Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US Cord Cutters Getting Snubbed From NBC's Olympic Coverage Online

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the all-about-the-benjamins dept.

Television 578

Monoman writes "The Washington Post reports, 'The 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics start tonight. But if you're among the 9 percent of U.S. households who have broadband but don't subscribe to paid television, it will be nearly impossible to (legally) watch the games online this year. ... That's because while NBC is streaming all of the events live online, full access to the livestream will only be available to paying cable subscribers. And thanks to a $4.38 billion exclusive deal NBC struck with the International Olympics Committee (IOC) in 2011 for the privilege of broadcasting the Olympic games in the U.S. through 2020, cord-cutters don't have a lot of options.' Is this a money play by Comcast/NBC to get some subscribers back? Should the FCC step in and require NBC to at least provide a stream of their OTA content?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNISM! (0, Offtopic)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 8 months ago | (#46190237)

Capitalism has failed. Slashdort Beta is a symptom of the utter rottenness of the capitalist system, hiow the drive for profit destrouyes everything it touches. We need a planned economy under workers control! Smash Slashdort Beta with workers revolution!

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (1, Interesting)

pellik (193063) | about 8 months ago | (#46190277)

Did you notice that there is a new javascript link saying they changed their plans on rolling out the beta? Or what are you fighting against now?

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (0, Offtopic)

FUCK BETA, FUCK DICE (3529333) | about 8 months ago | (#46190329)

And do you believe it? FUCK BETA

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190355)

That they are still going to roll out the beta.

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190529)

That article is not in English. It is in corporate speak. Literal translations follows:

"fuck you"*

*Corporate speak is a highly stylistic language with a very low content/word ratio. It looks nice, but it needs a lot of words to convey a short and simple message.

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (2)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 8 months ago | (#46190561)

I noticed that you are a chump and a sucker! And probably a bourgeois propagandist.

Re:Slashdort beta: another reason we need COMMUNIS (4, Insightful)

foobar bazbot (3352433) | about 8 months ago | (#46190589)

Did you read what that new link says?

It says they'll keep classic around "until we're confident that the new site is ready", thus implying they do plan to remove classic. It states that they "have work to do in four big areas", and accurately lists what people have been complaining about (the accuracy and non-contradictoriness of the list makes Soulskill's assertions that much of the feedback is contradictory look questionable, to say the least), but carefully refrains from actually saying that any particular improvements will happen before they roll out the beta and execute classic.

In short, once you run it through a corporatespeak filter, it says they didn't expect this much backlash, they're going to postpone the rollout (but not necessarily change it in any other way), and they're trying to pacify us by repeating back what we've said. And if you read between the lines, you might get the impression they're not going to give us this much warning next time...

Also! (2)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 8 months ago | (#46190433)

I thought "Cord Cutting" was the term for Olympic Winter Wood Log-Chopping. Imagine my disappointment! Another travesty caused by CAPITALISM.

Why? (5, Insightful)

jtara (133429) | about 8 months ago | (#46190241)

And why is it that you are owed free content?

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

silviuc (676999) | about 8 months ago | (#46190279)

Do they still display/run ads? If they do, then content is paid for and they get even more eyeballs to watch the ads.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

reebmmm (939463) | about 8 months ago | (#46190375)

As far as I'm aware, you can still get it by antenna. So, there you have your ad supported NBC version for free.

I don't know what that has to do with making the same content available online.

Re:Why? (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 8 months ago | (#46190391)

Kind of. Advertisers pay less for on-line views then OTA viewers.

And I don’t think it is NBC being greedy, it is International Olympics Committee which is being greedy. They have been able to extract a huge amount of money from NBC so they would have exclusive video rights in the USA. (which may be splitting hairs – they are both greedy, I just think the IOC is more greedy.)

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

Stormy Dragon (800799) | about 8 months ago | (#46190313)

Because I'm required to pay taxes to cover the millions of dollars of public funding being spent on security for the games.

