Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Aug 2010 22:19 UTC
Multimedia, AV A couple of days ago we talked about how the RIAA and NAB are planning on asking US Congress to mandate FM radio chips inside every cell phone. This plan was met with some ridicule, so the NAB decided to write a blog post addressing the critics. Most of the post is overshadowed by an overdose of America's favourite national pastime: WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE. 9/11!
Thread beginning with comment 438372
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
bornagainenguin
Member since:
2005-08-07

FuriousGeorge trolled...

Sure, this scenario does not pass the "but-I-don't-want-Big-Gobment-increasing-phone-prices-by-$0.50" test, but if you are going to take that position you must explain why you are also opposed to the "seat belts in cars" mandate.

If you can stay ideologically consistent in this reductio ad aburdem style debate then I can respect your opinion, and agree to disagree.

(Remember, being a true libertarian means supporting the rights of private institutions or even governments to deny equal protection based on race, religion, or creed. It's very fashionable to claim libertarianism, but when push comes to shove how long will you really own it.)


Nice troll, only it is completely off topic to the issues involved.

The objection over the cost involved is minor compared to the question of why the NAB is insisting on using FM rather than NOAA radio frequencies or other such emergency broadcast channels. The self-interest of the NAB blinds them to how transparent their real motives are. The truth is this has nothing to do with security or emergencies and everything to do with legislating a failed business model.

Their diligent efforts over the last thirty or more years to make the airwaves into their own private club have resulted in their increasing irrelevance in every day life. The NAB has behaved like that bratty kid in the neighborhood with all the cool toys who insisted on having everything their way or they take their toys and go home--and just like the bratty kid they now find themselves alone with their toys as people find something better to do.

Bed. Made. Lie.

In any case I find myself skeptical more due to who exactly it is that is making the recommendation due to the self-interest involved than anything else. As has been said earlier this stinks of the "free hemp now" protesters who always seem to be slightly stoned and spend all their time in headshops. Thanks to whartung for such a perfect analogy to explain the situation to outsiders with!

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Score: 2

FuriousGeorge Member since:
2010-08-26

Someone anonymous person safely behind his keyboard said
FuriousGeorge trolled...
Sure, this scenario does not pass the "but-I-don't-want-Big-Gobment-increasing-phone-prices-by-$0.50" test, but if you are going to take that position you must explain why you are also opposed to the "seat belts in cars" mandate.

If you can stay ideologically consistent in this reductio ad aburdem style debate then I can respect your opinion, and agree to disagree.

(Remember, being a true libertarian means supporting the rights of private institutions or even governments to deny equal protection based on race, religion, or creed. It's very fashionable to claim libertarianism, but when push comes to shove how long will you really own it.)

Nice troll, only it is completely off topic to the issues involved.


Someone seems both cranky and emboldened by the protective anonymity of his little keyboard across the internets.

The only thing off topic was your failure to address the question: why are you against seat belts in cars as a mandate?

And guess what: the only one trolling in this thread is you ;)

Point made, bye!

Edited 2010-08-27 12:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

FuriousGeorge Member since:
2010-08-26

... by the way. The notion that radio is a failing business model and people are going away from it is wrong. As a result, your entire argument is a fallacy.

As the article states, the AM/FM radio audience is growing yearly and steadily.

Respectfully, you should stick to talking about things you know.

Reply Parent Score: 1

bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

FuriousGeorge trolled...

... by the way. The notion that radio is a failing business model and people are going away from it is wrong. As a result, your entire argument is a fallacy.

As the article states, the AM/FM radio audience is growing yearly and steadily.


O.o; Dude, wait what?

{checks FuriousGeorge's profile}

Date Joined: 2010-08-26

Ahhh...an astroturfer! Well "Brian" I hope they're paying good if you're going to sell your soul to the company like this...

AM/FM radio growing every year...LOL..sure it is.

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Score: 2