Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Still more entertaining than cricket.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                     

Democratic Remote

For multiple users and a single TV
  (+3)
(+3)
  [vote for,
against]

Ever had siblings or significant others squabble over the remote?

This is a bundled set of 2+ remotes. they have a built in chain of command. meaning the highest seniority remote can override channels and volumes of lower remotes, but not in reverse. Similar to the window lock button most cars with electric windows have.

Therefore no one ever has to pass the remote, but if the high level user leaves or isn't paying attention, the other siblings or significant other can still change channels.

It could also be used as a child-lock function blocking access to channels considered indecent to the remote holding masses.

metarinka, May 06 2010

[link]






       OMG! I know! My significant others squabble over the remote all the time. The only thing that shuts them up is when I threaten to have another one of their Eunuchs disemboweled.   

       But I don't get how this would actually work. How does the highest-priority remote know whether or not its user agrees with an action that a lower-priority remote initiates?
jutta, May 06 2010
  

       This idea is implicitly a model of government. Problem is, it models an outdated form of government, with an absolute monarch at the top. That's just *so* 18th century. We've developed better (well, OK, more complex) systems since then.   

       How about a parlimentary system which shows the channel selected by the plurality of remotes? Or a fractional representation system which overlays multiple channels, with the brightness of each controlled by the number of remotes selecting it? Or the prewar Polish system, where any individual remote can turn off the TV?   

       Edit: This was written before the title change.
mouseposture, May 06 2010
  

       are you suggesting a socialist remote mouseposture? where each remote controls according to it's ability and watches according to it's needs? I don't think america is ready for a socialist tv experience.   

       This could work on a simple voting system, remote a selects chanel x, on the tv it asks the other remote holders if they agree with channel choice, if majority is reached channel changes, if no one votes then there was no disagreement and channel changes after a set time (10-20 seconds)   

       the chief remote would have veto power over lower decisions or the ability to "call a recess" on the remote parliment for say 30 minutes so that no one could initiate a channel change for the duration of your favourite show.   

       There would also be a vote of no confidence button if the remote in chief was missing and everyone wanted to change the channel.
metarinka, May 10 2010
  

       //I don't think america is ready for a socialist tv experience//
Which is why we need a disciplined cadre of revolutionaries to lead the way. Once we're in power, the workers and peasants will fall into line. If not immediatley, then I'm sure they'll catch on when they see the trainloads of bourgeois and kulaks headed for reeducation camps in North Dakota*
  

       *or New Jersy. We haven't decided yet.
mouseposture, May 11 2010
  

       will the reducation camps feature television programming? and if so, how would one change the channel?   

       I for one am hoping for a channel change I can believe in.
metarinka, May 11 2010
  

       But if, say, the Shopping Channel decided to form a minority Government with the support of the Extreme Wrestling channel, what would that look like? And would it matter that the channel that had got the most votes was the Pretentious Arts channel?
hippo, May 11 2010
  

       It wouldn’t — beforehand, people would say they’d vote for it, but when it comes down to actually pressing the button, they’d change their minds at the last minute and vote for one or the other of the dominant channels.
Ian Tindale, May 11 2010
  

       And in the event of there being no outright winner of the vote, would you find your television viewing experience being supplied by the Civil Service for a few days while everything sorts itself out?

(hey! why is Ian the only one to get to use em dashes and real quotes?)
hippo, May 11 2010
  

       (because I’m so used to using the appropriate “keypresses” to get them — on my MacBook™ keyboard, that it’s almost second nature.)
Ian Tindale, May 11 2010
  

       Talking of democracy, if the Labour party had thought of replacing Gordon Brown with Ed Balls, before all this nonsense going on right now, it’d be an inevitability that they’d have easily won. I mean, who could resist?
Ian Tindale, May 11 2010
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle