I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

"texas slacker" wrote in message
...


I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?


HMmmmmm How they know how many receivers you have,
how about for you to think that they maybe watching you,
making whoopee on front of TV make sure that your TV don't
have hiding camera built in to it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:30:36 -0400, "Grumpy"
wrote:


"texas slacker" wrote in message
...


I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?



Signal encryption.

HMmmmmm How they know how many receivers you have,
how about for you to think that they maybe watching you,
making whoopee on front of TV make sure that your TV don't
have hiding camera built in to it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


My neighbor never looks anymore. They saw me naked.

I cured them of that!

Wanna see again?

"texas slacker" wrote in message
...


I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?


I'm pretty sure each receiver has a card with a unique address - sort of
like an ethernet card -
and that card enables the features you have paid for....
Therefore, each receiver has it's own decoder that is enabled by the sat
company.
Even if you buy a receiver, you still need the "card" to be turned on,
enabled, and authorized by the sat company.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:39:34 -0400, wrote:

They don't care how many you hook up but they will only authorize the
ones someone is paying for. There used to be ways to hack the card but
they got smarter, changing the codes all the time so it got so
cumbersome that I haven't heard of anyone doing it lately.

Rupert "bought" off the best hacker in the world for Direct TV. The
fellow was from Canada. It saved him from going to jail, so he
stopped giving out his hacks (under threat of penalty).

The cards in the receiver is matched to the EPROM on each receiver. He
taught Rupert (the company) how to issue commands and write to the
receiver chip, to avoid the hack. Each card is matched to the
receiver.

I only know from when I followed how people hack networks years ago.

Once stopped, stocks in Direct TV soared in price.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:17:11 -0700 (PDT), texas slacker
wrote:



I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

I have to connect mine to the system with their receivers.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:51:24 -0500, G. Morgan wrote:

texas slacker wrote:



I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

They don't. That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.

DISH doesn't. Mine has never phoned home. OTOH, my DirectTV is connected to
my router.

You can take the receiver anywhere, and as long as the antenna/LNBF is
peaked for the correct network it will work.

They have a special package for RV's, that expects the receiver to move
around.

I was thinking about taking one of the receivers from out other house and
install it here (during our prolonged move) but decided to go with DTV instead
of DISH. DISH ****ed me off. That's the great thing about capitalism.

They don't. *That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.

DISH doesn't. *Mine has never phoned home. *OTOH, my DirectTV is connected to
my router.


I WAS a happy dish subscriber, but dropped it when they got greedy.

I bought all my boxes, and installed them myself. I was a dealer at
one time, and even attended the echostar 6 launch as a VIP, signed the
launch banner and met charlie and jim. I had suggested they put up a
special channel and they did. I WAS a insider, or perhaps a dish
groupie......

but i dropped dish when they raised the extra receiver fees for 5
bucks each to 17 bucks.....

this began the multi year period of shrinkage or small growth.... that
increase all at once.....
THEY DESERVED TO LOSE ALL THEIR CUSTOMERS!

for the last few years direct tv has grown steadily but not dish....

I now have the comcast triple play with TIVOs.

dish DVRs are well know to be buggy, comcast and tivos have been rock
solid!

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:53:58 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote:



They don't. *That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.

DISH doesn't. *Mine has never phoned home. *OTOH, my DirectTV is connected to
my router.


I WAS a happy dish subscriber, but dropped it when they got greedy.

I bought all my boxes, and installed them myself. I was a dealer at
one time, and even attended the echostar 6 launch as a VIP, signed the
launch banner and met charlie and jim. I had suggested they put up a
special channel and they did. I WAS a insider, or perhaps a dish
groupie......

but i dropped dish when they raised the extra receiver fees for 5
bucks each to 17 bucks.....

this began the multi year period of shrinkage or small growth.... that
increase all at once.....
THEY DESERVED TO LOSE ALL THEIR CUSTOMERS!

for the last few years direct tv has grown steadily but not dish....

I now have the comcast triple play with TIVOs.

dish DVRs are well know to be buggy, comcast and tivos have been rock
solid!


The DISH DVR is certainly buggy. The Comcast DVR I had for a few months (an
apartment here) was just as buggy, though. So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:51:24 -0500, G. Morgan
wrote:

texas slacker wrote:



I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

They don't. That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.


