Main image

Twitter is Not Television.

28th May
2009
written by
stephenconroy Dear Social Media Wankers, Twitter is not “the future of television”. The sooner Hale-Bopp returns and you morons mass-suicide, the better.

The mixture of filth, twitter, television and the echo of a Cult of the Past is a siren call to the world. And worthy of analysis from we Cult Members.

We need to do some maths.

A “frame” of TV at high definition digital TV in Australia is about 720p. At 16:9, this is 720 pixels x 405 pixels. At 32 bits per pixel, each pixel is 4 bytes. Each frame takes 1.11Mb, uncompressed.

A cult leader should be transmitted uncompressed. The image of our dear digital revolution cult leader should not be damaged nor altered in any way.

At a frame-rate of 25 frames per second, this results in each minute of TV of our dear leader taking 27.8Mb

It is estimated that the leader is on television for 7 minutes per week. This is 194.6Mb per week.

To transmit the 194.6Mb would take 1,458,000 tweets. As there is an API limit of 100 tweets per hour, a total of 14,580 hours would be required to transmit the data.

This is 607.5 days. Or, 1.66 years.

Q.E.D. Twitter cannot replace, not is Television.

@stephenconroy is correct in a twisted fashion. I wonder if he wants to join the #CultOfMarkPesce. stephen.conroy.pesce, this is your siren call.

Tags: , ,

2 Comments

  1. “Thankfully, My employer has an Ancient Shiva Terminal Server in existence.” | Cult of Mark Pesce
    28/05/2009

    [...] relation to my previous post on His Holiness Mark Pesce being transmitted via Twitter: via a 300 baud modem the timing is as [...]

  2. fearless.leader.pesce
    30/05/2009

    I’m afraid your maths are just a touch wrong. Each *second* of television takes 27.8MB. Which means each minute would be 1.668GB. Thus, the seven-minutes-per-week of my appearance/visitation to you through the magic image-sending boxen, would consume 11.67GB of data.

    Which is more tweets than I care to count.

Leave a Reply