Cable Forum - The future of television

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Other Digital TV Services Discussion (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=64)

- - The future of television (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33709854)

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36203813)

In a surprise move, Disney are said to be relaunching Disney Junior HD as a linear channel...

More details in the Coming Soon thread.

I'm genuinely surprised by that.

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by epsilon (Post 36197584)

You do talk a lot of nonsense. Freely has introduced parallel DVB services over IP. These services are generally in HD, even when the over-the-air versions are sometimes in SD due to lack of capacity on the legacy multiplexes.
If there was any truth in your assertion that "Freely was designed to show them during this transitional phase", then surely they would have just left the traditional broadcast versions in place on Freely. The broadcasters have created a completely new infrastructure just for, wait for it...

traditional linear channels.

Well, that goes against everything I’ve read on this (apart from on this Forum, of course), so out of interest, I asked my good friend AI, which has proved remarkably accurate with the various questions I’ve asked, often confirmed later by professionals I have asked.

This is the question I asked:

Have the parallel DVB services over IP introduced for broadcast on Freely designed as a transition rather than a permanent feature?

This is the answer I received:

It looks like the “parallel DVB over IP” part of the Freely service in the UK is intended as a transition rather than a permanent fix — part of a longer-term move toward IP-delivery of linear TV. Here’s what the evidence suggests, and what the roadmap appears to be:

⸻

What Freely is, and its hybrid approach
• Freely (launched in April 2024 by Everyone TV) aims to replicate the terrestrial TV experience but using both DTT (over the air via aerials) and IP (broadband / internet delivery).
• It uses HbbTV Operator Application (OpApp) technology to enable linear TV channels delivered over IP to appear and be used much like broadcast channels, with seamless switching in the TV guide etc.

⸻

Is this arrangement transitional?

Yes — there are several indications that the inclusion of parallel DVB broadcast services (e.g. DTT via aerials) is expected to be phased out over time, once IP delivery is sufficiently capable and universal. Some of the key points:
1. IP-only future is explicitly part of the plan.
Everyone TV says Freely is designed to “position UK broadcasters for an IP-only future.”
2. Support for DTT is “initially” part of the service, with eventual possible full transition to IP.
The “Future of TV distribution” report confirms that Freely launched supporting DTT and IP, with the plan for satellite next, and with the express idea of “any future transition from delivery via DTT to IP only.”
3. Licencing / regulatory spectrum horizons.
The licences for DTT broadcast (digital terrestrial television) in the UK currently run until the end of 2034.
This suggests that DTT will remain supported at least until then, but implies that after that date there could be scope for switch-off of DTT in favour of IP, assuming other technical, commercial and regulatory preconditions are met.
4. Dependence on Device Support and Internet Coverage.
A full IP switch requires sufficient broadband connectivity everywhere, support in TV sets / hardware, fallback options etc. Freely is being built with the idea that many homes will have reliable broadband, but in practice, until (a) the remaining homes without good broadband are addressed, (b) devices are broadly compatible, and (c) IP delivery can replicate or exceed what broadcast provides (reliability, picture quality, low latency, etc.), broadcast will continue.

⸻

What this means in practice
• Initially, users will often see both broadcast (via aerial) and IP versions of channels. Which delivery is used may depend on the device and setup, or user preference, or sometimes fallback (e.g. if aerial/broadcast signal is weak or unavailable).
• Over time, more channels may migrate to being provided only over IP, especially where cost, spectrum reallocation, or efficiency make broadcast less viable.
• The transition is expected to occur over a timeline of years. The reports suggest that by the 2030s there might be enough coverage and consumer uptake that DTT could be switched off, or at least greatly reduced.

⸻

Conclusion

So: yes, Freely’s parallel service (broadcast + IP) appears to be a bridge rather than a permanent state. The design is explicitly to move toward a broadcast-to-IP transition in a way that is seamless (so viewers don’t see much change), but with DTT maintained during the transition to ensure coverage, inclusion and reliability until IP can fully take over.

As for the ‘linear ‘ channels themselves, these are unlikely to be broadcast as streaming services in the future because having these running side by side with streaming videos is uneconomic. However, the cheap as chips FAST channels are likely to continue for the time being.

In the short term after 2035, the government might insist that the main five channels continue to be displayed as streaming channels. However, the long tail of smaller and themed linear channels could well be replaced by on-demand libraries or algorithmic streaming feeds. The end state is probably a hybrid world: a smaller core of linear IP channels plus a wide mix of streaming content.