My Directv doesn't call home ever and I don't pay the $5 extra. They
can of course check thru the satellite if my receiver is legit or not.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:15:29 -0400, "
wrote:




So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

Why is that?

After 30 years, I dumped our cable company. DTV offered more for
less. I could not get some of the HD stations I wanted from the cable
company I see no reason to go back to cable even though they have
caught up.

I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.
Not worth the hassle of changing email address.

"Oren" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:30:36 -0400, "Grumpy"
wrote:


"texas slacker" wrote in message
...


I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?



Signal encryption.

HMmmmmm How they know how many receivers you have,
how about for you to think that they maybe watching you,
making whoopee on front of TV make sure that your TV don't
have hiding camera built in to it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


My neighbor never looks anymore. They saw me naked.

I cured them of that!

Wanna see again?

Their you go

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:15:29 -0400, "
wrote:




So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

Why is that?

Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

After 30 years, I dumped our cable company. DTV offered more for
less. I could not get some of the HD stations I wanted from the cable
company I see no reason to go back to cable even though they have
caught up.

Maybe le$$, but certainly less.

I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

DSL sucks. All I can get in the AL house is 768K, which is in reality 300K,
on a good day. Here they sold me 6Mb, but it's really 2Mb. Terrible. I'd
gladly pay the extra $5 for real Internet service.

Not worth the hassle of changing email address.

I haven't changed email address for 15 years (still pay for the POTS ISP).

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:58:31 -0500, "Doug" wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:51:24 -0500, G. Morgan
wrote:

texas slacker wrote:



I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

They don't. That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.


My Directv doesn't call home ever and I don't pay the $5 extra. They
can of course check thru the satellite if my receiver is legit or not.

Not check, rather they send out authorization codes which the receiver
matches. The satellite link is only one-way.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:38:01 -0400, "
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:15:29 -0400, "
wrote:




So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

Why is that?

Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. Also I have 7 TVs. It
sucks to have to share channels.

After 30 years, I dumped our cable company. DTV offered more for
less. I could not get some of the HD stations I wanted from the cable
company I see no reason to go back to cable even though they have
caught up.

Maybe le$$, but certainly less.

I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

DSL sucks. All I can get in the AL house is 768K, which is in reality 300K,
on a good day. Here they sold me 6Mb, but it's really 2Mb. Terrible. I'd
gladly pay the extra $5 for real Internet service.

Not worth the hassle of changing email address.

I haven't changed email address for 15 years (still pay for the POTS ISP).

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:39:05 -0400, Metspitzer
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:38:01 -0400, "
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:15:29 -0400, "
wrote:




So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

Why is that?

Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. Also I have 7 TVs. It
sucks to have to share channels.

I don't have to share channels (I don't think) but each has to have its own
box ($6/mo).

On 7/11/2012 10:39 AM, Metspitzer wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:38:01 -0400, "
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:15:29 -0400, "
wrote:




So far the DirectTV DVR is a lot
better. OTOH, I'd much rather have cable. I'd switch in a minute.

Why is that?

Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. Also I have 7 TVs. It
sucks to have to share channels.


That was the card the cable companies played for a long time. "You don't
need equipment for each TV". They quietly dropped that when they started
removing analog converted stations and encrypted almost all of their
digital content.



After 30 years, I dumped our cable company. DTV offered more for
less. I could not get some of the HD stations I wanted from the cable
company I see no reason to go back to cable even though they have
caught up.

Maybe le$$, but certainly less.

I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

DSL sucks. All I can get in the AL house is 768K, which is in reality 300K,
on a good day. Here they sold me 6Mb, but it's really 2Mb. Terrible. I'd
gladly pay the extra $5 for real Internet service.

Not worth the hassle of changing email address.

I haven't changed email address for 15 years (still pay for the POTS ISP).

On 7/10/2012 4:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:30:36 -0400, "Grumpy"
wrote:


"texas slacker" wrote in message
...


I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?



Signal encryption.

HMmmmmm How they know how many receivers you have,
how about for you to think that they maybe watching you,
making whoopee on front of TV make sure that your TV don't
have hiding camera built in to it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


My neighbor never looks anymore. They saw me naked.

I cured them of that!

Wanna see again?


