage tier AWS account
         (2) start a new instance with one of the official Ubuntu images
         (3) ssh -D 2000 ubuntu@<instance-ip>
         (4) enjoy personal US-based SOCKS5 proxy ;)
    

The only problem with DRM is that you're prohibited by law to reverse engineer
it, which means totally-legit software can be baned if not following certain
guidelines (like security by obscurity) ... otherwise I'm all for DRM because
it's fundamentally flawed and it's keeping them busy (like a dog chasing its
tail).

------
thristian
Some examples of the ways TV-style content is changing in the face of the
internet:

<http://vodo.net/pioneerone> \- Pioneer One is a sci-fi TV series much like
traditional series, except that it's directly supported by viewer donations,
and distributed via BitTorrent.

<http://www.famicomdojo.tv/> \- Famicom Dojo explores the features and history
of old Japanese videogame consoles, a good example of "long-tail" content
becoming viable.

<http://www.youtube.com/show/autotunethenews> \- Catchy remixes of news and
commentary shows on legacy TV. This is what happens when random people can
edit and retransmit, instead of just consuming shows.

------
aaronbrethorst
[2009]

------
catshirt
Why was piracy a more predictable force than social applications? I would have
assumed the opposite. I'd have thought it was predictable because it mimicked
natural behavior. On the other hand, had I been born in time, I would have
never guessed the concept of "stealing" music or movies would become
acceptable on any level, let alone normal.

~~~
rmc
_Why was piracy a more predictable force than social applications?_

People have been copying stuff online for years ("Don't copy that floppy").
However very few people thought "grandmas and 14 year old girls" would be
getting online to chat and hangout.

------
bhavin
one more in the trend of re-submitting old PG essays.

------
maeon3
Computers beat the TV like the automobile beat horse drawn wagon. Computers
just delivered superior service at a much lower price. I am unhappy that
forced advertisements are encroaching on my Internet. It is only a matter of
time until the Internet turns back into one way television, where the big
players produce, and the little rabbits pay a large fee to consume.

~~~
d_r
This might offend some people, but I'd argue that something like Reddit (and
even HN, at times) is a modern person's version of a TV -- endless streams of
interesting/useful information that can be consumed to no end. Admittedly,
some sources (like HN) provide a higher signal-to-noise ratio in most cases,
but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be cautious about the amount we read.

Within the scope of HN, an honest question: how many AMAs or interesting
heart-warming or funny stories have you read in the last month? How much do
you know about VC funding, term sheets, pitches, A/B testing, SEO, HTML5,
frameworks, functional programming, etc? And then, how many finished products
have you built that have at least a few customers?

(Thanks HN for having a noprocrast feature.)

~~~
rmc
_I'd argue that something like Reddit (and even HN, at times) is a modern
person's version of a TV -- endless streams of interesting/useful information
that can be consumed to no end_

Good point. One great advantage of Internet vs. TV is that reddit/HN is 2 way
and user generated and there are much less central authorities than TV.