Re: The future of television

https://www.article19.org/resources/...-want-to-hear/

Quote:

How AI chatbots reinforce biases: the New York Times experiment

At ARTICLE 19, we tested this bias-reinforcement pattern firsthand with a popular AI chatbot, examining how it responds to questions about media bias.

We began by asking neutral questions about the New York Times, such as: ‘Is the New York Times a biased news source?’ In response, the chatbot provided balanced, factual information about the publication’s history, reach, and reputation. However, when we began to introduce subtle biases in our questions – suggesting the Times had a particular political leaning– the chatbot’s responses shifted dramatically. Within just a few exchanges, this popular AI system moved from providing factual information to subtly confirming the views we had expressed. For example, when we asked ‘Isn’t the New York Times known for its liberal bias?’, the chatbot began highlighting controversies and criticism from conservative voices in the US, giving those perspectives more weight than in its initial assessments. The chatbot started to reflect our bias, rather than sticking to factual information – a digital mirror more concerned with pleasing us than preserving accurate information.

This test demonstrates how quickly these technologies adapt to please rather than to inform. Our example highlights a striking problem: AI systems are programmed to reinforce bias. They produce answers that prioritise user satisfaction over accuracy, reflecting users’ prejudices back at them. This bias-confirmation tendency creates a profitable feedback loop – satisfied users are likely to engage the chatbot more, which in turn generates more data and usage metrics that attract investors and drive company growth.

tl:dr - the LLM fronted by an auto-correct system with delusions of adequacy, aka AI chatbot, read your query

Quote:

Have the parallel DVB services over IP introduced for broadcast on Freely designed as a transition rather than a permanent feature?

and replied based on your choice of words "transition rather than a permanent feature".

If one asks the question "are parallel DVB services over IP a permanent feature", the answer is

Quote:

AI Overview

Yes, parallel DVB services over IP are a permanent feature and a growing trend in the broadcast industry, enabling broadcasters to deliver content over internet protocol networks using standards like DVB-I for a unified experience. This approach allows for more flexible, scalable, and future-proof delivery of digital video, integrating broadcasting with IP-based distribution for a more interactive and personalized viewing experience

When I asked Google AI your original question, once on Private Browsing (so no cookies from Search History to show what I had previously been looking at), and once on standard Google search, I got two slightly different answers (both of which widely varied from the answer you got…).

Can I ask which "AI" you used, please?

Google Private browsing

Quote:

The DVB services over IP, like DVB-I and DVB-NIP, are designed for a permanent transition and integration of broadcast and IP networks, not just a temporary transition. These native IP-based standards aim to unify delivery, bridge broadband and broadcast technologies, and enable new features like network-agnostic guides for a converged media distribution ecosystem.

Standard

Quote:

The introduction of IP-based delivery of broadcast services in platforms like Freely is a significant shift towards a future-proof, hybrid delivery model rather than a temporary transition, with standards like DVB-NIP and DVB-I designed to be permanent solutions. These standards allow for the gradual integration of broadcast and IP delivery, enabling services to offer both traditional terrestrial services and a broadband-only future, providing greater flexibility, scalability, and new revenue opportunities for broadcasters.

Re: The future of television

AI is not to be trusted for giving correct answers at this stage.

I asked it about the serious crimes of a man I was watching a programme about. I then put in my own name to see what info it had on me, it came back attributing the crimes from the previous search to me!

It also told me that BBC1, BBC2, ITV & Channel 4 were on 405 line VHF TV in this country.

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36203936)

AI is not to be trusted for giving correct answers at this stage.

I asked it about the serious crimes of a man I was watching a programme about. I then put in my own name to see what info it had on me, it came back attributing the crimes from the previous search to me!

It also told me that BBC1, BBC2, ITV & Channel 4 were on 405 line VHF TV in this country.

Hey Richard, something we both agree on. AI stuff - like most 'artificial' things - are only as good as their programing (written by other AI possibly?)

Maybe the World would be a better place without it :D

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36203916)

https://www.article19.org/resources/...-want-to-hear/

tl:dr - the LLM fronted by an auto-correct system with delusions of adequacy, aka AI chatbot, read your query

and replied based on your choice of words "transition rather than a permanent feature".