Re:Why? (1)

mythosaz (572040) | about 8 months ago | (#46190367)

Russian citizen checking in, I guess.

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

bob_super (3391281) | about 8 months ago | (#46190441)

Do you genuinely believe that the US ships that happen to be nearby, and all the Delegation's land security, as well as the assistance provided by the US agencies warning of toothpaste terrorists, are free?

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

mythosaz (572040) | about 8 months ago | (#46190477)

You object to paying to protect our citizens as they travel the world, or you object to not getting free television content as a result of it?

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

bob_super (3391281) | about 8 months ago | (#46190555)

I'm not objecting to anything. I'm pointing out that my tax dollars are used to support a dictator putting on a big corporate show.
Since they are not supposed to be doing this for the glory of Coca-Cola, it must be about the sports.
Under that false assumption, I'm sponsoring a big sports event by paying for its security. As a sponsor, I should probably have the right to see a stream of dreadful US-centric self-congratulatory selective coverage riddled with ads... for free.

Re:Why? (1)

hubie (108345) | about 8 months ago | (#46190383)

Millions of US tax dollars are being spent on security in Sochi?

Re:Why? (2)

camperdave (969942) | about 8 months ago | (#46190461)

Millions of US tax dollars are being spent on security in Sochi?

I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Stormy Dragon (800799) | about 8 months ago | (#46190543)

Yup:

U.S. Navy warships enter Black Sea ahead of Sochi Games [pbs.org]

Two U.S. Navy ships entered the Black Sea Wednesday as part of a Pentagon security plan ahead of the Sochi Olympics. The ships will be on standby to assist in the evacuation of American athletes and spectators in the event that threats are made to the 2014 Games.

Re:Why? (1)

silviuc (676999) | about 8 months ago | (#46190547)

Now, this may be news to some people but... not everybody who comments on /. lives in 'murica bud.

Re:Why? (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 8 months ago | (#46190425)

Wait – I am confused. How are you watching the Olympics in the US but pay Russian taxes? I can think of a select few cases where that can be true but not many.

Re:Why? (1)

Teun (17872) | about 8 months ago | (#46190447)

The value might be billions of Dollars but the public funding is certainly in Rubles...

Re:Why? (3, Informative)

glavenoid (636808) | about 8 months ago | (#46190363)

It's silly since it's still available over-the-air for free anyway. Do these "cord cutter" people not have antennas?

Re:Why? (1)

rhodium_mir (2876919) | about 8 months ago | (#46190521)

The events broadcast on NBC are available OTA, but they are also broadcasting some events on NBC Sports, MSNBC, USA and CNBC.

Re:Why? (0)

HexaByte (817350) | about 8 months ago | (#46190379)

What? There's an Olympics going on?

I guess if I really cared I'd find a way to watch it.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190381)

I understand that it gives you pleasure to reply with a snide and condescending remark, but consumers without a cable subscription is a significant and rapidly growing market, and media companies like NBC are going to have to eventually find a way to cater to them. Presumably the stream would contain commercials, in the same fashion as that old phenomenon you may have heard of called 'broadcast' (which is my solution as a happy cord cutter, luckily I live in an urban area with solid HD reception over a cheap antenna), so while it may be free to the consumer there would still be a potentially viable income source. Does that make it clearer?

Re:Why? (1)

khasim (1285) | about 8 months ago | (#46190385)

And why is it that you are owed free content?

You aren't.

But this isn't about free content.

This is about an agreement to restrict who can broadcast the material and how they're using that restriction to deny that material to people.

So the first question should be "why aren't more media companies able to broadcast an event such as the Olympics".

Re:Why? (3, Informative)

mythosaz (572040) | about 8 months ago | (#46190517)

They're not restricting their broadcast - since they're still broadcasting it from the top of the hills their antennas are on.

Plug in your antenna and watch it for free.

The Olympics are a big business run by a big company, and they sold the rights to NBC.

