HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Re: microwave cable tv info needed
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix  (508) 655-3848
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 14:01:20 GMT

<U57755@uicvm.uic.edu> (Alejo Balingit) writes:

>Does anyone know  how popular cable-less cable tv is?  My friend just invested
>some money on an outfit in Indiana and it seems like they are giving him some
>false hopes on its future popularity.  I have never heard of this technology,
>but supossedly there are some in California that are now running. I guess there
>is a microwave transmitter and receiver involved so that there are no cables
>required for hookup and each receiver is individually coded to prevent
>pirating. If anyone knows where this technology is going please post or mail
>me, I don't remember the company's name, but they made his investment sound too
>good to be true and I'm just being a realist. Thanks in advance.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 And that which sounds too good to be true, probably is.  All the 
wireless cable deals out there are a SCAM, pure and simple...and a
scam which is trading on our public airwaves.

 See, there are wireless cable licenses being granted right now, mostly
for smaller cities.  The idea is as you describe it -- microwave
video transmission, although I'm not sure how scrambled it really
is.  The idea is to charge for receiver rental.  The frequencies are
the same ones used for the old ITFS service.  

 The FCC is allotting these licenses by lottery.  So the idea these
scam companies have is to line up "investors" to apply for the
licenses...then sell the licenses back to the company.  The more
investors the company can line up, the better that company's
chances are of getting the actual license for the system in 
question.

 For the individual investor, though, the deal is a certain money-
loser.  The "applications" being prepared by these firms are
often ten flawed.  There are so many applications that the chance of
actually winning one is minimal.  And the cost of "investing"
is usually $10,000.  That's a lot more than an individual
application would probably cost.  And it's a lot to lose...and
lose you will if you "invest" in this scam.

 I hope the FCC looks at what's going on and cancels the lottery
process altogether.  This thing is rotten to the core.

Scott Fybush -- fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us
A $10,000 investment?  And just where can I get $10,000 anyway? :-)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Cable programming
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 20:15:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Keywords: cable box programming

chrisp@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Chris Pelkie) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>I hadn't figured out already. If it matters, these are black
>Scientific-Atlanta boxes, but since these are custom manufactured
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>for different cable systems, that info is probably meaningless to you.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
On what do you base this piece of information?
-- 

Anson Kennedy                                                   anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)

"If you don't watch the violence,    \           "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it."  \                I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson                            \  -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)
From: rao@uts.amdahl.com (Madhavan Rangarao)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: cable installation fee rip-off.
Date: 24 Jul 92 22:23:52 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Hi netters,

I was getting bored to adjust the indoor antenna frequently.  Thought
I might as well go for cable tv connection.

I called TCI in CA since they are monopolising my apartment complex 
connections.  They quoted outrageous $60 for the installation.  All the cable
and connections are already in place and all they have to do is to activate
the connection.  This is a daytime robbery for charging so much money for the
installation only.  Does anybody know, how do I get their promotional rates?
(Please don't suggest, wait for it ...).  

How do people react to such things?  I am thinking of getting a outdoor
antenna.  The problem is, my apartment complex discourages the use of outdoor
antenna.

Any suggestions, comments welcome ...

Thanks,

Rao ...
From: libes@cme.nist.gov (Don Libes)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: VCR Plus Codes still needed
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:16:25 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology

In article <Brr33M.5K3@solbourne.com> kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>I think the biggest obstacle would be the confusion factor.  There
>already is one code "standard" out there; the public would probably be
>"too confused" by and newspapers wouldn't bother to print Yet Another
>Code.  The acceptance level of whatever PD code was designed would
>have to be pretty high to displace VCR+, but you won't get that level
>without the support of newspapers, who won't print the code without a
>large user base, etc.  I can see it now:
>
>9:00	Ch 4  Quantum Leap	3452 (VCR+) / 24332 (Usenet ++)		;-)

Standards come and go.  As your quotes indicate, VCR+ is not really a
standard - it's just the only thing out there.  My local cable guide
refuses to publish VCR+ codes and last I spoke with them, they have no
intent to change.  Since cost is the issue, they would willingly use a
free system.  I realize VCR+ "seems" to be pervasive, but is it?