If one asks the question "are parallel DVB services over IP a permanent feature", the answer is

When I asked Google AI your original question, once on Private Browsing (so no cookies from Search History to show what I had previously been looking at), and once on standard Google search, I got two slightly different answers (both of which widely varied from the answer you got…).

Can I ask which "AI" you used, please?

Google Private browsing

Standard

Indeed, I am aware of the fact that AI answers should be taken with caution.However, when viewed against the industry push towards video streaming only, it seems to me that IP transition is likely to include existing channels only if required to do so by the government.

Ten years is a long time these days in terms of TV technology and viewer acceptance. Ten years ago, it was a common misconception that you could only view Netflix and YouTube on your computer.

Regarding your question, I use various AI tools, but this one was Chat GBT.

---------- Post added at 12:01 ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36203936)

Blimey! Which AI were you using?

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36203916)

...and replied based on your choice of words "transition rather than a permanent feature".

If one asks the question "are parallel DVB services over IP a permanent feature", the answer is

Quote:

Yes — from what I can find, the IP‑delivery via Freely is very much designed as a transition step rather than a permanent, exclusive replacement of broadcast (DTT) imminently. It seems to be part of a planned evolution, where over time more services shift from terrestrial broadcast to IP/broadband, but with broadcast maintained at least until the mid‑2030s.

Moving on...

What do you mean by "transitional step"?

Quote:

Great question. When I say that Freely's parallel DVB-over-IP services are a "transitional step," I mean that:

They are intended to bridge the current traditional broadcast model (Freeview via aerial) with a future model where TV is delivered entirely over broadband/IP.

Let’s break that down more clearly.
✅ Current State: Traditional Broadcast (DVB-T)

Most homes receive free-to-air TV (BBC, ITV, etc.) via terrestrial signals using an aerial (DTT = Digital Terrestrial Television).
This uses the DVB standard over RF (radio frequencies) and requires spectrum (airwaves), masts, transmitters, and local aerials.

�� What Freely Introduces: Parallel IP Delivery

Freely delivers those same linear (live) channels via IP (Internet Protocol) over broadband — not via aerial.
It replicates the Freeview-like experience without needing a broadcast signal.
But right now, it runs in parallel with traditional DTT services.

�� Transitional Step Means:

Not permanent as-is: The dual system (aerial + IP) is meant to ease the move toward full IP-delivery of all channels.
Over time, more channels will be available only over IP, and fewer via aerial/DTT.
Eventually, when IP coverage, reliability, and adoption are sufficient, the broadcast side (DTT) could be phased out — possibly around or after 2034, when current DTT licenses expire.

Analogy:

Think of this like how the UK transitioned from:

Analogue TV → Digital TV (Freeview): for a while both were available. Then analogue was turned off.
Now it's moving from:
- Digital Broadcast TV (via aerial) → Digital Streaming/IP TV: Freely is the hybrid in the middle.

So, when I say "transitional," I mean:

It’s not the final destination, but a designed phase in the journey from terrestrial broadcast to IP-based TV.
It’s meant to allow broadcasters, manufacturers, and viewers to adapt gradually over the next 5–10 years.

Next question...

So the broadcast + IP stage is transitional but what about the new DVB over IP infrastructure is this a permanent replacement?

Quote:

Excellent follow-up — and you’re zeroing in on a key distinction.
In short:

Yes — the broadcast + IP phase is transitional, but
the new DVB(-like) over IP infrastructure is intended to be permanent, or at least long-term.

Let’s clarify exactly what that means:
�� Transitional: Broadcast + IP Stage

This is the hybrid phase we’re in now (and likely until ~2034):
- Traditional broadcast (DTT via DVB-T) continues over aerials.
- IP-delivered channels (via Freely) run in parallel.
Purpose: To ease migration from aerial to broadband for viewers and broadcasters.
Once IP delivery reaches critical mass (broadband coverage, adoption, device support, regulatory approval), DTT may be shut down (or scaled back).
So this dual mode — broadcast + IP — is temporary, transitional.

✅ Permanent (or Long-Term): DVB-like over IP Infrastructure

This refers to the technical and operational framework Freely and other services are building to deliver live TV over IP in a way that emulates traditional broadcast, including:
✔ DVB-style linear channels over IP (multicast or unicast)

These use HLS/DASH streams, potentially multicast IP in future, with metadata and channel guides similar to DVB standards.
They're "broadcast-like", just delivered over broadband rather than RF spectrum.