Re:Why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190389)

Um why don't they just get a digital antenna and watch it from the local network?

Re:Why? (1, Insightful)

mythosaz (572040) | about 8 months ago | (#46190535)

because entitlement!

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190419)

People expect it because a lot of the content is available OTA

Re:Why? (2)

glavenoid (636808) | about 8 months ago | (#46190507)

Precisely, so why should NBC have to pay for the bandwidth when there's already a well-established method of distribution in place which will cost them the same regardless of how many people consume that resource?

Re:Why? (1)

Threni (635302) | about 8 months ago | (#46190431)

Free? I paid quite a lot towards the London olypmics. I don't like the olympics, didn't go, but paid more than people outside London for the privilege of heavily disrupted journeys into work. They take millions in advertising/endorsement etc. There are many plausible sounding stories about corruption and the like. The least they could do is ensure everyone on the planet gets to watch it for free. It would be more in keeping with the spirit of the olympics than holding it in some naff retro state with a bad track record on freedom, run by a comedy Bond villain.

Re:Why? (1)

lgw (121541) | about 8 months ago | (#46190453)

Does NBC give you a way to pay to stream all their coverage from their web site? Watching broadcast television is what we did in the 20th century - in this century we stream stuff on the internet.

I don't think it's the government's job to require NBC to sell products. If NBC doesn't want to get money by selling streaming options, that's not the government's business.

I do think it's the Olympic committee's business. They're the ones who should be requiring NBC to provide live internet coverage (for a fee) as part of their exclusive deal. And it's probably just an oversight that they didn't - practical live streaming internet coverage is still new-ish, and I can believe the market for it hasn't quite sunk in with the older generation who generally makes these sorts of decisions.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 8 months ago | (#46190487)

And why is it that you are owed free content?

I suppose a 4000 year old tradition of having an open and international series of games to bring about peace and cultural tolerance/friendship might confuse some people into thinking that as a global event, the ability to view and participate in them would be something not controlled by a single group of greedy profit-oriented people who don't care to hear the clamours of said participants. Sorta like Slashdot beta....

Re:Why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190495)

Content that contains ads is only free if you value your time at 0.

Re:Why? (1)

ShaunC (203807) | about 8 months ago | (#46190503)

And why is it that you are owed free content?

OKAY there Mister Slashdot Beta Designer...!

No!!!1111111 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190245)

Should the FCC step in and require NBC to at least provide a stream of their OTA content?

But that would be Socialism! Where is the freedom??? Gummint bad! Gummint bad!

Sincerely, the average Slashdot libertarian

Re:No!!!1111111 (2)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 8 months ago | (#46190353)

"Freedom" would be if anyone receiving NBC's broadcast signal had the right to retransmit it (over the Internet or otherwise).

Re:No!!!1111111 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190551)

Freedom would also be if NBC had the right to murder said person in retribution.

At least on this subject... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190255)

I am not in favor of the FCC stepping in.

Instead, I think we should allow for NBC to see the consequences of their deal. Let people with the ability to use proxies, use them and get the coverage of these Olympic Games from whatever source they choose to.

Myself? I think I'll get some from the BBC. If for no other reason than avoiding the near constant shilling of the athlete's stories. If I want to know them, I'll look it up. Otherwise, let me watch the damn games already.

This is how slashdot ends. (3, Insightful)

emmagsachs (1024119) | about 8 months ago | (#46190257)

Not with a bang, but with a beta.

Fuck Beta, go Usenet! (1, Informative)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 8 months ago | (#46190261)

Face it, Slashdot has jumped the shark. As others have said, the way forward is Usenet. Time to go back to the only censorship-free, non commercial Internet forum. Nobody will ever be able to buy Usenet, it will ever go 'beta' and it is the wave of the future.

Comp.misc seems to be the new Slashdot replacement. See you there!

Re:Fuck Beta, go Usenet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190455)

damn, I thought everybody was headed to alt.sex.wizard !

