Social Feed

I remember this in the news too...

Almighty1 said:

I remember this in the news too...

$14,000 spent on rented rotary phone

A widow rented a rotary dial telephone for 42 years, paying what her family calculates as more than $14,000 for a now- outdated phone.

www.nbcnews.com

Click to expand...

That is a misnomer. In the old days you subscribed to telephone service. That included the telephone line and one telephone. An extension cost $1 a month extra. So that $14,000 over 42 years was for the service not the leased telephone. There is no way they paid $28 a month for 42 years for a leased telephone.

anybody remember this disaster ?

SuperDish_Fan23 said:

Why are ViP922s So rare? like its crazy how ebay has none, i checked everywhere, also, i got a ViP222k now, which is actually activated!

Click to expand...

Whoever still has their 922, please let me know i just wanna see photos of the ui and other stuff

SuperDish_Fan23 said:

Whoever still has their 922, please let me know i just wanna see photos of the ui and other stuff

Click to expand...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wL6dsORmXg

Slicker guides never did much for me

Bobby said:

That is a misnomer. In the old days you subscribed to telephone service. That included the telephone line and one telephone. An extension cost $1 a month extra. So that $14,000 over 42 years was for the service not the leased telephone. There is no way they paid $28 a month for 42 years for a leased telephone.

Click to expand...

The widely publicized calculation stems from a viral news story from 2006 involving a widow named Ester Strogen. Her family discovered she had been continuously leasing two rotary dial telephones from AT&T for 42 years.
The total cost—which actually came out to more than $14,000 by the time the lease was canceled—was calculated based on the following legacy telecom structure:

• The Monthly Fee: At the time her granddaughters discovered the charges, the ongoing leasing fee was $29.10 per month for the two outdated phones.
• The Math: Over 42 years (504 months), paying roughly $24 to $30 a month accumulates to between $12,000 and $14,600 ($29.10 × 504 months = $14,666.40).

Why did this happen?
Prior to the landmark breakup of AT&T ("Ma Bell") in 1984, consumers were legally not allowed to own their phones; they were required to lease them directly from the phone company.
When the laws changed and phone ownership became legal, AT&T spun off its rental division into a company called QLT Consumer Lease Services. Millions of customers, particularly elderly individuals who were used to seeing a single unified phone bill, simply never realized that the small recurring "equipment lease" line-item could be canceled by buying a cheap phone at a retail store.

Yes, leasing absolutely cost that much in reality, and the math is entirely accurate. However, the calculations performed by the family did contain one major historical nuance: they multiplied the final 2006 rate across all 42 years, which means the actual total cash paid out was likely a bit lower.
The original viral story focused on 82-year-old widow Ester Strogen from Canton, Ohio, who paid $29.10 a month for two black rotary phones until her family intervened in July 2006.
The reality behind how the cost reached that staggering total breaks down into two distinct phases:

Phase 1: The Historical Base Rate (1960s – 1984)

When Strogen first got the phones in the 1960s, renting was a legal mandate and cost a fraction of the 2006 price—usually just a few dollars a month.

• The "Insurance" Mirage: In exchange for that fee, Ma Bell promised free, lifetime maintenance. If the phone broke, they replaced it instantly at no extra cost.
• The Cost-Plus Reality: Because these solid-state phones were built like tanks out of heavy plastic and steel, they almost never broke. Consumers paid a continuous premium for decades for a repair service they rarely used.

Phase 2: The Deregulation Rate Hikes (1984 – 2006)

After AT&T was forced to break up its monopoly in 1984, the rental side of the business was shifted to Lucent Technologies and later a legacy holding company. To maximize profit off a shrinking customer base, they steadily increased the monthly rental fees over the next 20 years.

• By 2006, the rental cost had quietly ballooned to roughly $14.55 per phone per month.
• When the family discovered the $29.10 monthly charge, they looked back at the 42-year span and estimated the collective loss at over $14,000.

Even adjusted for historical inflation—where $2 a month in 1964 had the purchasing power of roughly $20 today—Ester Strogen and hundreds of thousands of other elderly Americans realistically paid thousands of dollars out-of-pocket for standard desk phones they could have purchased at retail for $10.

