Slashdot Log In
Watching Tonight's Presidential Debate Online
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:33 AM
from the play-the-drinking-game dept.
from the play-the-drinking-game dept.
farkinga writes "For those of us that no longer have a television, live TV events can be a challenge to watch. Fortunately, tonight's Presidential Debate has attracted the attention of most US broadcasters, many of whom will provide online viewing options. Leading the way is Hulu, a joint venture between NBC Universal and News Corp, who will stream the Fox-branded feed tonight — assuming they worked out the bandwidth issues that came up during the second debate!"
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Live? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm more interested in a recorded version, since I'll be busy during the actual debate... :/
Re:Live? (Score:5, Informative)
Take a look at eztv.it: http://eztv.it/index.php?main=search [eztv.it] - you can usually find debates available for download after the fact; either same day or at the most, the next day.
Parent
Re:Live? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Live? (Score:5, Informative)
C-SPAN posts the complete debate videos on their YouTube account [youtube.com]. If you ever miss a debate, check there first.
Parent
I prefer C-SPAN for live, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't have "analysts" telling me what my reaction is.
C-SPAN [cspan.org]
Parent
Re:I prefer C-SPAN for live, too. (Score:5, Funny)
Then how are you going to know who to vote for? I mean I've seen plenty of sitcoms that I didn't know were funny until I heard the laughtrack. Which kinda leads me to think WTF.
smile
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I prefer C-SPAN for live, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
I am sure there are people weak minded enough to have their views changed by what these people say, so I would kind of like to know what they are saying.
I once heard someone in advertising say that some of the easiest people to manipulate are the ones who are convinced that they're too smart (or whatever) to be manipulated.
Parent
Re:Live? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Linux? No CNN. (Score:5, Informative)
I tried during the last debate to watch it on CNN.com/live but it appeared their video player didn't allow Ubuntu/Firefox to connect. After further research, they use some vbscript in their code. I'll definitely watch it, just not with CNN.
Re:Linux? No CNN. (Score:4, Interesting)
Barack Obama supports Linux. I did some freelance work for his North Carolina campaign headquarters, settting up a gentoo box for use as their intranet server. I met BO and talked about linux and modernizing the Federal Government, access to information, etc. He'll probably be a very linux-friendly administration. It may not be year of the linux desktop yet, but it will be year of the linux whitehouse.
Parent
Re:Linux? No CNN. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Linux? No CNN. (Score:5, Insightful)
You do understand that the chance of the president getting involved in the choice of what operating system to use in the white house is about as likely as the CEO of IBM getting involved in the choice of what brand of toilet paper to use in their office in Bangalore, don't you?
Parent
how to get CNN live on linux (Score:5, Informative)
You can get it to work: just use VLC media player
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ [videolan.org]
and open the video stream:
File->Open Network Stream
check HTTP/HTTPS/FTP/MSS and put in the url http://www.cnn.com/video/live/cnnlive_1.asx [cnn.com]
then watch and try not to vomit!
Parent
Much easier at 1.5X speed (Score:5, Interesting)
I have TV. I still set my MythTV to record it, and started watching about an hour in.
Why ? So I could use time-stretch to watch it at 1.5X speed. They take forever to say the simplest thing.
Time stretch is amazing. Get done in less time, without everyone sounding like chipmunks.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How does time stretch work? (Yes I googled it, all I get is a bunch of how-to about installing myth-tv.)
BTW, /., logging in the new way sucks, change it back to the old way that has been changed for a while now without reason? Used to be able to log-in WHILE making a comment. Now, follow the log-in link, log-in, take you to the front page rather than the comment you were going to reply to. Why make it more of a hassle and less convenient than it used to be?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm guessing it also does a frequency shift on the audio so it's the same pitch at a different speed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have TV. I still set my MythTV to record it, and started watching about an hour in.
Why ? So I could use time-stretch to watch it at 1.5X speed. They take forever to say the simplest thing.
Time stretch is amazing. Get done in less time, without everyone sounding like chipmunks.
My MythTV box died a while ago and that time-stretch feature is by far the number one thing that I miss. I am going to replace my MythTV box just for that. I'm not aware of any other DVR that does that. It's an awesome little feature. The debates would have been so much more interesting in time-stretch.
Multicast (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, but he'd have to start the client at 8:00 anyway. Assuming the feed doesn't exist until then, he wouldn't be able to set it up beforehand either.
I don't know anyone who doesn't own a TV!! (Score:3, Interesting)
I for one have a High Definition TV receiver plugin for my laptop and it coincidentally can also record and time shift. So I can comfortably place it aside and let it record the thing for me to watch later when I have the time and its in high definition to boot. Online viewing right now just plain sucks.
My challenge (Score:3, Interesting)
My challenge with anything video online is my ISP's bandwidth caps. I am capped at 60GB per month combined download and upload. Streaming video can add up fast! My issues with Firefox only showing a black box for CNN's streaming video was solved. I do not know who solved it...CNN or Firefox folks. But it's good news nonetheless.
