Walter B. writes in:
The newly functioning BBC iPlayer has a max volume of ... 11. Very Spinal Tap.
Alas, this is what I get:
For those that can, however, yay! The taxpayer-funded appropriation of public broadcasting by foreign corporations now has a cooler volume knob.
"Rob! Actually, Weems is just the manufacturer. Th..."
"Probably not. I think (not a chemist) ice turns to w..."
"Any more details on the lifetime internet connection..."
"Or indeed, if the metal in question was at a tempera..."
"Shutz Not that I know, but: surely If you put en..."
"We were gifted the cardiinal, it's cute, but the bat..."
"Joel, the $360 (cost at the time I write this) cover..."
"I think the real power of this in games would not be..."
"Simeon, there's underground lanes on Queensway, in B..."
"The price is definitely for one board only. ..."
"anon, You obviously didn't get it...."
"The left channel is a jealous channel......"
"But can I bring it on an airplane?..."
"They submitted a sample of Budweiser to a German lab..."
"First we had a bird listening to electronic music. N..."
"I've met Dan Akroyd on a photoshoot for one of his w..."
"Mind you, people should try this one also... ..."
"There is only ONE teapot to rule them all. ..."
"i can promise you, 3d artists wont get more out of t..."
"thumbs up!..."
the latest
latest episodes
I noticed this yesterday watching a link from the BBC news feed in Firefox. I figured it was old and I'd just never noticed it. Brilliant.
Why don't you just make 10 louder and make 10 the top number?
^ These go to eleven.
“It’s one louder.”
It has been around for a few months, at least since they embedded Flash videos into webpages rather than launching the Real/WM pop-up.
I'm surprised this hasn't been posted before. Even the old iplayer went to 11.
iPlayer is fine so long as you don't want actually watch or listen to anything.
The flash television iPlayer has been going to 11 for as long as I've been using it. Many months.
The BBC isn't taxpayer funded. Everyone in Britain who has a television pays for it, but they all pay the same amount, unlike tax. Unless they manage to illegally avoid it, which 5% of them do. BBC employees would find the word "tax" rather insulting, as it might suggest they have some relation (and therefore obligation to broadcast in favour of) the government.
That is unless I've missed something, and iPlayer is funded by someone's tax. Is it?
I'm British, and I always considered it a tax. It's money you're obliged by law to give to the public broadcaster. It's TV Tax.
Foreigners just point and laugh at the ways the British try and parse it as a "fee" because it doesn't go directly to the state, or because it's a flat rate.
Inverse Square, the iPlayer is not funded by tax, although the cost of developing and running such services is borne by the Licence fee payer, which some call a tax. The point is the Licence fee is independent funding stream from govt.
I have always considered commercially funded broadcasters to be more controlled, in terms of output content, because of the need not to 'offend' the hand that feeds it.
It is worth noting that the BBC World Service IS funded by the UK govt, through the Foreign Office budget.
Would would you rather have? a news source that is chasing advertising money? The system in america where anything that doesnt have instant success being canceled?
Indeed. Despite the principle behind the BBC being questionable, you can't deny that the license money is largely well-spent. Anyone else hear that they're planning on putting up their entire archives on the iplayer site? I think I may never be bored again when that happens. If only for all the David Attenborough documentaries.
Hey, I'm fine with the TV tax. It's a great deal -- £15 a month for a load of great channels with nearly all-original programming.
What I think is dumb is using that money to pay microsoft to DRM-ify the BBC's programming, which was paid for by said tax/fee. Public money, public ownership.
The BBC isn't taxpayer funded. Everyone in Britain who has a television pays for it, but they all pay the same amount, unlike tax.
Its just an unfair tax! Other taxes that are like it include Vehicle Excise Duty and the infamous poll tax. If the Government makes you pay money by law, its a tax.
I happen to think that an independently (ish) funded BBC is a (largely) good idea, but the cost does fall disproportionately on the poorest in UK society...
@10: The BBC is famous for being over critical of the government. Jeremy Paxman is a British institution, relied upon to grill to death every politician who needs it and expose liars and frauds - newsnight is not something that could be sustained commercially in a country this small. The largest commercial service, sky, is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who explicitly has an agenda to push - sky news does not report on things that would hurt his interests.