Let Her In - Vince Gill

Devil in Her Heart - The Beatles

Take Me To Heart - Quarterflash

Take Me To The River - Talking Heads

Don't Take Me Alive - Steely Dan

Years down the road

navychop said:

Years down the road

Click to expand...

Looks like Charlie Ergen will never give up satellite TV. The reason Echostar 25 the most poweful DBS satellite ever built at 110 location already. Also Echostar 26 another super satellite on order for 119 orbital location will be ready in 15 months. he will have 110/119 for another 20 years. Dish will be the only satellte company left. The reason for rural areas and some people like satellite easy to operate and change channels in seconds.

renjy651 said:

Looks like Charlie Ergen will never give up satellite TV. The reason Echostar 25 the most poweful DBS satellite ever built at 110 location already. Also Echostar 26 another super satellite on order for 119 orbital location will be ready in 15 months. he will have 110/119 for another 20 years. Dish will be the only satellte company left. The reason for rural areas and some people like satellite easy to operate and change channels in seconds.

Click to expand...

I hope these new "most powerful" satellites will mean that DISH can provide every channel that can be sourced in HD in HD. I do not like the fact that two of my favorite channels (Start and H&I) are SD. I was also very disappointed after installation that METV has to be streamed from my internet connection. Finally, I dropped the locals upon seeing that my local CW channel is in blurry letterboxed SD when it has been HD OTA for years.

Mister B said:

I hope these new "most powerful" satellites will mean that DISH can provide every channel that can be sourced in HD in HD. I do not like the fact that two of my favorite channels (Start and H&I) are SD. I was also very disappointed after installation that METV has to be streamed from my internet connection. Finally, I dropped the locals upon seeing that my local CW channel is in blurry letterboxed SD when it has been HD OTA for years.

Click to expand...

my me t.v. is in HD via the sat. though it's better PQ via ota

Mister B said:

I hope these new "most powerful" satellites will mean that DISH can provide every channel that can be sourced in HD in HD. I do not like the fact that two of my favorite channels (Start and H&I) are SD. I was also very disappointed after installation that METV has to be streamed from my internet connection. Finally, I dropped the locals upon seeing that my local CW channel is in blurry letterboxed SD when it has been HD OTA for years.

Click to expand...

This piece gets me - the fact that Dish has removed SD channels from satellite completely in the name of "HD upgrades". I pay for satellite TV, not streaming...I don't see why they couldn't leave the SD version of the channels on Satellite then put the HD streaming version like they have for other channels.

zippyfrog said:

This piece gets me - the fact that Dish has removed SD channels from satellite completely in the name of "HD upgrades". I pay for satellite TV, not streaming...I don't see why they couldn't leave the SD version of the channels on Satellite then put the HD streaming version like they have for other channels.

Click to expand...

CONTRACTS!

slow_poke_pete said:

my me t.v. is in HD via the sat. though it's better PQ via ota

Click to expand...

Yes, I considered D* as I knew some of my favorite channels had better PQ but too many require moving up to the "Choice" package and incurring the Regional Sports Fee.
I do not have METV or any of the Weigel owned channels here in El Paso.

What about the commercial services? will they keep using single Stacked or DP single/dual LNB's?

navychop said:

CONTRACTS!

Click to expand...

At this point one can only ask whether any live ch's are still distributed in SD. Other than maybe "classics" ch's that run only older stuff

Even if you are broadcasting old SD-only shows, I would think advertisers would still want their commercials to look good.

telstar_1 said:

Well, the bag can't weigh that much, right? But by law food product packaging must display the actual net weight of the product, i.e., the contents of the container, so by any logic, if not law, a store's stated per-ounce cost should reflect that figure. But since there's not any law regulating shelf statements, a store can say whatever it wants without violating any rules. So I guess the answer is more consumer legislation. Or simply caveat emptor.

Click to expand...

I would think that the Vendor/Maker of the product would have a say in it, showing the Correct weight ...
You would think it would be in the contract.

I do look at the ounces of items, but unless its way off, I don't check the math, may have to start now.

Remember when you use to get a 13.5 oz bag of Chips .... Thats a PARTY Size now.