PS: I actually own VCR+ (gift), and I wish I could use it.
Don
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: Dan Lawrence <danl@halcyon.com>
Subject: Re: VCR PLUS ? ** Does anyone think it's REALLY usefull **
Originator: bbs@halcyon.com
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:55:45 GMT

mpalmer@encore.com (Mike Palmer) writes:
> I would hope the VCR's with built in VCR+ would include a backup battery
> of some kind.  It ammazes me that VCR manufacturers can't build a battery
> into all models.  My JVC HRS6600 S-VHS VCR's only kep their memory for
> 60 seconds or so and then, not only the time is lost, but all the channel
> and setup info has gone bye-bye.

I have always wondered why most vcr's instantly forget all programming if 
the power goes out for just a second, but it takes for ever for them to 
forget the channel tuning and assignment.  Is there something I am 
missing?
 
Dan Lawrence
danl@halcyon.com
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: bhouser@sc9.intel.com (Brad Houser)
Subject: Re: Remoteley Addressable converters
Keywords: big brother, privacy
Reply-To: bhouser@sc9.intel.com
Organization: Intel Corporation, California Technology Development
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:21:12 GMT


In article <1992Jul21.131959.16714@brtph560.bnr.ca>,
mcohen@brtph127.BNR.CA (Matt Cohen P785) writes:
>
>	I heard somewhere that the remotely addressable converters
>could be queried as to what the permitted service state was, what 
>channel they were tuned to, etc. Can anyone provide some factual
>information on this? OF course you can think of the implications,
>and it would be a bonus for the cable companies - easy to spot
>pirates, survey channel popularity, record viewing habits, etc.
>My box is a Zenith and it is addressable. Is it two-way???
>
>Matt
>
>

The cable tv distribution network is like a tree with thinner and
thinner trunks and branches radiating from the "head end".  As the signal
is sent down the line, periodic amplifiers are needed to keep the signal
to noise ratio acceptable.  Thus the main purpose of the head end is to 
transmit, and the main purpose of the convert or descrambler is to receive.

In order for the cable company to query your box, there would be a need for
"upstream" amplifiers, as all the "downstream" amplifiers would block
the signal from going upstream.  This would require additional splitters and
amplifiers throughout the system.

While it is technically feasible, and there are some systems that do this,
I think you can probably assume that most cable companies would rather not 
go to the expense just to catch pirates.  

If on the other hand a cable company wants to offer thruly interactive
services, like cable on demand (without the phone), then there will be a
need for these two-way amplification systems.  If Video Dial Tone becomes a
reality, then my guess is that many of the things you suggest would be
possible.
--
[Brad Houser                               <This space for rent>     ]
[                            bhouser@sc9.intel.com                   ]
[+1-408-765-0494                                                Woof!]
From: tkelsey@panix.com (Tom Kelsey)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: VCR Plus Codes still needed
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:49:58 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <18323@muffin.cme.nist.gov> libes@cme.nist.gov (Don Libes) writes:
>In article <Brr33M.5K3@solbourne.com> kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>>I think the biggest obstacle would be the confusion factor.  There
B
>
>Standards come and go.  As your quotes indicate, VCR+ is not really a
>standard - it's just the only thing out there.  My local cable guide
>refuses to publish VCR+ codes and last I spoke with them, they have no
>intent to change.  Since cost is the issue, they would willingly use a
>ifree system.  I realize VCR+ "seems" to be pervasive, but is it?
>
>PS: I actually own VCR+ (gift), and I wish I could use it.
>Don

 May I ask WHY you can't use it?  isn't there any publication that has
the codes.  don;t you have TV Guide there..  even if you have an 'outer 
region' guide with different channels, you can REPOGRAM it to display
your channels.. even time zones can be reprogrammed.. 

