Thread

1. trollbridge · 1786041906 · focus · HN ↗

   Broadcast TV seems laughably irrelevant. It’s difficult to find official numbers, but under 1% of US households have no cable, satellite TV, home Internet, or a cell phone. The latter two are how people consume video and TV to a large degree today.

   In exchange, we have a great deal of spectrum tied up for terrestrial TV, much of which goes to running infomercials or else is surreptitiously leased for terrestrial data broadcasts. And the government gets to decide to regulate it so it becomes inherently politicised - like favouring certain owners.

   Realistically - this spectrum should simply be reassigned for IP based services, with perhaps some set aside for non profit / educational uses, some for commercial, etc.

   (Radio is pretty much the same boat but I can see a case to be made for keeping some analog FM radio broadcasts. The 6MHz per channel for TV is insane.)

   1. BeetleB · 1786046451 · focus · HN ↗

      > It’s difficult to find official numbers, but under 1% of US households have no cable, satellite TV, home Internet, or a cell phone. The latter two are how people consume video and TV to a large degree today.

      Fairly wrong/irrelevant metric. Lots of people subscribe to Netflix and watch OTA broadcasts.

      Lots of people stick to a Plex membership just because of its DVR capability - that's for broadcast TV.

      Lots of DVR and adjacent products out there on the market for people who watch broadcast TV.

      I wouldn't dream of getting a cable subscription when I can get so much good content for free. Streaming fills the rest.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.