Television is 100 years old today

Origins and “Who Invented Television?”

• Commenters argue TV was an accretion of many inventions rather than a single “Eureka” moment.
• Mechanical systems (Nipkow disks, Baird-style electro‑mechanical rigs) are contrasted with all‑electronic CRT systems (Farnsworth, Zworykin, Japanese and German pioneers).
• Disagreement over credit: some see early mechanical demos as “real TV,” others focus on electronic rasterization and CRT-based systems as the true ancestors of modern television.
• Several point out that what mattered was assembling a complete, interoperable system and securing standardization and industry backing.

Technical Evolution: Standards, Color, and “HD”

• Early “high definition” in the 1930s–40s meant jumping from ~30 to a few hundred lines; an 819‑line analog system and various Japanese experiments are cited as proto‑HD.
• The adoption of color in the U.S. forced the frame rate shift from 30 to 29.97 fps to avoid interference, leading to enduring complexity (drop‑frame timecode, 59.94 Hz issues).
• PAL/SECAM are described as higher line-count but more flickery; they also introduced clever tricks like delay lines and phase alternation.
• Vestigial sideband modulation is highlighted as a key bandwidth optimization step that arrived after the very first systems.

CRT Technology: Danger, Ingenuity, and Nostalgia

• CRTs are praised as peak analog/“cassette futurism” tech: synchronous, continuous beams, no frame buffer, images existing only in phosphor decay and human persistence of vision.
• Commenters recount hazards: implosions, electron-gun neck failures, charged capacitors, and early color sets emitting problematic X‑rays.
• Historical uses of CRTs as computer memory (Williams tubes) and as delay elements in analog systems fascinate many.
• Some still use CRTs (including oscilloscopes and high‑end sets) and admire their motion clarity, despite bulk, lead content, and obsolescence.

Cultural and Psychological Effects

• Several cite media theorists arguing TV as a medium favours spectacle and decontextualized “now this” transitions, hindering deep reflection.
• Others extend these critiques to 24/7 cable news and social media, seeing “manufactured outrage,” parasocial relationships, and the erosion of civic life.
• A counterview notes that education and serious content can be made engaging (classic documentary and science shows), and that the real issue is selection and incentives, not the technology alone.

From Shared Broadcasts to Fragmented Streaming

• Nostalgic accounts describe families organizing their week around a few flagship shows and nightly news, creating strong shared cultural references and a “common reality.”
• Today’s on‑demand, individualized streaming is seen as reducing that shared experience; conversations become harder when everyone watches different things on different schedules.
• Some welcome the decline of mass‑broadcast gatekeepers and point out that “shared culture” once excluded those without TVs; others mourn the loss of broad, cross‑cutting experiences.

Personal Memories and Historical Perspective

• Multiple stories: first TVs seen in shop windows in the 1940s–50s, early cross‑border reception, and family gatherings around single sets.
• Others juxtapose TV’s 100‑year history with home movies, telegraph, cars, and phones already existing a century ago, underscoring how compressed modern technological change is.

Technology Trajectories and Energy Debates

• One thread contrasts extraordinary 20th‑century progress (TV, space travel, internet, smartphones) with concerns about energy limits, climate change, and possible future technological decline.
• Another responds that regress is more likely to vary by country and policy, not necessarily a uniform global collapse.