On 15/03/2017 15:39, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article om,
dennis@home wrote:
On 15/03/2017 14:53, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
No. The entertainment craft unions normally grab new technology and
sort out a deal afterwards.

And if they are like you and can't work out how to use the technology?

Have you *ever* worked in anything which could even remotely be called
industry?


Have you ever worked where they design and make technology?

You think they design and make technology in the average theatre?

If something like you've described - a method of using fixed mics mounted
some way off to cover a stage performance for that audience - came along,
it would first be demonstrated to interested parties. If it looked
promising it would go on to trials in the field. If those were successful
it would then be introduced.

Only an idiot like you would expect anyone to buy something untried and
untested because you *just know* it will work.


I think you are just arguing for nothing so I will be blunt..
the sound technicians wouldn't have a clue how to set it up and use it
and there is no need to reinvent the wheel as nobody is spying on stage
productions.
Mics fitted to performers have other uses too, its harder to mime when
they don't have a mic to hide their lips.

You do recall this is about spying and not stage performances?

Its already proven that the array mic technology works, why it is used
for some stuff and not others is nothing to do with spying.

Just accept that if the CIA/GCHQ wanted to hack your smart TV they could
and with your knowledge you wouldn't know.