tk
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: VCR Plus Codes still needed
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:54:57 GMT

While reading article <1992Jul21.042159.14033@seas.gwu.edu>, I noticed that
lai@seas.gwu.edu (William Y. Lai) said the following:
>In article <BrpBwu.Jo4@solbourne.com> kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:
>>Thus the problem with the public domain scheme -- how does anyone make money
>>from it?
>
>	Newspapers:	Create value for subscribers for almost no cost

What value?  With VCR Plus if I want the codes in Denver I have to buy the
Rocky Mountain News (or TV Guide), not the Denver Post.  With a PD system
the numbers are just like the normal program guides - unless one paper does
an outstanding job no one is going to purchase one paper over another just for
their TV section.

>	Remote Makers:	Sell code programmers w/o paying for royalty
>	Consumers:	Program VCR with greater ease, at lower cost than
>			buying VCR+ devices (hopefully)

I think the "greater ease" part would be lost.  If people need to use VCR +
now, they certainly will be confused by yet another coding scheme.  Besides,
at a discounted price of $49 or so, it's hard to imagine it being worth any
company's time and trouble to bring something like a remote to market for less
than that.

>	Hackers:	Develop new ways to control their VCR/TV/etc.

This one's true, but then again a TRUE hacker would just build something to
program the VCR using its "real" programming mode anyway.  :-)

>The only obstacle to this whole thing is that GemStar's lawyer is going to be
>on our case as soon as they hear about it!

No, I think the biggest obstacle would be the confusion factor.  There already
is one code "standard" out there; the public would probably be "too confused"
by and newspapers wouldn't bother to print Yet Another Code.  The acceptance
level of whatever PD code was designed would have to be pretty high to displace
VCR+, but you won't get that level without the support of newspapers, who won't
print the code without a large user base, etc.

I can see it now:

9:00	Ch 4  Quantum Leap	3452 (VCR+) / 24332 (Usenet ++)		;-)
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed above
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, not those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
From: sonic@artgate.cray.com (Curtis Swanson)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: Pitiful cable picture
Date: 28 Jul 92 20:09:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.


In article <64311@hydra.gatech.EDU> gb7@prism.gatech.EDU (Joe Bradley)
writes:

>A serviceman from the cable company has come out and said the power is turned
>up to the max at the curb and there is nothing he can do. I have tried
>inserting an amplifier just after the cable comes into the house but before
>the first splitter. This makes the picture worse! The amp has a gain of
>16-24 dB over 5-600 MHz. I have even tried another amp of a different type
>but with the same result.
>
>Does this sound like something is wrong with the signal distribution system
>in my house or is the cable company supplying me with too weak of a signal?
>How could the amps make the picture worse (snowier)?
>

All splitters drop a lot of signal (typ. 12db).  What I think is happening is
that your amp is being overloaded by the signal from the cable company, 
creating more distortion than you had due to loss in the splitters.  I'd try
two amps after the first 2-way splitter, one on each output.  That should 
restore the signal to the usable in most of your home......
--
***  Curt Swanson  ***  sonic@romulus.cray.com  ***  IOTTMCO  *********
HOME:n - That mythical place where you can go and relax.......
I'd rather be in a coma.........
Xref: sparky rec.video.cable-tv:1085 sci.electronics:13634
From: root@cvbnet.prime.com (cvbnet)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: 60 Hz Hum on Cable-tv Coax
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:01:09 GMT
Distribution: all

From article <1992Jul28.145911.4972@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, by dbesler@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Darren Besler):
> 
> When I connect the coax for cable tv to my VCR and connect the audio out to
> my stereo amplifier I get a 60 Hz Hum. I know the noise is coming from the 
> cable as this also happens with the cable connected to my FM tuner. It is  
> very annoying as I have to disconnect the cable when I wish to watch a video
> tape and direct the audio through my stereo. 
> I have noticed this problem in different parts of the city where cable is
> supplied by different suppliers.
> What is causing the 60 Hz interference?
> How can it be removed?
> 
> dbesler@ccu.umanitoba.ca


There seems to be a difference of potential (voltage) between
whatever the cable is connected to and the cable itself.