Jimbo said:

I would think that the Vendor/Maker of the product would have a say in it, showing the Correct weight ...
You would think it would be in the contract.

I do look at the ounces of items, but unless its way off, I don't check the math, may have to start now.

Remember when you use to get a 13.5 oz bag of Chips .... Thats a PARTY Size now.

Click to expand...

I remember when a pound of coffee was 16oz. Now its 12oz, they don't call it a pound anymore and its three times the cost of the 16oz pound.

TRG said:

I remember when a pound of coffee was 16oz. Now its 12oz, they don't call it a pound anymore and its three times the cost of the 16oz pound.

Click to expand...

Well, they don't call it a pound anymore ....

Ice cream is that way too, use to be a half gallon, now its 1.5 quart or some say 48 oz

Jimbo said:

Well, they don't call it a pound anymore ....

Ice cream is that way too, use to be a half gallon, now its 1.5 quart or some say 48 oz

Click to expand...

We have a regional ice cream company here that advertises that their ice cream containers are still a full half gallon.

NYDutch said:

We have a regional ice cream company here that advertises that their ice cream containers are still a full half gallon.

Click to expand...

Now check and see if any of them (probably a few) are actual Ice Cream ...

Most Ice Creams are Not actual Ice Cream.
Bryers for example, call Most of thiers "Frozen Dairy Dessert"

dishstaller said:

Well, according to the price per ounce on that first bag of coffee he mentions, that would mean the bag weighed over 6 ounces. That bag does NOT weigh 6 ounces. According to Google, an empty bag weighs half an ounce.

Click to expand...

You need to weigh the actual bag...a deli bag weighs less than that but a thick coffee bag is gonna weigh around an ounce...an empty tin can has some weight

Juan said:

You need to weigh the actual bag...a deli bag weighs less than that but a thick coffee bag is gonna weigh around an ounce...an empty tin can has some weight

Click to expand...

Products sold by the ounce, pound, etc, should always be priced for the product only. Only the shipping weight should include the packaging.

NYDutch said:

Products sold by the ounce, pound, etc, should always be priced for the product only.

Click to expand...

Unless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.

I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner.

You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).

harshness said:

Unless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.

I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner.

You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).

Click to expand...

I would think that all the packaging would already be accounted for ... they weigh the container, subtract that from the scale, then add the product , so its weighing the Product only

Jimbo said:

I would think that all the packaging would already be accounted for ... they weigh the container, subtract that from the scale, then add the product , so its weighing the Product only.

Click to expand...

You would be thinking wrong when it comes to goods that are sold by weight (meat, produce, nails). Those items typically go on the scale wrapped without an associated tare. The weight only excludes the sticker because it hasn't been printed yet.

harshness said:

You would be thinking wrong when it comes to goods that are sold by weight (meat, produce, nails). Those items typically go on the scale wrapped without an associated tare. The weight only excludes the sticker because it hasn't been printed yet.

Click to expand...

Thats ridiculous ....

Thats not how Deli does it, I know your talking pre packaged.
They need to CHANGE that.

Jimbo said:

Thats not how Deli does it, I know your talking pre packaged.

Click to expand...

Perhaps only for sliced meat and cheese. Salads and similarly "shifty" or "drippy" items are typically weighed in deli cartons of some sort.

My monster burritos (up to two lbs.) are weighed in their foil jackets or paper mache take-out trays, and the jacket/tray is then "sealed" with the printed label as it comes off the printer.

Precision has to give way to practicality in situations like that.

Jimbo said:

Now check and see if any of them (probably a few) are actual Ice Cream ...

Most Ice Creams are Not actual Ice Cream.
Bryers for example, call Most of thiers "Frozen Dairy Dessert"

Click to expand...

I only buy Tillamook and Alden's ice cream. The first ingredients are milk and cream.

harshness said:

Perhaps only for sliced meat and cheese. Salads and similarly "shifty" or "drippy" items are typically weighed in deli cartons of some sort.

My monster burritos (up to two lbs.) are weighed in their foil jackets or paper mache take-out trays, and the jacket/tray is then "sealed" with the printed label as it comes off the printer.