We are also getting snubbed by Slashdot BETA (0, Offtopic)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 8 months ago | (#46190269)

like the cord-cutters who are getting shafted by NBC/cable companies, we Slashdot users are getting boned by Dice with the forced Beta.

Make all the beta skins you want, but allow logged-in users to choose Classic.

The day Classic disappears as an option is the day 90% of slashdot members are gone.

Re:We are also getting snubbed by Slashdot BETA (-1, Troll)

JustNiz (692889) | about 8 months ago | (#46190299)

Enough already. I'm fed up with every second comment being just a bunch whining about the beta. Please take it somewhere else.

Re:We are also getting snubbed by Slashdot BETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190411)

Question is where - it would probably be a good idea to come up with replacements for Slashdot while it still exists in its current usable form. Any fork sites already up?

Re:We are also getting snubbed by Slashdot BETA (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 months ago | (#46190509)

From Bruce Peren's http://technocrat.net/ [technocrat.net] ...

You've reached a web site owned by Perens LLC. We are moving to new servers and thus the content you expected isn't online yet.

To reach Bruce Perens, email to bruce at perens dot com, or phone +1 510-4PERENS.

Hot topics as I write this: Why doesn't Bruce resurrect Technocrat.net now that Slashdot is owned by Dice.com and stinks more than the last two times I've shut down Technocrat.net due to lack of readership? And while we're at it, we need to replace Groklaw.

Think it would really work this time? You've got my email and phone.

Slashbeta - News for niggers, stuff that's black (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190273)

Fuck beta

HD Homerun / Proxy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190281)

>Should the FCC step in and require NBC to at least provide a stream of their OTA content?"

no, you can do this already with several products, HD HomeRun / Simple TV.

Isn't the BBC broadcasting it or something? just go there, and if you have to, use a proxy.

Hint: Canadian coverage is much better... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190285)

...and all online. There's just the minor issue of geolocation to circumvent.

Re:Hint: Canadian coverage is much better... (2)

japhering (564929) | about 8 months ago | (#46190565)

...and all online. There's just the minor issue of geolocation to circumvent.

Everyone's coverage is better than NBC's .. NBC spends more time doing profiles, interviews and commercials than the spend showing sports..

Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190287)

I watched them last night. They had skiing, snowboarding and all of the non-curling ice events on. I'm good. I've already had enough olym*-feel good (passive-boastive) commercial time to last me. I might just skip the next few weeks.

They have done this for years (0)

aralin (107264) | about 8 months ago | (#46190291)

I've been snubbing comcast since 2007 and they have done this with every major event for years. They won't let you pay for it, the only way to get it is as cable subscriber. This should be illegal for sure. FCC should require them to have a payment option. Just charge $100 for the event coverage. NHL charges that much for the entire season of broadcasts. (Outside of US that is, inside it is $160.)

Re:They have done this for years (1)

bob_super (3391281) | about 8 months ago | (#46190481)

"FCC should"
Considering the inbreeding between the US agencies and the people they regulate, it's just not going to happen.
Regardless of which market is being discussed.

let's hope the DRM's been beta-tested (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190293)

Otherwise people will quickly find cracks.

Also does anyone really care about the law any more? To me it's just something you pay enough respect to that you're not caught. It's a product of power-mongers born with privilege. Much like the new owners of Slashdot, who are trying to fuck it up with their site redesign.

Re:let's hope the DRM's been beta-tested (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 8 months ago | (#46190463)

Are you hoping that the DRM is challenging enough to be amusing?

Dont watch it (3, Insightful)

muphin (842524) | about 8 months ago | (#46190297)

i dont watch it, dont care.
the Athletes are awesome... buts its too political and commercial now.
and now the Olympics are being limited to certain media outlets....

Meh is right. (1)

Moof123 (1292134) | about 8 months ago | (#46190505)

Meh.

