Live data from Hacker News

A year without TV

jgc.org

11–20 of 68 posts

Re: A year without TV

#11
I'd recommend get_iplayer for UK-based geeks who want to have a bit more control over when and how they watch stuff from the BBC iPlayer.

http://linuxcentre.net/iplayer

It's a command line PVR. There's a surprising amount of good stuff on at odd times on BBC Four, like the two science programs he mentioned for example.

It's one more step away from having to watch TV on its schedule and its terms.

Re: A year without TV

#12
It's been years for me. Occasionally I find myself watching TV in a hotel or at a friend's house or bar or some such. What amazes me is not how bad TV is, but how good it is. It's enjoyable, stimulating, highly pleasant distraction. There's some really, really good shows. It's easier to zone out with than reading a book or playing a difficult game. Really, TV is pretty good stuff at what it does.

Just - my long term goals don't jive with TV. I want my distraction/relaxation to also further my social life, learning, or industriousness. So I'll play difficult games that force lots of thinking (Civilization IV on one of the top three difficulties, online Risk over at Conquer Club, Darklands with an emulator), or I'll read a book, or I'll go to a museum, or I'll watch TED talks, or read Hacker News, or I'll click around in Wikipedia to learn more of different philosophies and eras of history, or I'll do something social with someone, or just go sit in nature or a park or a place I can be out amongst people.

These distract, stimulate, and relax to different degrees, but one of them should get the job done at any given time, and ideally my distraction/relaxation/stimulation also furthers one of my other goals. I'm amazed at how good TV is - and that's what scares me about it, because it doesn't further my other goals at all.

Re: A year without TV

#13
post #8
post #5

This reminds me distinctly of this onion article: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28694 It's great that he doesn't watch television (except that he does, he just gets it through an alternate channel and is more selective of what he watches) but he puts forth no interesting discussion about the merits thereof. He does mention copyright issues, but only to say that he doesn't violate copyright because it's too muc…

It's odd that it reminds you of that. Is me mentioning this once on my blog your measure of 'constantly'?

People who don't watch TV do tend to mention it at every opportunity. But they likely watch youtube vids, interviews, webcasts etc.

So it's like someone constantly going on about how they haven't even owned a car for 5 years! And forgetting to mention they have a 4x4 pickup truck now.

Re: A year without TV

#14
Nothing worse than hollier than thou high and mighty "TV is dumb and for the idiot masses".

If you actually learnt how to use a TV guide, and decided to watch only programs that interest you, you might have a different view point.

And how can you not even mention "micro men" from the BBC which was a fantastic look at the 80s home computer revolution. How can you not rate Newsnight? Question time?

Will the next meme be "I haven't even been connected to the internet for a year! The internet is full of rubbish and I don't miss it one bit"?

Re: A year without TV

#15

It's been years for me. Occasionally I find myself watching TV in a hotel or at a friend's house or bar or some such. What amazes me is not how bad TV is, but how good it is. It's enjoyable, stimulating, highly pleasant distraction. There's some really, really good shows. It's easier to zone out with than reading a book or playing a difficult game. Really, TV is pretty good stuff at what it does. Just - my long term…

What amazes me is not how bad TV is, but how good it is.

I'm glad to hear this perspective here. Let me pose a question: What exactly makes watching a thoughtful, well-crafted drama (for instance, The Wire) on television any less worthy than reading a good back or going to watch a play?

I think there's a lot of unfortunate knee-jerk bias against TV.

Re: A year without TV

#17
I've been about a year (super-senior in college, now), and it would be longer without roommates. Haven't missed it; Hulu has most of what I'm interested in, and I don't have any interest at all in following what's new on TV. Others, I tend to borrow seasons from friends (which is MUCH easier at college, I'll grant, but still).

It's amazing just how noisy TV is. DVDs / Hulu of the same show are way nicer to watch, because 1/3 of your time (or more) isn't spent watching / ignoring ads.

Re: A year without TV

#18
post #3

I was TV-less for several years-long periods (starting when I lived overseas in a non-English-speaking country). It's actually easier to do now, thanks to the loads of other time-wasting alternatives, such as Web video, Web surfing, and mobile apps.

Agreed. I don't think many people who proclaim how they haven't owned a TV for years understand the irony - they've switched one activity for an even dumber activity.

Re: A year without TV

#19
I haven't had a TV for three years. The hardest part was giving up Lost in Season Two. I feel lost when friends talk about "The Wire", "Weeds", "24" but I'd rather live vicariously through my own life. I don't even Hulu. I almost feel like TV is a treadmill - just keeping up with show plot trajectories.

Getting rid of a TV isn't a magic solution for life's problems. It doesn't make you more social. It doesn't make you focus on your big projects though. You can easily whittle away free time surfing on your iPhone on your couch (as I do).

I recently saw a two-year old boy whose parents had been raising without TV. They've succumbed. Thomas the Train. Previously, without TV, he would literally cry on the floor for 20 min. straight - because what the heck do small kids do if the parents can't distract them with the real opiate of the masses, in Karl Marx parlance.

Re: A year without TV

#20
post #15

It's been years for me. Occasionally I find myself watching TV in a hotel or at a friend's house or bar or some such. What amazes me is not how bad TV is, but how good it is. It's enjoyable, stimulating, highly pleasant distraction. There's some really, really good shows. It's easier to zone out with than reading a book or playing a difficult game. Really, TV is pretty good stuff at what it does. Just - my long term…

What amazes me is not how bad TV is, but how good it is. I'm glad to hear this perspective here. Let me pose a question: What exactly makes watching a thoughtful, well-crafted drama (for instance, The Wire ) on television any less worthy than reading a good back or going to watch a play? I think there's a lot of unfortunate knee-jerk bias against TV.

> What exactly makes watching a thoughtful, well-crafted drama (for instance, The Wire) on television any less worthy than reading a good back or going to watch a play?

Great question. A few points:

1. A play or movie has a start and end time that is reasonably compressed - you watch Memento or Gattaca, it takes you two hours, you sit and think about it afterwards for a while, and it's done. A high quality program will run for many seasons, taking 30 minutes to an hour of your life times X weeks for however long. Also, being not as compressed, the average quality tends to be lower (with some exceptions of very good programming, though it's rare).

2. Very easy to just keep watching after the high quality program ends, watching the next thing that comes on. Very, very easy to do that. My housemate last year had a TV hooked to a DVD player and Nintendo Wii for parties, but no channels. I did buy him a box set of Planet Earth for his birthday after seeing some of it at a friend's house. But it's like, put on the DVD, watch it, put it away, done. No getting sucked in.

3. Garbage books are no good either - I tend to read books that give me a perspective on another culture (Koda Rohan, Eiji Yoshikawa, or Genji for Japan, for instance), or read business books, technical books, history, economics, finance, etc. I'd classify a lot of fiction as similarly mindlessly-distracting-without-growth too. That's fine for what it is, but I'd rather get the enjoyment while also developing as a person, asking myself tough questions, getting more in touch with another culture, gaining expertise, and so on.

But sure, there's some good TV. I used to go do cardio at the gym whenever a sports match was on that I wanted to watch, for instance, because they had a bunch of TVs, and I'd go during the fifth inning or halftime and watch the end of the game. I might buy a boxed set of DVDs and have a weekend marathon at my place sometime if a show is really good, insightful, and develops the character.

Still, I don't watch television regularly because I think I'll have a healthier, happier, more productive life where I reach more of my goals if it's not part of my life. Perhaps some people have knee jerk anti-TV reactions as a signaling mechanism that they're "unplugged", but that's not it in my case. Some TV is really cool. I watched some Top Gear at one of my English friend's flats in London, and it's just really enjoyable. The question was still - wait, is this what I should be doing with my time? Couldn't I be enjoying myself while also learning, or producing something, or connecting more deeply with someone I like? It's a keenly thought out thing that I made a conscious decision about a long time, but I'm not one of those horrible anti-TV preachy people. If it serves a role in a person's life and they're happy with its effect, then it's a good thing for them.

Post reply on HN