You could measure this to verify it.
	1. disconnect the cable from equipment.
	2. Use a voltmeter set to AC volts > 110
	3. Measure between the shield of the cable and
		where it connects on the equipment.

ASSuming you measure something greater than 100 millivolts,
you need to correct this situation. There are many many ways
to do this. Ask anyone involved in studio or pro-audio work.
It drives everyone nuts until it's solved.

The very first thing you should do is find where the cable enters
the house. There should be a grounding block that it plugs into.
There should be a heavy wire connecting the block to your
electrical service box ground.

My guess is that this has become disconnected.

If not, then the equipment is not grounded correctly or
it possibly uses a non-polarized AC plug which you can
simply reverse. This may also require that you reverse
all the plugs on your other equipment to stop hum which
now may be originating in the first piece of equipment.

If it doen't have a non-polarized plug then maybe there is
a ground disconnected somewhere inside the equipment itself.

You can also verify this.
	1. disconnect the cable again.
	2. Set the voltmeter to ohms on the lowest scale.
	3. Verify that, for a 2 wire plug, one side of the
		plug has ZERO ohms resistance to the
		cable shield connector on the equipment.
	   If it's a 3 wire plug then step 3 should be true
	   as well as ZERO ohms from that same side of the
	   plug and the round pin of the plug.

If all that is true, its possible that your electrical
outlet is wired incorrectly.

I'm not going to be responsible for you electricuting
yourself so I'll leave it up to someone else to tell
you how to check that out. There are, however, some
devices which look like a 3 wire plug which have some
lighted indicators which will tell you if it the
outlet is correct. I think Radio Shack sells one.

Good luck, joe
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: PARAGON CABLE TV = BASTARDS
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 04:56:47 GMT

Paragon does suck.I am in Huntington Beach CA..there are paragons all
around...this one sucks..they have called 6 times in 48 hours
to ask me to buy the converter box...i've had it with them
--
==============================  *  Marshal Perlman               * DO
=-> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu <-=  *  Huntington Beach, California  * NOT
==============================  *  (Surf City, U.S.A)            * EAT
* Yeltsin is the Russian word for Retsin * CAUTION: RADIOACTIVE MESSAGE
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Help 75ohm coax to RCA...
From: rabagley@uceng.UC.EDU (Ross A Bagley)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:22:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati

I am thinking of getting a Sony 8mm watchman.  It has RCA video and audio
inputs/outputs.  One of the things I want to do with it is to copy movies
onto 8mm tapes (of which I have a few).  My VCR does not have RCA outs.
I want to know if there are any "black boxes" which can provide conversion
from the 75 ohm coax the cable comes in on to the RCA inputs on the Sony
device.  Preferably cheap.  I can do limited electronic construction, so
if anyone can tell me the location to get plans for this device, that would
probably help too.

Thanks in advance.
--                                  ______________________________________
      _______                       |                                    |
     /\______\                      |       rabagley@uceng.uc.edu        |
    / / ___  /_____ ______ ______   |                                    |
   / / /_\/ /______\\_____\\_____\  |  Sex appeal is 50% what you've got |
  / / _  __// ___  //  ___//  ___/  |  and 50% what people think you've  |
 / / / \ \ / /_\/ //___  //___  /   |  got.              -Murphy         |
 \/_/   \_\\_____//_____//_____/    |____________________________________|
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
From: mcohen@brtph127.BNR.CA (Matt Cohen P785)
Subject: Remoteley Addressable converters
Keywords: big brother, privacy
Reply-To: mcohen@bnr.ca
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:19:59 GMT

	I heard somewhere that the remotely addressable converters
could be queried as to what the permitted service state was, what 
channel they were tuned to, etc. Can anyone provide some factual
information on this? OF course you can think of the implications,
and it would be a bonus for the cable companies - easy to spot
pirates, survey channel popularity, record viewing habits, etc.
My box is a Zenith and it is addressable. Is it two-way???