Use an antenna. (4, Informative)

GerbilSoft (761537) | about 8 months ago | (#46190315)

Pretty much all HDTVs support receiving over-the-air TV stations using an antenna, and considering NBC is one of the largest broadcast networks in the US, it shouldn't be that hard to get NBC if you don't have cable.

Re:Use an antenna. (2)

Taelron (1046946) | about 8 months ago | (#46190393)

Exactly, for those that care... The cable industry has gone out of their way to make people forget about OTA. I've gone camping and been places where the OTA regular 4 (Fox, NBC, CBS, ABC) digital HD channels came in just as clear if not better than they did over Cable. So why should I pay them $100 a month for channels I dont want? Now full disclosure, I have no intenet on watching the Olympics anyways, they have gotten stale over the years to the point of outright boring. The only entertainment i've gotten out of the Olympics in years has come from the woefully unready Sochi hotels.

Re:Use an antenna. (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about 8 months ago | (#46190583)

The opening ceremony this year was kind of great. Might want to at least check it out.

Yes (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190397)

This. OTA to USB tuner, Windows Media Center or lots of linux options for DVR. Hi-def, no subscription. I only use it for Super Bowl and Olympic parties!

Re:Use an antenna. (5, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | about 8 months ago | (#46190415)

Pretty much all HDTVs support receiving over-the-air TV stations using an antenna, and considering NBC is one of the largest broadcast networks in the US, it shouldn't be that hard to get NBC if you don't have cable.

Do you really think that all the content is on the OTA NBC station? In my case NBC is broadcasting on 5 different channels in my Comcast region. Only one of these is OTA.

except it is not live to them (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190323)

It is time delayed. And they have caused more people to cut.
Like me. Give it back to the over the air people dont do cable tv.

You say that like it's a bad thing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190331)

I am not going to watch the debacle-in-the-making Sochi Olympics anyway. I would call it a boycott, but I wasn't really interested in watching it anyway.

How much better would it be... (0)

Art Challenor (2621733) | about 8 months ago | (#46190335)

How much better would it be if people could get as energized by something that really matters as they do sports? (Or, indeed, as energized as they do over the sucky beta).

Nothing new (4, Insightful)

Wuhao (471511) | about 8 months ago | (#46190343)

That 9% is pretty used to having reduced access to licensed, live television content as a direct consequence of not paying a subscription for licensed, live television content.

Cut the BETA! (-1, Offtopic)

foobar bazbot (3352433) | about 8 months ago | (#46190345)

Please post this to new articles if it hasn't been posted yet. (Copy-paste the html from here [pastebin.com] so links don't get mangled!)

On February 5, 2014, Slashdot announced through a javascript popup that they are starting to "move in to" the new Slashdot Beta design. Slashdot Beta is a trend-following attempt to give Slashdot a fresh look, an approach that has led to less space for text and an abandonment of the traditional Slashdot look. Much worse than that, Slashdot Beta fundamentally breaks the classic Slashdot discussion and moderation system.

If you haven't seen Slashdot Beta already, open this [slashdot.org] in a new tab. After seeing that, click here [slashdot.org] to return to classic Slashdot.

We should boycott stories and only discuss the abomination that is Slashdot Beta until Dice abandons the project.
We should boycott slashdot entirely during the week of Feb 10 to Feb 17 as part of the wider slashcott [slashdot.org]

Moderators - only spend mod points on comments that discuss Beta
Commentors - only discuss Beta
  http://slashdot.org/recent [slashdot.org] - Vote up the Fuck Beta stories

Keep this up for a few days and we may finally get the PHBs attention.

-----=====##### LINKS #####=====-----

Discussion of Beta: http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=56395415 [slashdot.org]

Discussion of where to go if Beta goes live: http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&type=submission&id=3321441 [slashdot.org]

Alternative Slashdot: http://altslashdot.org [altslashdot.org] (thanks Okian Warrior (537106) [slashdot.org] )

Money Games (5, Insightful)

s.petry (762400) | about 8 months ago | (#46190347)

For a while not, the Olympics has been nothing but a money making and redistribution system. When I was a kid, we had amateur athletes that worked hard for their few minutes of fame. The money for them came after their competitions, so it was a bit less corrupt. Sure, we had steroids back then and people were getting busted. At least they tried to give a sense of fair play back then.