I will probably be on the road while the debate is going on...but have Mythbuntu programmed to record the show, including all the pundits' takes after the debate.
The trouble is, MythBuntu creates huge files (2.2 GB for just 1 hr), making disk space run fast. I just wish my man success. Can you guess who it is?
No Hulu for me (Score:4, Informative)
I'm an American living abroad and Hulu has region restrictions, so it doesn't work for me. Bastards.
OGG or other? (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone ballsy enough to stream using a more widely available, non-Flash codec?
Yes (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, I am. Just hook me up with a few dozen OC-192 connections at each of the largest 100 cities in the country, and set me up with 1000 computers at each site, and I'll stream it in OGG Theora format. Oh, and I'll also need a satellite dish and receiver tuned to the C-SPAN channel.
Re:OGG or other? (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone ballsy enough to stream using a more widely available, non-Flash codec?
Are you actually arguing that OGG is more widely available to the viewing public than Flash, Real, or WMV?
It's not about "balls." It's about installed base and the marginal utility of supporting OGG compared to formats installed already on most people's machines. I'd love to see an OGG stream of the debates, but I wouldn't claim that it's "more widely available" in an attempt to suggest that people aren't supporting it for illogical reasons.
Parent
BBC (Score:4, Informative)
Try Streaming Bittorrent (Score:3, Interesting)
Or you could... (Score:3, Informative)
Hulu = nogo (Score:3)
I can't think of a better use for streaming the presidential debates online than enabling all us expats who can't see it live on our local stations. Which is why I found it really annoying when I logged on to Hulu for debate #2 that I got a big fat denial message stating they can only serve content to people in the US. Thankfully, the BBC had it live and uninterrupted.
Re:podcasts? audio? mp3's ? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Awesome, I spotted the links I wanted @ the bottom, I didn't see that the first few times I searched.
thanks again!
Re:Overdrive (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking as a non USian, living outside the US, I have to say that the American presidential election is all over the news feeds here as well.
There are two reasons for this. Firstly, newsfeeds and syndication. Whatever the American media decides to talk about, the entire anglosphere usually ends up talking about as well. If there's a bus crash or school shooting in the middle of nowhere in, say, Nebraska, its gets on the Irish, and usually English, national 9 o'clock news. This is a symptom of an increasingly monopolised and centralised media in the western world.
Secondly, the US presidential elections are actually very important. I see Slashdotters posting comments to the effect that both parties are equally bad and it doesn't matter which way you vote and excuses, excuses, excuses. I can tell you from the point of view of someone who is very much affected by the results of your national elections, this is a pretty depressing thing to hear. It's clear to anyone who has half a clue that there are very wide and deep differences between the two main candidates, and it's quite irritating to find out just how flippantly many Americans go about voting, or not voting, for their president.
Your election affects me. It affects people around me. My nation's economy, policies, laws, and culture, yes culture, are significantly affected by your selection of a president, through his administration's policies. When the choices made by religious southern fundamentalists end up slowly eroding my way of life because people who should have known better were too apathetic to vote, I get a little irritated. So in my view the more coverage this election gets, the better.
So in short, I would rather these stories on the Slashdot front page rather than have this site ignore or only pay lip service to the issue. This is "Stuff That Matters" to me.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Second, This being Slashdot you are going to get a lot of libertarian views, mostly siding with democratic policies.
Third, The presidential seat is merely a face that the world gets to see and blame. The real direction of the country come from the cabinet, the house, and unfortunately, the bench as of late.
for instance, the current economic crisis effecting you wasnt due to a president, (that didnt help the situation), it was a whole slew of issues from Dem
Re:Overdrive (Score:4, Funny)
Speaking as an American, I think it's about time we open up the vote to foreigners. They seem much more interested and informed that most of us'll ever be.
Remember, kids, Apathy is the American way!
1. Systematically abuse, neglect, and exploit the RoW.
2. Watch TV.
3. Wait for a RoW counterattack.
4. Find defenseless country with unfamiliar culture to scapegoat.
5. SIC 'EM!
6. Repeat steps 1-6.
7. Wait for foreign powers and media to analyze our politics and explain to us what's really going on.
8. Ignore them. Watch more TV.
9. Repeat steps 1-8.
10. Wait for foreign populations to lambast, curse, yell, scream, and panic at our politics.
11. Read about it online. Think "Oh, what a horrible country they're talking about! Good thing America's not like that!"
12. Repeat steps 1-11. Pray hard for step 13 and vote for leaders that will pray with you.
13. Profit!
14. Buy a larger HDTV.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Man I just posted this in another thread, but it fits here too.
Lets look at some policies. Iraq war, pretty much the same. We'll take the troops out of Iraq when the conditions on the ground allow it, and put them in Afghanistan. Domestic wiretapping? Obama voted for the Bush plan. Economic bailout? Both of them voted for it.
I don't see either of them talking about fundamental change in the way our system works. I don't see either of them talking about cracking down on corporate crime. I don't see either of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"American" means "of the Americas". Anybody living on the continents of North or South America could rightly call themselves "American".
