old black module board for c band receiver

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Maybe it will end like Casablanca. 'This is the start of a
beautiful friendship".


On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:18:43 GMT, "wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I'm still shocked, shocked that there's gambling going on here...I have no
>idea what everyone is talking about, 00 sounds like something from star
>wars, but the next POST will be by Prince Charles who will clarify a real
>screw up.
>"wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
>> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix for
>> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
>>
>>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:18:43 GMT, "wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I'm still shocked, shocked that there's gambling going on here...I have no
>idea what everyone is talking about, 00 sounds like something from star
>wars, but the next POST will be by Prince Charles who will clarify a real
>screw up.

OO is where people discuss hidden feeds. NOT pirating encrypted
signals.

The real srewups are those that don't get that a chipped board is
nothing but theft.

>"wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
>> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix for
>> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
>>
>>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

None of the channels up there are intended for our use, with the possible exception of
a few audio subcarriers. We are parasites. We may be able to subscribe to a few of
them, but we are not the reason those channels are on C-Band.

There is a huge difference between stealing channels and receiving unencrypted
channels. I see no parallel at all between what Valvidar does and defeating
encryption.




"irwell" <hook@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:nqlm311edli2s7hpildkd2isjunq7po5q0@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 21:48:32 GMT, "DRLev" <fake@ddress.tv> wrote:
|
| >==
| >You still did not address the question that there are channels
| >the 4dtv will receive via overlay that others have to pay a
| >subscription fee to receive.
| >===
| >
| >I thought that I did. What do you mean by others?.
| The LSD people for some of them.
| >
| >The reason that your remarks struck a nerve is that I am one of the moderators of
that
| >forum.
| IR>>I know that.
|
| DRL>n you claim that OO is used for discussion of signal piracy you also are
| >saying that I am housing a den of thieves.
|
| Not a den of thieves but people like Valdivar who moralise about
| someone using a chipped board, but he takes advantage of the
| information on the OO forum to receive signals not intended for
| his use. I do the same but also know the rules of the game.
|
| >
| >That forum was created by a person that (at the time) was a manager in the 4DTV
| >section of GI. Some GI/Mot employees also still have access to that area.
Discussion
| >of signal theft absolutely is not tolerated there.
| >
| >There is a big difference between the uplinkers knowing that signals are received
and
| >violation of encryption. If a few uplinkers for some reason are naive enough not to
| >encrypt their signals then good for us. Reception of unencrypted signals is legal,
| >.... it is not theft. It would be foolish to tell them we can receive their
channels.
| >
| Ah! The nuances of the English language. Anyway good luck and
| thanks for the trojan work you have done for us all over the years.
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Thank you Sir. The first intelligent thing said in the last 3 days , so lets
move on and slay the dragon together.( I forgot who the dragon was..
"irwell" <hook@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:i9mm315l74gaptm7hj83poutdq6oaocfss@4ax.com...
> Maybe it will end like Casablanca. 'This is the start of a
> beautiful friendship".
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:18:43 GMT, "wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm still shocked, shocked that there's gambling going on here...I have
no
> >idea what everyone is talking about, 00 sounds like something from star
> >wars, but the next POST will be by Prince Charles who will clarify a real
> >screw up.
> >"wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
> >> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix
for
> >> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
> >>
> >>
> >
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:25:39 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>wrote:

>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
> Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>information should not be accessed?

Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
the broadcsters find out.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:15:56 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:25:39 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>
>>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>> Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>>information should not be accessed?
>
>Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
>the broadcsters find out.

So the trusted circle is like a gang of schoolkids
that find a malfunctioning vending machines that
dispenses soda pop for a quarter instead of a buck.
Keep it under your hat guys, in case someone lets
the machine owner know and he fixes the machine.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:24:58 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:05:30 GMT, "DRLev" <fake@ddress.tv> wrote:
>
>>Do you want to answer my question?
>>
>>It has been asked twice and you still have not answered it.
>>
>If Valdivar, or anyone else uses the overlay function of
>the 4dtv to receive programming that is decoded by the
>4dtv, but other users have to pay a subscription fee to
>watch, what do you call it?
>Gary says the function of the OO's section is to ensure
>the information does'nt get into the wrong hands.
>What are the wrong hands if it is a legitimate use
>of the signal?



Leave the hypocrites alone.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:41:57 -0500, Gary J Tait
<classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:41:20 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Not a den of thieves but people like Valdivar who moralise about
>>someone using a chipped board, but he takes advantage of the
>>information on the OO forum to receive signals not intended for
>>his use. I do the same but also know the rules of the gam
>
>That is beside the point. The fact is no security is being broken in
>the access of those channels, unlike when someone uses a chipped black
>board, modified FTA receiver, AVR card or whatever.