Today's Olympics is like watching any other televised sport (NBA/NFL/Baseball). It's a sham to make money. Most participants do have some natural talent, but anything that makes TV is well.. treated differently. Athletes are "trained", "fed", given exceptional medical care, and pampered for the spotlight. Their sponsors abuse them to make money, media outlets do the same, and Governments use them for clout (see how much money we spent on _our_ athletes!).

I'm sure part of my bias is becoming older and more cynical. Not that much though, because we have an internet that lets us compare today to the 70s and see the difference. Pro Hockey players are what make the Olympic teams today, and Pro basket ball players, and Professional skaters are what's on the ice. The US claims to have done this because others do, which may or may not be true. Two wrongs won't bring back the original spirit of the games however.

Who even watches that crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190351)

I heard the Sochi Olympics are just for beta testing. Nobody watches them.

bah (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 8 months ago | (#46190361)

Legality is overrated. Then again, so are the Olympics.

Re:bah (1)

uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) | about 8 months ago | (#46190405)

HURRAH!

Can somebody explain why I should care? (1)

sehlat (180760) | about 8 months ago | (#46190369)

I've been a cord-cutter since 1992 and don't miss it, so why am I supposed to be upset that NBC is being as criminally stupid as usual?

Buck Feta! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190371)

Decided I'd check out Slashdot today and got served the "beta" (alpha?) version. Looks totally radical and bodacious! Looks like Web 1.0 had a gnarly head-on collision with Web 3.0. I really am excited about the changes -- maybe you can throw in some "Like us on Twitter" and "Tweet about us on Facebook" things at the bottom that would really be great!

Oh shit, and how about some ad-based/artificial scarcity games. We could have our own awesome games like "Dungeon Farmer" and "Distro Wars". I'd totally play "Distro Wars" especially if you could couple it with some banner ads and malvertising!

http://entertainment-beta.slashdot.org and http://beta.slashdot.org look awesome!11!1oneoneleventy. I am totally going to make a viral video about it!!11oneone.

If "fail" were the elixir of life you would be immortal.

Not important - government should stay out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190373)

"Should the FCC step in and require NBC to at least provide a stream of their OTA content?" No. This is not a health or safety issue, so the government should stay out of it.

Move to Canada! (5, Informative)

tom229 (1640685) | about 8 months ago | (#46190377)

Canada, despite having a population of only 30 million, has the second most athletes competing, and by far the best coverage [imgur.com] of any developed nation.

If you're Usian or from the UK i'd recommend getting an unblock [unblock-us.com] subscription and setting your country to Canada.

So??? (0)

higg (11739) | about 8 months ago | (#46190387)

Cord cutters know they are going to miss out on any live sports (or any other live) broadcasts that are not on over-the-air networks. Why would anyone have any expectation that the Olympics would be different?

Don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190395)

I'll watch it illegally if I feel like it, but more than likely I just won't bother. I've pretty much watched every Olympic games since 1984 in LA. Their loss as far as I am concerned.

Madness? (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 8 months ago | (#46190399)

NBC paid $4.38 billion.
There are 2,850 athletes.
That's about $1.5 million for every single athlete competing.

Why not Aereo? (1)

RealGene (1025017) | about 8 months ago | (#46190407)

Isn't this sort of thing its reason for being?

Stop WINNNING (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190409)

The Olympics are about winning. Not loosing if you don't have cable TV you are loosing. START WINNING

No, the FCC should not step in (1)

rujasu (3450319) | about 8 months ago | (#46190413)

That's silly, no reason to compel them. Might be a good idea from NBC's perspective to make the stream free, but they don't stream their entire lineup of shows, why should they be required to stream this one? This doesn't really affect 9% of the country in any case. Most cord-cutters can still watch this, because it's over-the-air. Just use an antenna!