"USian" is probably not the best term to use, but it's a damn sight more accurate than "American".
In my country (Uruguay), we regularly do refer to ourselves as "Americanos" (American in Spanish).
:)
When somebody calls himself an "American" in English we understand what they mean, but in Spanish we call them "Estadounidenses" - which should be translated to USian
and even then it could be a bit of a misnomer (Brazil for example is United States of Brazil, etc...)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They're 90% the same, as said before.
Foreign policy: both parties support the War in Iraq, and foreign interventionism in general. Both parties support an oversized military, based in hundreds of bases around the world, rather than concentrating on protecting our borders. Neither party believes in not being the global policeman.
Business regulation: both parties support deregulation of the financial markets, leading to our current mess. The Graham act which overturned Glass-Steagal was passed in 1999, and
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Foreign policy: both parties support the War in Iraq
Correction: Elements of both parties support the War in Iraq but you'll find far more people who oppose it on the Democratic side of the aisle (including the nominee for President) than you will on the Republican side (Ron Paul and who else?)
and foreign interventionism in general. Both parties support an oversized military, based in hundreds of bases around the world, rather than concentrating on protecting our borders. Neither party believes in not being the global policeman.
Americans as a whole have supported foreign interventionism since WW2. You can argue about whether or not that's in our best interests but the results of our last flirtation with isolationism weren't very encouraging.
Wall Street Bailout: both parties supported this, the Democrats slightly more than the Republicans, though the plan was concocted and pushed by Bush and Paulsen, Republicans. The Democrats, under Pelosi, were instrumental in getting this passed.
I don't view it as a 'bailout' -- I view it was a re
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Correction: Elements of both parties support the War in Iraq but you'll find far more people who oppose it on the Democratic side of the aisle (including the nominee for President) than you will on the Republican side (Ron Paul and who else?)
While it's true that there's always people in both parties who are exceptions to the rule (on any issue), generalizing is worthwhile. So, generally, the Democrats support the war, as when they grabbed power in '06, they did absolutely nothing to pull out. There might
Re:Overdrive (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a 46 year-old American citizen. My ancestors came over from Europe 400 years ago. I have been actively interested/involved in politics since I watched Bobby Kennedy get shot on TV when I was 6. I can honestly tell you that there is very little difference between the two candidates other than the color of their skin and their age. The Democratic and Republican parties have become one and the same. If our media, which dominates your airwaves would cover the "other" parties' candidates you would see the lack of difference between the two leading candidates.
Do you honestly believe that the world would be exactly the same as it is now, if Al Gore had won in 2000?
Parent
Re:Overdrive (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Overdrive (Score:5, Interesting)
Mickey increases the number of registered voters without increasing the number of actual voters. This provides an opportunity for disguising vote fraud by adding votes at the end of the night, but staying under the registered total.
It's not separate from the black box machine, it's complementary to it.
Parent
Perhaps, but ACORN is following the law. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, we're still missing some of the ACORN story. For one thing, the problem is because they pay people per registration. So some people like to add a bunch of phony registrations to get paid more.
ACORN knows this, so they look for it and fire those people. They also separate the probably fraudulent registrations. But they are required by law to give ALL of the registrations to the elections officials, so they also include a note saying, "These are probably fraudulent, please check. And here are the details of the guy who came up with these probably fraudulent registrations so you can prosecute them."
They've done this for a long time now. Remember that scandal over the illegal firing of US Attorneys? That was because they refused to prosecute ACORN for this years ago because they did not believe that they were doing anything illegal. But Bush's people fired all the people who said it was legal and stacked the deck with hardcore Republicans. So now they're prosecuting.
Even though ACORN is being defrauded by bad workers. Even though ACORN is obeying the law. Even though ACORN verifies the registrations and separates the bad ones in spite of having no legal obligation to do so.
This is just politically motivated nonsense. Yes, there will probably be convictions, but they'll be of people ACORN turned in and recommended for prosecution.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
ACORN is bothering to check. The problem is that once someone hands in a bogus registration form to them, they are legally obliged to hand it in. What they do, which is absolutely the right thing to do, is mark it as likely problematic.
A couple of good links on the subject: This explains [talkingpointsmemo.com] what's going on in detail, in terms of ACORN's responsibilities. And this [slashdot.org] is a memo from ACORN that explains their side in detail. The bottom line is that ACORN has absolutely no incentive to hand in bogus registrations.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I only "have" TV because my roommate has TV (because of his addiction to "Deal Or No Deal"). It's generally not worth having because it's content controlled by big corporations, not real people.
Re:What is this Russia? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why drive out and cast a meaningless vote when the swing voters have decided for me?
Guess what? When you're trying to influence an election where the person with the majority of votes is the winner, removing one vote from the vote pool has the effect of giving the other votes more sway. You are literally giving the ignorant voters more say over the course of this nation because you don't want to 'reward' the candidate with your vote. Instead you'd rather reward the candidate by making other votes count more. If you're really pissed off, vote third-party. Will they win? Hell no. But,
Re: (Score:3, Funny)