Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Giant Squid Filmed In Natural Habitat For the First Time

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the I-crush-everything dept.

Science 98

First time accepted submitter Edgewood_Dirk writes that a giant squid has been filmed in its natural habitat for the first time. "Scientists and broadcasters have captured footage of an elusive giant squid, up to eight meters (26 feet) long that roams the depths of the Pacific Ocean. Japan's National Science Museum succeeded in filming the deep-sea creature in its natural habitat for the first time, working with Japanese public broadcaster NHK and the U.S. Discovery Channel. The massive invertebrate is the stuff of legend, with sightings of a huge ocean-dwelling beast reported by sailors for centuries.'" The first live footage of a giant squid was captured in 2006 by Japan's National Science Museum researcher, Tsunemi Kubodera, after it was hooked and brought to the surface.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Get A Good Look (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507679)

Before they catch it and eat it.

Re:Get A Good Look (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508349)

Raw. Maybe even alive.

Blech.

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | about 2 years ago | (#42508413)

They said that it tastes like chicken.

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 2 years ago | (#42508519)

Woks are at the ready!

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

dimeglio (456244) | about 2 years ago | (#42508577)

Or all you can eat sushi.

Re:Get A Good Look (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509095)

Calamari.

Look it up.

Re:Get A Good Look (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509093)

...or before they have sex with it.

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

mdielmann (514750) | about 2 years ago | (#42515535)

Unfortunately, for the Japanese and other seafood lovers, giant squid have high levels of ammonia.

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

TheLink (130905) | about 2 years ago | (#42516087)

Not necessarily a show stopper - ammonia dissolves quite well in water. Toxic metals might be a bigger problem.

Re:Get A Good Look (1)

tehcyder (746570) | about 2 years ago | (#42516815)

Unfortunately, for the Japanese and other seafood lovers, giant squid have high levels of ammonia.

So what? Most fish and seafood taste like piss anyway.

No Video at the link (2)

oic0 (1864384) | about 2 years ago | (#42507689)

I clicked hoping to some video of the thing :(

Re:No Video at the link (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507749)

the video is more elusive than the squid

Re:No Video at the link (3, Informative)

Internal Modem (1281796) | about 2 years ago | (#42508127)

Maybe someone can find a better version than this NHK broadcast [youtube.com] story on YouTube?

Re:No Video at the link (1)

similar_name (1164087) | about 2 years ago | (#42513269)

"Giant squid in its natural ..." This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by NHK.

Re:No Video at the link (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about 2 years ago | (#42526063)

Video Removed by User.. :(

Re:No Video at the link (4, Informative)

Arkham (10779) | about 2 years ago | (#42508843)

I have it on my to-do list to record it. The live footage in full quality will air on Discovery Channel on Sun. January 27th on a show called "Monster Squid: The Giant is Real". I suspect until then it will be hard to find good quality footage.

wtf? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507701)

Where is the video?

Re:wtf? (-1, Troll)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 2 years ago | (#42508067)

Where is the video?

RFTA, Anonymous Coward.

Re:wtf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508155)

I did and it doesn't have a video.

Re:wtf? (4, Funny)

Ol Biscuitbarrel (1859702) | about 2 years ago | (#42508375)

So what you're saying is RELEASE THE KRAKEN VIDEO!!!!!!!!!!!! Right? Oblig filter error

Re:wtf? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509339)

Where is the video?

RFTA, Anonymous Coward.

We did, you pompous ass, and it's not there. Hence the question, retard. Now where is the video, moron?

creepy human looking eye (1)

rjejr (921275) | about 2 years ago | (#42507745)

Anybody else think the eye in the photo looks entirely way too human? I don't know why, it just does.

Re:creepy human looking eye (-1, Troll)

MightyYar (622222) | about 2 years ago | (#42507995)

Turns out it was actually Bill Clinton.

The question that's itching to be asked.. (2, Funny)

Antony T Curtis (89990) | about 2 years ago | (#42507773)

The question that people must be itching to ask the Japanese Researchers: How does it taste?

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507893)

They only ate 2 of the arms. It was a little rubbery, perhaps some soy sauce would help.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

Ol Biscuitbarrel (1859702) | about 2 years ago | (#42508409)

Was it like chicken? Wonder if it would set you back $3.6k/lb like bluefin tuna. [latimes.com]

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (5, Funny)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | about 2 years ago | (#42508553)

Are you sure their first impulse was to EAT it? I mean...it's Japan.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (5, Informative)

the gnat (153162) | about 2 years ago | (#42509103)

Are you sure their first impulse was to EAT it? I mean...it's Japan.