Yeah yeah yeah, we all like insecure transmissions. It is just some of
us are not afraid to admit it.


Hahah, Mr 3000 was funny BTW.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait
<classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:13:05 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:02:24 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:07:16 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You are kidding. right?
>>>>Why do they call it OO?
>>>
>>>To keep that data in a trusted circle, so it doesn't get in the wrong
>>>hands. It is not stealing, becasue of the authorisation status of the
>>>channels are such the receiver can get them. Defeating security is
>>>forbidden on that forum.
>>>
>>As Shakespeare wrote 'That which we call a rose by any other
>>name would smell just as sweet'
>
>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.


You are violating the broadcasters rights. If they wanted you to see
it, it would be in the EPG. Buy a 4200 if you want unmapped DCII!!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

In order to access the Owner's Only forum in the sat forums ,one has to
supply their unit ID in order to "prove" that they are a legitimate 4DTV
owner.

That certain information about unencrypted services is kept to that group,is
not because we are sneeky thieves,but as Gary Tait said some people can't be
trusted with a little information about "free" channels,etc.That's why it is
not good to discuss fta feeds to openly and never a good idea to contact the
channel -because it's not there for us and they can soon encrypt it.Call it
fear and gree,but there it is.

I do not,nor have I ever discussed piracy in the satforums!DRLEV and other
moderators keep a close watch for it!I've seen some people told off.

My background is in computers.I could've pirated DTV,Dishnet and all the
others anytime!I have "friends" too.Certain FTA receivers can be "doctored"
to steal programming,but I refuse to do it!Instead,I prefer to pay for my
programming,like it not going off half way thru the movie,sports
event,etc!Besides,C band has choice and there is plenty of fta out there for
the ultra stingy!

Chipped Back VC2 boards that get "all" the video...now that IS stealing.

Why do you think a lot of C band channels went encrypted in the first
place -big mouths!

"Gary J Tait" <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kr0n31tbis0q60g2op10bnvd7fl6m2vt0d@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:18:43 GMT, "wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm still shocked, shocked that there's gambling going on here...I have no
>>idea what everyone is talking about, 00 sounds like something from star
>>wars, but the next POST will be by Prince Charles who will clarify a real
>>screw up.
>
> OO is where people discuss hidden feeds. NOT pirating encrypted
> signals.
>
> The real srewups are those that don't get that a chipped board is
> nothing but theft.
>
>>"wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
>>> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix
>>> for
>>> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Why do you want to be left alone?


"kryppy" <kryppy@gmail.cc> wrote in message
news0jo31526fgui73ictvb7pelqp2h6v7bd4@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:24:58 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
|
| >On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:05:30 GMT, "DRLev" <fake@ddress.tv> wrote:
| >
| >>Do you want to answer my question?
| >>
| >>It has been asked twice and you still have not answered it.
| >>
| >If Valdivar, or anyone else uses the overlay function of
| >the 4dtv to receive programming that is decoded by the
| >4dtv, but other users have to pay a subscription fee to
| >watch, what do you call it?
| >Gary says the function of the OO's section is to ensure
| >the information does'nt get into the wrong hands.
| >What are the wrong hands if it is a legitimate use
| >of the signal?
|
|
|
| Leave the hypocrites alone.
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:02:18 -0500, kryppy <kryppy@gmail.cc> wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:41:57 -0500, Gary J Tait
><classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:41:20 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Not a den of thieves but people like Valdivar who moralise about
>>>someone using a chipped board, but he takes advantage of the
>>>information on the OO forum to receive signals not intended for
>>>his use. I do the same but also know the rules of the gam
>>
>>That is beside the point. The fact is no security is being broken in
>>the access of those channels, unlike when someone uses a chipped black
>>board, modified FTA receiver, AVR card or whatever.
>
>
>Yeah yeah yeah, we all like insecure transmissions. It is just some of
>us are not afraid to admit it.
>

They aren't insecure, they chose not, or haven't bothered to put their
feed into a closed/subscription mode.

Unilke say Dishnetwork, whom specificlly are transmitting in a closed
subscription mode.

>
>Hahah, Mr 3000 was funny BTW.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:06:08 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:

>So the trusted circle is like a gang of schoolkids
>that find a malfunctioning vending machines that
>dispenses soda pop for a quarter instead of a buck.
>Keep it under your hat guys, in case someone lets
>the machine owner know and he fixes the machine.

More like the kids that find a whole in the fence of a ballpark or
drive-in theatre. But not quite, since nothing is really getting
stolen.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:04:12 -0500, kryppy <kryppy@gmail.cc> wrote:

>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>
>
>You are violating the broadcasters rights. If they wanted you to see
>it, it would be in the EPG. Buy a 4200 if you want unmapped DCII!!
>

No, if they want to genuinely protect their rights, they can choose to
by properly configuring the uplink gear to transmit in closed od sub
mode. AS long as they chose not to, it is within out rights to view
those tharnsmissions.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Well what goes around comes around!
To my absolute shock, I stumbled on a web site where a contributor to this
topic, and very vocal on honesty, stealing and convicting etc. asking for a
HACK.
I realize by not naming the person it leaves a cloud over all of us. On the
other hand we know where we have posted in the last 2 days.
I'm not here to cause hate and discontent to BUD owners as I have received
information and real help over the years. Who 'am I to say if he ever got
the HACK or if he did use it. I didn't save the POST as it would serve no
purpose.We all have more important things to do, I hope so. Bye

m> wrote in message news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix for
> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Well,based on the character and previous posts of some individuals in this
newsgroup,we know who it wasn't!


"wolf2" <wilfj@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RM4%d.731808$6l.286513@pd7tw2no...
> Well what goes around comes around!
> To my absolute shock, I stumbled on a web site where a contributor to this
> topic, and very vocal on honesty, stealing and convicting etc. asking for
> a
> HACK.
> I realize by not naming the person it leaves a cloud over all of us. On
> the
> other hand we know where we have posted in the last 2 days.
> I'm not here to cause hate and discontent to BUD owners as I have received
> information and real help over the years. Who 'am I to say if he ever got
> the HACK or if he did use it. I didn't save the POST as it would serve
> no
> purpose.We all have more important things to do, I hope so. Bye
>
> m> wrote in message news:1TsZd.681191$Xk.499704@pd7tw3no...
>> I can get all the video but no audio. Someone said there was/is a fix for
>> the audio, can anyone comment. Thanks
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

Gary J Tait wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:25:39 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>
>
>>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>>
>>Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>>information should not be accessed?
>
>
> Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
> the broadcsters find out.

Broadcaster / Cable Tv were the reason For The Scrambling.. Not The
individual Viewer !
They Were downlinking the FREE Services,( HBO, Showtime, Cnn,) And Then
Selling ( Charging for) Them For a Profit..

>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:19:39 -0500, no one <noone@lost.cat> wrote:

>
>
>Gary J Tait wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:25:39 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>>>
>>>Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>>>information should not be accessed?
>>
>>
>> Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
>> the broadcsters find out.
>
>Broadcaster / Cable Tv were the reason For The Scrambling.. Not The
>individual Viewer !
>They Were downlinking the FREE Services,( HBO, Showtime, Cnn,) And Then
>Selling ( Charging for) Them For a Profit..
>
>>

In the original days of cable/satellite, yes, a good part of the
reasoning behind scrambling was to keep unscrupulous cable TV
operators from " stealing" the channels.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

and then there's the bar owners who were picking up "free" out of region and
often blacked out sports events -and other programming.

"Gary J Tait" <classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6k8s31p4q4k8l09ankne44bgkip0n4jrqh@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:19:39 -0500, no one <noone@lost.cat> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Gary J Tait wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 19:25:39 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:38:53 -0500, Gary J Tait
>>>><classicsat@nospam_yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>>>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>>>>
>>>>Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>>>>information should not be accessed?
>>>
>>>
>>> Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
>>> the broadcsters find out.
>>
>>Broadcaster / Cable Tv were the reason For The Scrambling.. Not The
>>individual Viewer !
>>They Were downlinking the FREE Services,( HBO, Showtime, Cnn,) And Then
>>Selling ( Charging for) Them For a Profit..
>>
>>>
>
> In the original days of cable/satellite, yes, a good part of the
> reasoning behind scrambling was to keep unscrupulous cable TV
> operators from " stealing" the channels.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.satellite.4dtv (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:06:08 -0800, irwell <hook@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>>It isn't defeating the security, it is fooling the receiver to tune
>>>>channels that aren't mapped, whose authorisation status is open.
>>> Fair enough. But who are the 'wrong hands' that this
>>>information should not be accessed?
>>
>>Some dolt that blabs the location and status of those channels, and
>>the broadcsters find out.
>

>So the trusted circle is like a gang of schoolkids
>that find a malfunctioning vending machines that
>dispenses soda pop for a quarter instead of a buck.
>Keep it under your hat guys, in case someone lets
>the machine owner know and he fixes the machine.



I love my new servers!! I was missing so many messages!!!!!

Classic!!!!