Precision has to give way to practicality in situations like that.

Click to expand...

What ever I get out of the Deli is put into a container when I ask them for it, they weight the container and then add the deli product, thats the way its suppose to be, if the rest of the world is screwing you, you should try the place down the street.

TRG said:

I only buy Tillamook and Alden's ice cream. The first ingredients are milk and cream.

Click to expand...

$7.50 a 1/2 gallon, thats worse than Bryers price wise.

Jimbo said:

$7.50 a 1/2 gallon, thats worse than Bryers price wise.

Click to expand...

I'll give that a try next time, if I can find some in the right sugar areas.

Jimbo said:

What ever I get out of the Deli is put into a container when I ask them for it, they weight the container and then add the deli product, thats the way its suppose to be, if the rest of the world is screwing you, you should try the place down the street.

Click to expand...

They are probably cheating you by swapping store brand product for name brand...those store deli's are very sketchy

$5.69 for the 48oz of Rocky Road at my Walmart.

Jimbo said:

I'll give that a try next time, if I can find some in the right sugar areas.

Click to expand...

22g per serving.

Bobby said:

22g per serving.

Click to expand...

How much is a serving?

Juan said:

How much is a serving?

Click to expand...

2/3 of a cup, a large scoop.

I had a BUD in the 80's before the little small dishes started showing up. The signals were unsrambled and then I had to get a monthly code.

I forgot about the tv antenna rotator to change polarity…

reubenray said:

I had a BUD in the 80's before the little small dishes started showing up. The signals were unsrambled and then I had to get a monthly code.

Click to expand...

You mean you were pirating the VCII and entering "Wizard numbers" every month after key change? GI finally resorted to changing out the keys twice as often, then even more often, down to just hours, making it mostly untenable?

When i was a kid, i used to salivate envisioning me having a Cband dish. It wasn't until about 1995, I installed my first Cband dish, and i remember it took me about 2 weeks to get that dish aligned properly.. This was before internet, and i had to call and talk with people on the phone about advice on how to properly tune the dish. I can't remember the receiver, but it had a UHF remote. I had the satellite receiver in the living room, but i ported it to two TV's, one in the living room and one in the bedroom. It was so nice being able to control the receiver with the remote in the bedroom about 40 feet from the living room. I remember watching Rosanne feeds where it would air the entire week in succession. Nice nostalgia.

iBoston said:

I remember watching Rosanne feeds

Click to expand...

I'd wipe THAT memory ASAP!

navychop said:

I'd wipe THAT memory ASAP!

Click to expand...

Why?

Any NDA you have signed before is still valid for the testing you have been and hopefully still are doing. The new NDA forms are ror new CE testers and new categories of CE testing. They have been placed here so that people who volunteer for any CE testing have access to them.

Tom Speer said:

Any NDA you have signed before is still valid for the testing you have been and hopefull still are doing. The new NDA forms are ror new CE testers and new categories of CE testing. They have been placed here so that people who volunteer for any CE testing have access to them.

Click to expand...

I'm still doing the testing.

660 CAVLIERS, 668 TWOLVES and 680 SPURS are now available

WPLG Miami is testing on the stream server again

KyL416 said:

660 CAVLIERS, 668 TWOLVES and 680 SPURS are now available

Click to expand...

Still with Choice package? My stepdad says when the game started he got black screen and something to do with not the right package.
He had the Twins the last 2 years and I saw the Wild screen on 668-1 when I was there a few weeks ago.

There were some technical issues during the pregame, where 668 was showing the Pacers feed instead of the Timberwolves feed until a few minutes before the game.

On the stream API it looks like some areas need the Sports Pack, what's his zip code?

KyL416 said:

There were some technical issues during the pregame, where 668 was showing the Pacers feed instead of the Timberwolves feed until a few minutes before the game.

On the stream API it looks like some areas need the Sports Pack, what's his zip code?

Click to expand...

55379
It's Shakopee (suburb of Minneapolis and considered part of the Twin Cities). They have the satellite version, not streaming

The BLUES, BLUJCKTS, HURCANES and WILD channels are now active and no longer pointing to the TV Promise slate