Japan is widely reviled for using its permitted "research whaling" activities as a cover for what essentially amounts to hunting for food. They kill whales (mostly minke, I think, which are at least fairly common) in the hundreds or thousands every year, I believe in the Antarctic, supposedly for research purposes, but since there is no prohibition on using the leftovers after the "research" is done, the meat ends up being sold in Japan. The problem is that most Japanese don't even know what whale meat tastes like, and from what I've read it's not very appealing, so it's not like there's any wide demand for the product - in fact the government has tried to promote its consumption to gain support for their policies. Obviously certain interests have great interest in the government, but it's never been clear to me whether this was a "protect our livelihoods" thing, or traditionalists and reactionaries trying to preserve a custom in the face of Western imperialism. (There's a lot of this in the US and Canada too, but it's the Indian tribes, not the central governments. Norway is one of the few other governments that pushes the practice, and you can buy whale meat there too.)

The Japanese are also notorious for their dolphin killing - there was a documentary called The Cove [imdb.com] from a few years ago that captured the whole mess on film.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (4, Funny)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 2 years ago | (#42509283)

WHOOSH! (google "hentai" my friend)

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509405)

False premise. Anyone telling you to google "hentai" is not your friend. The inverse is also true: you don't tell your friends to google "hentai".

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509823)

yaw-ahn

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (2)

lengau (817416) | about 2 years ago | (#42520503)

Wouldn't that be the contrapositive? The inverse would be that if you don't tell someone to Google "hentai", you're automatically their friend.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

the gnat (153162) | about 2 years ago | (#42511885)

Ewww. Point taken, my apologies. I'm going to go hide under the bed and whimper now.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509685)

I was offered some whale sushi on a trip to Japan a few years ago. This was prepared in the traditional style which included whale semen! Naturally, I declined, though I did try some whale tempura bits (cooked in blubber). I wouldn't say it tasted bad but I didn't care for the texture. That said, whales are big animals... think of all the different flavors and textures in a cow.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509729)

Boy have I got a solution for you! [southparkstudios.com]

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42510263)

Yeah... you missed the joke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tentacle_erotica [wikipedia.org]

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

BergZ (1680594) | about 2 years ago | (#42511811)

I suggest you ask the Fisherman's Wife what she dreams about doing with tentacled sea creatures.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

rs79 (71822) | about 2 years ago | (#42513653)

No, she held out for the bigger one, this is only the second biggest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossal_squid [wikipedia.org]

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (1)

qwak23 (1862090) | about 2 years ago | (#42512821)

Actually, having just moved back to the states from Japan, while it is certainly not something that is eaten daily (as it's fairly expensive), it is quite easy to find and actually quite tasty ;)

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (4, Informative)

TheCarp (96830) | about 2 years ago | (#42508859)

This question has already been answered....and the answer is...bad...

From wiki: ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_squid [wikipedia.org] )

Giant squid and some other large squid species maintain neutral buoyancy in seawater through an ammonium chloride solution which is found throughout their bodies and is lighter than seawater. This differs from the method of flotation used by most fish, which involves a gas-filled swim bladder. The solution tastes somewhat like salmiakki[citation needed] and makes giant squid unattractive for general human consumption.

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509471)

Hey, Denmark *loves* salmiak liquorice! They would be crazy for that stuff! ;)

Re:The question that's itching to be asked.. (2)

pluther (647209) | about 2 years ago | (#42509061)

Pretty horrible, most likely.

From what I've heard, giant squids have large amounts of ammonia in their bloodstreams. It acts as a natural anti-freeze (the water is damn cold deep in the Pacific, it's only the immense pressure that keeps it from freezing).

The ammonia would permeate the whole thing, completely ruining the taste.

I guess 'Giant' is relative (2)

markg11cdn (1087925) | about 2 years ago | (#42507779)

From the article :

Modern-day scientists on their own Moby Dick-style search used a submersible to get them into the dark and cold depths of the northern Pacific Ocean, where at around 630 meters they managed to film a three-meter specimen.

Though it also says that the squid was missing it's two longest arms and would have been eight meters long if it was whole...

Sharks with lasers were responsible (1)

cruff (171569) | about 2 years ago | (#42508587)

Those sneaky sharks, with their lasers, probably removed the two longest arms.

Re:I guess 'Giant' is relative (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42515237)

>> Though it also says that the squid was missing it's two longest arms and would have been eight meters long if it was whole...

You don't eat a squid that special all at once.

With all the problems we have in the world (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | about 2 years ago | (#42507783)

Someone thought it was a good idea to go and mess with the children of Cthulhu?

Yes, Cthulhu sleeps, but maybe not for long now.

Re:With all the problems we have in the world (1)

lorinc (2470890) | about 2 years ago | (#42508113)

Apparently, He failed to awake on last december 21.

Re:With all the problems we have in the world (2)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | about 2 years ago | (#42508607)

It's because they read the date backwards.

Re:With all the problems we have in the world (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42510341)

You think you're funny? Just wait until the great old one calls out to you. You'll rue this day and every day thereafter. Your mockery will be your undoing.

it would be awesome if... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507799)

a post talking about live footage of something weird actually had ... live footage of something weird

Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (5, Informative)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#42507921)

It appears that we'll have to wait for the shows to air before we'll see the footage.