I just gouged out my mind's eye. ^_^

TDD

On 7/11/2012 12:58 AM, Doug wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:51:24 -0500, G. Morgan
wrote:

texas slacker wrote:



I have satallite TV and am charged monthly by the number of receivers
on line. I can readily buy the receivers and got to wondering how
does the satallite company know how many I have hooked up?

They don't. That is why they charge $5 extra if your box does not
"phone home" every month.


My Directv doesn't call home ever and I don't pay the $5 extra. They
can of course check thru the satellite if my receiver is legit or not.



They quietly back off on that because they realized lots of folks don't
have POTS lines anymore. After you hit a certain dollar value the
receiver will not let you choose paid programming.

There is nothing can can check remotely since satellite as used by DTV
is unidirectional.

On 7/10/2012 6:46 PM, G. Morgan wrote:
Oren wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:39:34 -0400, wrote:

They don't care how many you hook up but they will only authorize the
ones someone is paying for. There used to be ways to hack the card but
they got smarter, changing the codes all the time so it got so
cumbersome that I haven't heard of anyone doing it lately.

Rupert "bought" off the best hacker in the world for Direct TV. The
fellow was from Canada. It saved him from going to jail, so he
stopped giving out his hacks (under threat of penalty).

The cards in the receiver is matched to the EPROM on each receiver. He
taught Rupert (the company) how to issue commands and write to the
receiver chip, to avoid the hack. Each card is matched to the
receiver.

I only know from when I followed how people hack networks years ago.

Once stopped, stocks in Direct TV soared in price.

In their last update that fixed it for them (DTV) they left a message
for the hackers at the end of the ROM, it read "game over". Lol...

It appears Nagravision 3 (Charlie) is holding up its encryption. The
FTA community predicted a hack a long time ago, still no hack. The best
you can do now is IKS, which IMO is a great way to get busted. I'm not
sure how the 'plastic' guys are doing, that is outright theft so I never
got involved with that.

My experiment ended a long time ago. I had a DVB-S card and did
decoding on-the-fly with my PC. I really just wanted to see if it was
as easy as what I was reading, and for the most part it was pretty easy.
I learned a lot, then just scrapped the project. When I saw the Charlie
people were suing people, I decided I learned enough. It was never
about free TV for me, it was the ease of decoding the stream in real
time that was the interesting part. Watching local channels from
anywhere in the US was interesting too, they should offer that as a
service for ppl. that want to keep up with local news stations from
their hometown or whatever.


Most folks have no idea what "hacking" is all about. O_o

TDD

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:



Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

The Viacom channels? They'll be back but I don't miss them myself. One
reason I hesitated going to SAT was loss of signal. In two years, it has
been out for a brief time twice. I'm talking 10 minutes or less. Our
cable company would go out if the weatherman even predicted rain. In high
winds and two winters of snow, not a bit of loss.




I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

DSL sucks. All I can get in the AL house is 768K, which is in reality
300K,
on a good day. Here they sold me 6Mb, but it's really 2Mb. Terrible.
I'd
gladly pay the extra $5 for real Internet service.

I easily get 3MB but I'm probably closer tot he substation. Our cable
company would be faster, but the price was $20 more. Yes, I'd pay 5 bucks
for faster, but not $24. Flor $10 more, I can get slower service from
MetrocCast. They offer an Ultra package for $70 and depending on location,
speed can be ither 25 mb or 10 mb. Probably depends on local
infrastructure.

"Metspitzer" wrote in message

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. Also I have 7 TVs. It
sucks to have to share channels.

Depends on your cable company. I needed a box and their remote anyway for
even a basic service.

I'm not sure what you mean by sharing channels. All our work independent of
each other and each TV has a box. On two of them, I have an RF remote so
it does not have to be aimed. Nice feature in some locations.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:54:43 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:


"Metspitzer" wrote in message

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. Also I have 7 TVs. It
sucks to have to share channels.

Depends on your cable company. I needed a box and their remote anyway for
even a basic service.

I'm not sure what you mean by sharing channels. All our work independent of
each other and each TV has a box. On two of them, I have an RF remote so
it does not have to be aimed. Nice feature in some locations.


When Comcast went all digital here a couple years ago, I had to
connect a box to each TV. Doesn't matter if you have a "digital
ready" TV. You need a box for each TV if you want to select channels
for that TV. They give you 3 boxes gratis. After that you pay a
monthly fee for additional boxes. Maybe 10 bucks, can't remember.
I'm guessing "channel sharing" is splitting the signal from one box to
2 or more TV's. Difficult, since the TV location might not be local
to the box, which you need to change channels.
I might have the MIL move in here soon, so I'll have to pay for a 4th
box. Unless I give up one I'm using now. Might do that.

