h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Walk into a bar and pay as you travel closer and closer to the livest screen. Ahhhhh.... you spent well tonight, the beer-drinking, rubble-rumbling fan of whatever it is of which you are a fan.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
...there might even be one monitor that shows extrapolations of the live footage, allowing a glimpse into the one- or two-frame future... |
|
| |
But if you stand further away from the screen, you already see the action later than someone next to the screen. |
|
| |
I've been in a pub before watching football in which one screen was
from a digital signal and the other from an analogue one. This resulted
in a 10 second lapse, facilitating instantaneous viewer-defined action
replay via the rotation of a few degrees of one's head, dependent on
your position in the establishment. |
|
| |
Ah, well, my favorite channel is the History Channel anyway. Does this mean my beer would be free? |
|
| |
Hmm, this is actually possible and quite a decent idea. Just need an internet-capable TV with a radio-controlled clock. We could brand it Simulcast. |
|
| |
1) Use the local time signal transmitter
2) Digital broadcast encodes a desired transmission time.
3) Buffer the stream until it is time to broadcast |
|
| |
Now for a SimulDrink to go with it... |
|
| |
If you live your life slowly enough (think "giant tortoise" or "Joshua Tree"), the BBC and Dave do this quite well. |
|
| |