And this is news? (1)

esconsult1 (203878) | about 8 months ago | (#46190421)

We're still stick in the old world, even with all the nice shiny technology around us. NBC is in a world where they wish everyone watched Johnny Carson every night. Where politicians can't go on stage without flashing their wedding rings. Where they can, with impunity broadcast laughable stories from the Olympics. They're still stuck in that world. And if you love the Olympics, so are we too.

Let the Olympics die (5, Insightful)

PingXao (153057) | about 8 months ago | (#46190429)

Just like slash BETA the world wouldn't really be affected one way or the other if the Olympics just up and went away. The worst effects would be felt by the corporate sponsors who would be deprived of a way to market their garbage to teh sheeple consumers.

Let the Olympics die. The International Olympic Committee and a large percentage of the national committees are some of the most corrupt organizations in the world. Fuck 'em.

And if someone who doesn't subscribe to cable television can't see online video of the games then I consider that a GOOD thing. It leaves more bandwidth for the rest of us.

Cord Cutters? (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | about 8 months ago | (#46190435)

I have paid cable TV but not through Comcast or Charter. How will their scheme work for people who have alternates to Comcast, Charter, Dish, or DirecTV?

Re:Cord Cutters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190581)

I have paid cable TV but not through Comcast or Charter. How will their scheme work for people who have alternates to Comcast, Charter, Dish, or DirecTV?

Simple.. bend over and smile ..

Including Time Warner? (1)

techvet (918701) | about 8 months ago | (#46190443)

Do Time Warner customers have access to watch the Olympics online? I know that TWC has *not* signed the deal with NBC for NBC Sports Live Extra for watching EPL games online or via mobile devices. Does that exclusion include the Olympics?

Little Impact (2)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 8 months ago | (#46190465)

Considering that real-time programming, particularly sports, is why many people hold onto their CATV subscriptions to begin with, I'm not expecting a whole lot of overlap between those who cut their cord and whose who are particularly interested in live Olympic coverage.

Who the fuck cares (Also fuck beta) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190467)

We are nerds, it's a fucking corporate sports charade. WHO THE FUCK CARES

FUCK SLASHBETA

Re:Who the fuck cares (Also fuck beta) (1)

sliceoflife (2814511) | about 8 months ago | (#46190569)

Exactly. All this commenting about pith, when time is running out...it's like fish gasping for air for the last time.

Its slow jerky and i don't get an overview as used (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190469)

And why can't I switch back to classic on my iPad ! And log in dosent work!

Just as well... (2)

vanyel (28049) | about 8 months ago | (#46190473)

1. Ignore the whole fiasco to start with

2. If it hurts their ratings because people can't get to the content, they'll learn...eventually

NBC knows a lot about IT security (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190489)

Their team knows how to hack the internet.

Though media reports that their current (/.) IT security team is in "beta"

nerd news readers says: **** beta

CBC (1)

Alex Mackinnon (2836613) | about 8 months ago | (#46190491)

Try, the CBC. No need to pay the NBC

meh (1)

djupedal (584558) | about 8 months ago | (#46190549)

From what I saw last night, the US isn't doing much worth watching so far, so...

Screw the olympics I want my Formula 1 fix (1)

JustNiz (692889) | about 8 months ago | (#46190579)

I don't care about the olympics but I wish there was a way for cord-cutters in the US to still watch Formula 1 at home.

Antenna! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#46190591)

Antenna!

should stream wirelessly via multicast, neh broadc (1)

raymorris (2726007) | about 8 months ago | (#46190593)

They should be forced to stream their OTA content.
In fact, they should put WAPs all over the country streaming it wirelessly. To do this efficiently, they should use multicast packets Better yet, use broadcast packets.

It could be called "broadcast television".

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?