Matt
From: jerry@ginger.hnrc.tufts.edu (Jerry Dallal)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: Watching cable with TV remote
Date: 30 Jul 92 21:20:14 GMT
Organization: USDA HNRC at Tufts University

In article <1992Jul29.151743.21798@fia.dmg.ml.com>, mlevine@perfect.fia.dmg.ml.com (Mark Levine) writes:

> |> Try this experiment:  disconnect your TV from whatever cable wire goes into
> |> it, and disconnect the cable TV wire from the wall.  Now connect your TV
> |> cable jack directly to the cable TV jack on your wall.  

> |> If you get 2-13 only, your TV is not cable ready, and you need a block
> |> converter.  If you get 2-13 plus 14 and above, you are OK.  If you get
> |> nothing, your cable system is run by a bunch of NAZI's.
> | 
> 
> Thanks for the advice. Unless I did something wrong, my cable system IS run by a
> bunch of NAZI's. No channels 2-13, no nothing. How the hell can they get away with this. If there are any other suggestions, legal or not, please let me know.
> This is getting me crazy.
> 

My sister lives in Manhattan with older equipment.  But she tells me that
everyone with new equipment is up in arms because they
*must* use the cable company's box.  The idea is to eventually
scramble *everything* to discourage theft of service.
From: oopdavid@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (D.RODMAN)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: SATELLITE DECODER INFO WANTED
Date: 29 Jul 92 18:12:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I am interested in learning more about how satellite programers un-scramble
the video for ones satellite decoder.  Specifically, where can one find
information on what device(s) are available to decode such signals.  I
was hopeful that someone on this group could direct me, it seemed the 
closest thing to what I was actually seeking.  Please e-mail directly
if possible.
From: bowers@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: FCC allows phone companies to transmit video signals
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:07:59 CDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA

In article <1992Jul30.185336.28425@cos.com>, bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
> 
> Don't hold your breath waiting for video dialtone. We had enough
> fun working out how to get ISDN's 160 kbit/s over twisted pair
> copper. Either the telco's would need to run co-ax alongside
> their present cables, or switch over to optical fiber to get
> enough bandwidth for TV.

Yeah, Well, the  guys at Bell Labs and at Bellcore are frantically 
searching for a compression scheme that will squeeze full motion video into 
a twisted pair.  I've seen 1/4 T-1 full motion video demos that look pretty 
good.

Besides, the telcos really want to string fiber to your home....they're 
hoping profits from video services will finance all that glass.  But in the 
short term (18-24 months) I bet we do see some form of video compression 
that runs over twisted pair.....When some of the BOC's finally got behind 
video dialtone that should tell one that the (compression) jig is up.......
Watch out TCI!!!!!!!!
>
From: jerry@ginger.hnrc.tufts.edu (Jerry Dallal)
Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: VCR video worse than TV's
Date: 30 Jul 92 14:45:48 GMT
Organization: USDA HNRC at Tufts University

Thank you to those who responded to my query.  Most everyone suggested an
amplifier.  That many suggestions made me overcome my knee-jerk
"If you've got good equipment and good cabling, most amplifiers boost
the noise as much as the signal" reaction.  I started with a Radio Shack
$25 Cable TV amp (knowing that Radio Shack doesn't make anything that works and
fully expecting to have to move up to a semi-pro unit) but, lo and behold, the
unit did the job. (I still find it hard to believe that Radio Shack makes 
something worth using.)  

The whole experience makes me want to try a 
powered FM antenna to try for some hard to reach stations.  Perhaps the better
units *don't* just amplify the noise with the signal.  . . . but that's another
story.  Thanks again.