In today's world, Talk:Conditional access has taken a central role in various areas of daily life. From politics to technology, entertainment and culture, Talk:Conditional access has managed to capture the attention of countless people around the world. Its importance and influence has been consolidated over time, becoming a topic of general interest that leaves no one indifferent. In this article, we will seek to delve into the most relevant aspects of Talk:Conditional access, analyzing its impact and development in different contexts. Dare to enter the fascinating world of Talk:Conditional access and discover everything it has to offer.
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hardware pairing, smart cards, PCMCIA CI modules are not discussed. This article appears half baked and appears inadequate for any person trying to learn from Wikipedia. I wish people put in more effort.
It seems to me that conditional access is just newspeak for access control - is there any point having a second entry? or can we just switch conditional access to a redirect to access control ? e.g. on this web site of people who link non-free content http://www.scmmicro.de/dvb/index.html all uses of conditional access seem to be just a fancy new name for access control or encryption/decryption. Boud 11:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I concur. This should probably be redirected to access control. If necessary, access control could mention the term conditional access as an alternate/buzzword name. - Alynna 13:12, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I've tagged the article for:
on top of the others that have been put onto the article:
Pmedema (talk) 17:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
It seemed logical to me to merge the content from Conditional access system into the main Conditional access article, as the former is directly derived from the latter. I won't make any sudden changes though until enough time has passed to allow for others to comment here. Bumm13 (talk) 09:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
The article doesn't mention fees the subscriber has to pay to even be able to get conditional access.
In Ohio, your 'basic cable' fees will increase substantially if you utilize the cablecard scheme to decode the channels they have moved to their digital tiers, such as C-SPAN 2. They do not provide a signal that can be decoded by a standard HDTV tuner.
If you have analog service at $10/month, Time Warner wants to 'rent' the cablecard at 2.50/month, and you would still have to provide some sort of box to plug the cablecard into - unless there is a TV model that is compatible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.101.136.61 (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
I have heard that even if you buy your own cablecard, cable operators and other access providers can and do still charge for access through the cablecard. Nick Garnett 15:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickgarnett (talk • contribs)
I would like to add a short section on the fact that conditional access technologies can act as a major bottleneck in competition between pay-TV broadcasters. According to Nolan, D. Bottlenecks in pay television: Impact on market development in Europe Telecommunications Policy, 1997, 21, 597-610:
Any thoughts on this? Niclas 08:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niclas M. (talk • contribs)
I recently made an edit that revoked a prior edit. This edit removed a number of entries on the Viaccess conditional access system. The editor's IP address (195.6.224.137) is from Viaccess themselves. More specifically, an IP address belonging to "VIAACCESS SA," a firm involved in the development of DRM. See Viaccess, or the site at viaacess.com. The user's contributions are certainly interesting. The IP's reverse DNS is actually chronos.viaccess.com, and given it's from an organization, I'm going to guess that it's an outbound NAT device, so these contributions may be from multiple employees.
My thought/question: does an employee of a DRM company making changes to pages about DRM constitute an expert contribution? Conflict of interest? I'm sure there's a policy on it somewhere. Only two such edits seem to be conflict-y, but they're definitely conflict-y. I've revoked the one on this page. Comments encouraged! Overand (talk) 16:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Conditional access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:51, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
L3 https://twitter.com/David3141593/status/1080606827384131590?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.8.243.184 (talk) 05:09, 25 July 2019 (UTC)