--
Vic

On Jul 11, 12:08*pm, Vic Smith
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:54:43 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:



"Metspitzer" wrote in message

One thing that annoys me about Satellite is you have to use converter
boxes. *I have more remote controls than I can keep up with. * My TV
goes from 2-999 and I keep it on channel 3. *Also I have 7 TVs. *It
sucks to have to share channels.

Depends on your cable company. *I needed a box and their remote anyway for
even a basic service.

I'm not sure what you mean by sharing channels. *All our work independent of
each other and each *TV has a box. *On two of them, I have an RF remote so
it does not have to be aimed. *Nice feature in some locations.

When Comcast went all digital here a couple years ago, I had to
connect a box to each TV. *Doesn't matter if you have a "digital
ready" TV. *You need a box for each TV if you want to select channels
for that TV. *They give you 3 boxes gratis. *After that you pay a
monthly fee for additional boxes. *Maybe 10 bucks, can't remember.
I'm guessing "channel sharing" is splitting the signal from one box to
2 or more TV's. *Difficult, since the TV location might not be local
to the box, which you need to change channels.
I might have the MIL move in here soon, so I'll have to pay for a 4th
box. *Unless I give up one I'm using now. *Might do that.

--
Vic

I think for a lot of people the issue of having a "converter box"
isn't a big one because today DVR's are available
and you can get one as part of a sat package. They add
so much to the TV that I can't imagine not having one. Hence,
most people are going to wind up with a "box" of some sort.

In my case, I have cable, but I've had a Tivo for 10+ years
now. It uses a cablecard, which costs me a few dollars
a month less than the cable company would charge for their
basic cable box without recorder. So, I'm saving about
$8 a month and the Tivo will pay for itself in about 4 years.
I use the Tivo remote to control both it and the TV.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:51:02 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:



Satellite TV sucks. Total signal loss every thunderstorm. Just lost 25
channels, but still paying for them. No Internet. Many reasons.

The Viacom channels? They'll be back but I don't miss them myself.

Yes. I watch TVLND sometimes.

One
reason I hesitated going to SAT was loss of signal. In two years, it has
been out for a brief time twice. I'm talking 10 minutes or less. Our
cable company would go out if the weatherman even predicted rain. In high
winds and two winters of snow, not a bit of loss.

Our DISH went out whenever there was a minor storm in the area. The only time
(only been here two months) DirectTV has gone out was last night when a fairly
severe T-cell was parked right over us.


I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

DSL sucks. All I can get in the AL house is 768K, which is in reality
300K,
on a good day. Here they sold me 6Mb, but it's really 2Mb. Terrible.
I'd
gladly pay the extra $5 for real Internet service.

I easily get 3MB but I'm probably closer tot he substation. Our cable
company would be faster, but the price was $20 more. Yes, I'd pay 5 bucks
for faster, but not $24. Flor $10 more, I can get slower service from
MetrocCast. They offer an Ultra package for $70 and depending on location,
speed can be ither 25 mb or 10 mb. Probably depends on local
infrastructure.

Cable Internet was actually $5 cheaper than DSL in my apartment, locally. 2MB
(even 3) is marginal. With DSL at the other house I might just as well use
dial up, though it would be more expensive.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 06:07:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I have DSL for internet but cable is faster and costs about double.

I had cable since 1995. I got tired of the nickel and dime stuff from
them. I just moved to CenturyLink, which is ASDL. The DVR/STB and
one other STB is free for life (no monthly fee). HD programming is
not compressed like with cable so you get true 1080p video. Packaged
the phone (w/bells and whistles at no extra cost). A free Cisco
router which includes WiFi for one PC and Cat5 for another.

Speed from cable was the low price end -- 3Mb. Now I average 8Mb at
no extra cost (up to 10Mb).

Then I get a $150 Am Ex gift card, no payment. until August which
saved a month of cable billing. Price is set for 5 years (?).

The video can be paused, rewound, recorded to DVR with devices turned
off once set (even remote over the Web). Media from the PC can be sent
to the TVs (have not tried this yet).

Happy so far. Still learning all the features....