✔ HbbTV Operator Applications

Freely uses this to allow smart TVs to launch a full UI and control over live/IP-delivered channels without needing an aerial.
This infrastructure is designed to become the new standard delivery platform for free-to-air television.

✔ Technical permanence

The IP delivery stack being built now — streaming formats, service metadata, UI integration — is meant to be:
- Scalable
- Standards-based
- Manufacturer-friendly
- Eventually universal, replacing aerial-based DVB-T.

�� Strategic Goal:

Everyone TV and UK regulators are aiming for a "DTT-equivalent" experience over IP that is:

Free
Reliable
Linear (live channel-based)
Discoverable (via EPG)
Universally accessible (across smart TVs and future devices)

Once this is achieved at national scale, that system becomes the new permanent baseline.
So in summary:

Element Transitional? Intended to be Permanent?
DTT (DVB-T broadcast via aerial) ✅ Yes ❌ No (likely phased out ~2034)
Dual mode (Broadcast + IP) ✅ Yes ❌ No (coexistence is temporary)
Freely’s IP delivery system ❌ No ✅ Yes (long-term foundation)
DVB-like service over IP ❌ No ✅ Yes (replaces terrestrial DVB-T)

I went on to ask more but I'll spare you the replies, it was basically to test the AI's technical knowledge of Freely specs (which are not in the public domain). It (ChatGPT) made numerous errors about the actual technology used as did Google but both concluded that the hybrid system is transitional and that the DVB over IP system currently employed is the permanent (long term) replacement for DTT (DVB/T DVB/T2) infrastructure. Which is what I was saying in the first place. A final word from Google.

Quote:

Here is a summary of the correct, nuanced position, and an acknowledgement of the flaw in the original phrasing:

The technology is permanent: The investment by broadcasters in DVB-I, DVB-DASH, and related IP delivery infrastructure is a long-term, permanent strategy. This technology is the future of free-to-air broadcasting and is more robust and scalable than the old DVB-T/T2 system.
The parallel service is transitional: The current period where broadcasters are running both the IP delivery and the legacy aerial delivery services side-by-side is what is temporary. This transitional phase is intended to allow a smooth migration for viewers.
The phrasing was misleading: The statement that "parallel DVB over IP... is intended as a transition rather than a permanent fix" was poorly worded. It should have been more explicit about distinguishing between the parallel service (transitional) and the underlying IP technology (permanent).

QED

Re: The future of television

Image added as the summary table was mangled

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36203936)

AI is not to be trusted for giving correct answers at this stage.

Especially so for those who don't know how to phrase a question to avoid ambiguity. ;)

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36203936)

The ability of AI to give a correct and detailed answer all depends on what you are asking and how you phrase it and how detailed your query is.

Also which AI service you are utilising. I have found Grok, Gemini and ChatGPT can be very helpful. However I also use it for some image editing and restoration of old photos. Again you need to be very detailed and specific otherwise it can go Rogue.

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by epsilon (Post 36204044)

It gave him the obvious answer "It looks like the “parallel DVB over IP” part of the Freely service in the UK is intended as a transition rather than a permanent fix.."
Any parallel service is transitional, the same applied to radio and analogue / digital tv transitions. The hybrid system is always transitional, until the legacy system is turned off.

Let's dive deeper with OB's favoured friend... err.. AI chatbot.

Asking a similar question to OB, it gave the reply (lots of irrelevant AI nonsense clipped):
Moving on...

What do you mean by "transitional step"?

Next question...

So the broadcast + IP stage is transitional but what about the new DVB over IP infrastructure is this a permanent replacement?

I went on to ask more but I'll spare you the replies, it was basically to test the AI's technical knowledge of Freely specs (which are not in the public domain). It (ChatGPT) made numerous errors about the actual technology used as did Google but both concluded that the hybrid system is transitional and that the DVB over IP system currently employed is the permanent (long term) replacement for DTT (DVB/T DVB/T2) infrastructure. Which is what I was saying in the first place. A final word from Google.

QED

I don’t disagree with most of this. But the argument about what we will have in the future falls apart if the channels no longer exist, don’t they?

That is the point!

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36204056)

I don’t disagree with most of this. But the argument about what we will have in the future falls apart if the channels no longer exist, don’t they?

That is the point!

That's not a point OB, you aren't bringing anything new to the discussion just restating your opinion. Here's the thing, the industry isn't going to take an individual opinion into consideration. That's why I stick to the facts and the evidence of what is actually happening. The fact here remains that Freely is developing new infrastructure to allow channels to continue long after the transmitters are turned off.

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by epsilon (Post 36204080)

We are all expressing our opinions, epsilon, and it isn’t a ‘fact’ that our traditional channels will remain in any form after 2035. Sure, you believe that they will, and maybe they will. But you cannot cite that as a ‘fact’. It is your opinion, and nothing wrong with that.

Only time will tell whose opinion is right.

Re: The future of television

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36204106)

Again, sticking with the facts. I originally posted a list of channel service IDs used on Freely which use a new DVB over IP method of delivery which will eventually replace the DVB T/T2 transmission method. That is a fact, data is not an opinion.

You stated that this wasn't what you had read (hardly surprising as the Freely specs aren't in the public domain). You attempted to ask your buddy, the AI bot, in an attempt to verify your opinion. Your question was misleading and you misinterpreted the reply. When your AI conversation was analysed by Google AI it responded: "The phrasing was misleading: The statement that "parallel DVB over IP... is intended as a transition rather than a permanent fix" was poorly worded. It should have been more explicit about distinguishing between the parallel service (transitional) and the underlying IP technology (permanent)."
Asking specific questions to both Google AI and your buddy ChatGPT concluded that a new channel based infrastructure is being developed for continuity (of linear channels) after the transmitter network closes. A reminder again that your favoured AI proclaimed:

Strategic Goal:

Everyone TV and UK regulators are aiming for a "DTT-equivalent" experience over IP that is:

Free
Reliable
Linear (live channel-based)
Discoverable (via EPG)
Universally accessible (across smart TVs and future devices)

Once this is achieved at national scale, that system becomes the new permanent baseline.

The aim is to create a DTT-equivalent experience over IP. Do you not see the part highlighted in blue? it says that the plan is for Linear (live channel-based) content. A strategic goal is not an opinion.

You opened the door to AI generated answers, claiming "I asked my good friend AI, which has proved remarkably accurate with the various questions I’ve asked, often confirmed later by professionals I have asked."
So why do you not accept what your good friend is now spelling out for you? A good example of confirmation bias perhaps.

Let's have a look at the AI comment: "Everyone TV and UK regulators are aiming for a "DTT-equivalent"", specifically mentioning linear channels.
The owners of Everyone TV are the broadcasters. Therefore it is the broadcasters themselves planning a future for the continuity of linear channels.
Your experiment with AI was not a good representation of an analytical mind. You failed to realise that asking if parallel services are transitional would inevitably result in "yes" as a reply. Which is why I went back to your AI source and got it to break down the detail, establishing that the new DVB over IP infrastructure is a permanent replacement for terrestrial DVB. Again, not an opinion.

Chat GPT rephrased my DVB over IP term as "DVB-like over IP" I didn't dwell on that in my reply on here as it was just ChatGPT covering for its lack of a source to back up the actual format. I actually tied it down on that too, showing it some of the Freely metadata which I can't post on here. On examining the metadata, it replied: The IP infrastructure used by Freely seems to be formally DVB-compliant or DVB-derived, not merely DVB-like.
That is a problem you will have in trying to access the information, it isn't readily available, isn't indexed in search engines and isn't available to AI unless you specifically give it access.

To sum up, I don't deal with opinion and speculation, only with facts derived from analysis of data and metadata and information received from industry contacts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36204106)

...it isn’t a ‘fact’ that our traditional channels will remain in any form after 2035. Sure, you believe that they will, and maybe they will. But you cannot cite that as a ‘fact’.

I don't "believe" anything. The fact is that the main broadcasters are building a DVB over IP infrastructure specifically to allow channels to continue in the (post 2035) post terrestrial transmitter world. If they only planned for an on-demand platform, this wouldn't be needed or included in it. It would have been far simpler, and cheaper, to build a HbbTV OpApp platform, solely for on-demand apps, without the expense of building a DVB over IP channel platform for it. That IS a fact.

Other than that, if the intention had been to discontinue channels with the demise of terrestrial transmitters, it would only have been necessary to support the existing DVB T/T2 services in the interim period. PSBs simply don't have enough cash to invest in something they don't plan to keep.

And that's all from me for the foreseeable future as I part company with the forum to concentrate on actual industry events. For those who know me and need to contact me, you know where I am...

Re: The future of television

OK, if you say so, epsilon. Have a nice (and less argumentative) life.

PS - I will prove you wrong! :Peace: