13 Aug
2006
13 Aug
'06
9:14 a.m.
Yeah, they've been around for years. It's
illegal to have anything capable of
receiving TV broadcasts in the UK without having a licence (about 160GBP/year,
approx $140US). Doesn't matter if the equipment isn't switched on - if it's
capable of receiving a signal then a licence is needed.
They're becoming worse then! It used to be black&white was exempted from the tax.
What happened to the pound? used to be substantially more valuable than the dollar.
10:44 a.m.
Scott Quinn wrote:
Regardless of exchange rate, dollars = pounds. :-(
Yeah, they've been around for years. It's
illegal to have anything capable of
receiving TV broadcasts in the UK without having a licence (about 160GBP/year,
approx $140US). Doesn't matter if the equipment isn't switched on - if it's
capable of receiving a signal then a licence is needed.
They're becoming worse then! It used to be black&white was exempted from the
tax.
What happened to the pound? used to be substantially more valuable than the dollar.
6:30 p.m.
(about 160GBP/year,
approx $140US).
What happened to the pound? used to be substantially more valuable
than the dollar. 
7:27 p.m.
On 8/14/06, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
D'ya mean that you can't get a pint for a
pound in pubs the world around?
Oy! Not in a long time. IIRC, a pint of lager in Oxforrd was about
95p in 1985 and a pint of bitter was around 85p (dunno about London
prices, but not a *lot* more than that). When I returned last year,
it was closer to 2 /Pounds 90 for a pint of bitter (about $5.50 US).
Still damn tasty, though.
-ethan
7:52 p.m.
New subject: Need GenRad XXDP+ diagnostics floppy disk
Hi,
Does anyone have the diagnostics diskette #2 for a GenRad 2293 machine,
and could send me an image? It's an XXDP+ RX02 8" floppy. I
accidentally zeroed the directory of the one I have and would like to
recover the diagnostics and systems files if possible. I've gotten a
lot of great help from people in trying to resurrect this disk,
including Will Kranz and Don North, but it looks like there is still a
lot of work ahead and it would be easier if I could find a good image
of the disk.
Thanks,
Richard Lynch
10:47 a.m.
Scott Quinn wrote:
Hmm, not for a long time now - although a B+W licence is still cheaper, I
believe. Up until a few years ago students used to be covered by any licence
that was at their official residential address, but they stopped doing that so
that they have to pay now too.
Given that the licence is only for the BBC channels, and I'll perhaps watch
2-3 hours of them per week, it works out as quite an expense per programme!
Yeah, they've been around for years. It's
illegal to have anything capable of
receiving TV broadcasts in the UK without having a licence (about 160GBP/year,
approx $140US). Doesn't matter if the equipment isn't switched on - if it's
capable of receiving a signal then a licence is needed.
They're becoming worse then! It used to be black&white was exempted from the tax.
What happened to the pound? used to be substantially
more valuable than the dollar.
I goofed :) I normally multiply pounds by two and then knock a little bit off
to get a rough dollar amount - but I was half asleep this morning and didn't
do the multiply by two bit first ;)
cheers
Jules
10:41 a.m.
Hi,
Jules Richardson said:
Given that the licence is only for the BBC channels,
and I'll perhaps watch
2-3 hours of them per week, it works out as quite an expense per programme!
Not quite - the licence is for having _any_ equipment installed in your
home capable of receiving broadcast tv - _any_ broadcast tv. The money
goes (mostly) to the bbc, but a licence is required for any broadcast
tv equipment including, but not limited to, a tv set, video or dvd
recorder with a tuner or a computer with a tuner. You still have to
pay even if you never watch the bbc :-(
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb at dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
11:35 a.m.
Stan Barr wrote:
Hi,
Jules Richardson said:
So, the *tuner* is the gotcha? I.e. if you used a component
DVD player/recorder, a video *monitor*, etc. *they* would be
exempt?
If so, has this "fact" influenced the types of products
offered there? (e.g., tunerless products?)
Given that the licence is only for the BBC
channels, and I'll perhaps watch
2-3 hours of them per week, it works out as quite an expense per programme!
Not quite - the licence is for having _any_ equipment installed in your
home capable of receiving broadcast tv - _any_ broadcast tv. The money
goes (mostly) to the bbc, but a licence is required for any broadcast
tv equipment including, but not limited to, a tv set, video or dvd
recorder with a tuner or a computer with a tuner. You still have to
pay even if you never watch the bbc :-(
12:47 p.m.
Hi,
Don said:
Stan Barr wrote:
Yep, one chap won a court case based on that very point!
IIRC he had a vcr, without a tuner, used with a monitor, but no tv.
Hi,
Jules Richardson said:
So, the *tuner* is the gotcha? I.e. if you used a component
DVD player/recorder, a video *monitor*, etc. *they* would be
exempt?
Given that the licence is only for the BBC
channels, and I'll perhaps watch
2-3 hours of them per week, it works out as quite an expense per programme!
Not quite - the licence is for having _any_ equipment installed in your
home capable of receiving broadcast tv - _any_ broadcast tv. The money
goes (mostly) to the bbc, but a licence is required for any broadcast
tv equipment including, but not limited to, a tv set, video or dvd
recorder with a tuner or a computer with a tuner. You still have to
pay even if you never watch the bbc :-( If so, has this "fact" influenced the types
of products
offered there? (e.g., tunerless products?)
No. :-)
Almost every household has a tv, and a license - in fact if you
don't have a license they come round to check if you have a tv.
(The licensing authorities have a list of all domestic addresses
in the uk and they compare it with their list of paid-up licenses
and go visit you if you haven't got one!)
To get back to the subject line:
The Intelasys Sea of Processors runs the individual processors
asyncronously each generating their own clock.
http://www.intellasys.net
http://www.forth.org/svfig/kk/04-2006.html
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb at dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
14 Aug
14 Aug
11:06 a.m.
Don wrote:
Stan Barr wrote:
Actually, the way I always understood it is that the licence fee funds the BBC
and isn't used for anything else (such and funding general transmitter
install/upkeep). But the Government call it a "TV licence" even though all the
cash goes to the BBC, and therefore you need to pay for the licence if you
want to watch any channels, not just the BBC.
I don't know how well it's been challenged in court - but as the BBC transmits
on slightly different frequencies across the country it'd be hard to market a
device that was guaranteed not to be able to receive the BBC now or in the
future, whilst being able to receive anything else.
If you use a DVD player and hook it up to a display that otherwise has no
tuner, then you should be safe without a licence.
Hi,
Jules Richardson said:
So, the *tuner* is the gotcha? I.e. if you used a component
DVD player/recorder, a video *monitor*, etc. *they* would be
exempt? Given that the licence is only for the BBC
channels, and I'll perhaps
watch 2-3 hours of them per week, it works out as quite an expense
per programme!
Not quite - the licence is for having _any_ equipment installed in your
home capable of receiving broadcast tv - _any_ broadcast tv. The money
goes (mostly) to the bbc, but a licence is required for any broadcast
tv equipment including, but not limited to, a tv set, video or dvd
recorder with a tuner or a computer with a tuner. You still have to
pay even if you never watch the bbc :-( If so, has this "fact" influenced the types
of products
offered there? (e.g., tunerless products?)
Not that I know of.
I do like the BBC - their programme quality on average is far better than
anything I've seen on satellite/cable or on the other terrestrial channels,
but it does mean paying a lot for the 95% of programming that I don't actually
watch!
--
A. Because it destroys the natural flow of conversation.
Q. What's wrong with top posting ?
6707
days inactive
6707
days old
11 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
compoobah＠valleyimplants.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
richardlynch3＠comcast.net -
stanb＠dial.pipex.com -
THX1138＠dakotacom.net