January 27th on Discovery Channel [cbsnews.com] for most of us.

January 13th on NHK [asahi.com] if you're in Japan.

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (5, Insightful)

hughJ (1343331) | about 2 years ago | (#42508027)

It'll probably be 10 seconds of actual video which is then chopped up, played in varying arrangements and speeds, with a healthy dose of scary/ominous music, and then be inter-cut by experts that speak only in 4-5 second chunks, and then commercial breaks of 4 minutes trying to sell me a Honda. A wonderful way to spend an hour.

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508631)

Yup, I am not wasting an hour of my life just to see a giant squid on 'live TV'. I'll wait for it to air, for someone on the internet to rehost just the relevant bits, and then watch that.

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (0, Flamebait)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#42508805)

Don't forget the intro, the teaser, the coming next, the recap EVERY 5 minutes so that even an American can keep up... well... the bright ones... I give it about 5 years and the TV will be just a static picture with one word repeated "BUY BUY BUY".

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (1)

maeglin (23145) | about 2 years ago | (#42509199)

Don't forget the intro, the teaser, the coming next, the recap EVERY 5 minutes so that even an American can keep up... well... the bright ones... I give it about 5 years and the TV will be just a static picture with one word repeated "BUY BUY BUY".

"BUY BUY BUY"

buy, buy, buy...

5520-3245-4211-0498 12/15 CVV 102

That is all. I must go watch reality TV now.

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#42509873)

Sorry. Failed Luhn MOD10 check. Please re-enter.

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | about 2 years ago | (#42509233)

I give it about 5 years and the TV will be just a static picture with one word repeated "BUY BUY BUY".

What? No Hippinotoad?

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (2)

webmistressrachel (903577) | about 2 years ago | (#42510975)

Hypnotoad would be better than Coronation Street and Eastenders. It violates human rights conventions, but it looks so much more interesting on the screen. And it's cheaper than all those wax dummies we use now. They are wax dummies aren't they? I mean, they can't be people. Can they?

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42509299)

flamebait? you people have no sense of humor...oh no! (s)he made fun of American's lack of attention span! burn him(er)!

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (1)

filthpickle (1199927) | about 2 years ago | (#42510589)

http://video.pbs.org/video/2247683791/ [pbs.org]

That is a pretty interesting show about the giant squid (they also briefly discuss the completely fucking scary looking colossal squid) . DVR the discovery channel nonsense, watch this show, then skip thru the discovery channel show just to see the video. Or just find it on the net somewhere...

Re:Air dates (for those asking where the vid is) (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 2 years ago | (#42512973)

Isn't science wonderful!

failzo85 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42507949)

rules are This dead. It is a dead whether to repeat is dying.Things Said. 'Screaming a sad world. At as WideOpen, paper towels, if you don't world's Gay Nigger Contributed code Raadt's stubborn Came as a comple7e if I remain other members in and/or distribute OS. Now BSDI is = 36400 FreeBSD simple solution trouble. It Of the above aNd arms and dick is busy infighting People's faces at these rules will These early at least.' Nobody uncover a story of and arms and dick Slashdot's Company a 2

Incredible (-1, Troll)

Sydin (2598829) | about 2 years ago | (#42507963)

I'm less impressed with the footage of the squid than I am with the Japanese for actually just filming the thing instead of killing it, eating it, than denying any evidence of it ever being there. Did they at least run down one or two environmentalist boats on their way back?

Re:Incredible (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#42508265)

I wouldn't jump the gun... The giant squid was inexplicably missing its two longest arms.

Re:Incredible (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42508549)

That is likely because their flesh is soaked in ammonium chloride and as such inedible. They use the ammonium chloride to maintain buoyancy.

Re:Incredible (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#42509927)

Really? [wikipedia.org] Or are those uses just in trace amounts, and the concentrations in the squid are too high?

Re:Incredible (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#42510283)

In all but some scandinavian nations this is only used in tiny amounts. Most people are not fans.

The Japanese found a giant squid (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 years ago | (#42508251)

And here's a picture of it [e621.net] (NSFW).

Re:The Japanese found a giant squid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42510265)

I think anyone that has been on Slashdot long enough has come to realize that any links present in comments on a story involving the Japanese and a squid are most likely NSFW.

Bah! This thing can't really exist... (2)

petergriffinismyhero (803004) | about 2 years ago | (#42508381)

there's no Pokemon card for it!

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508401)

I for one, welcome our new giant squids overlords!

Ya sure... (1)

sunking2 (521698) | about 2 years ago | (#42508415)

With no point of reference how can anyone tell what size it is? Yes, this is tongue in cheek...

Re:Ya sure... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508485)

With no point of reference how can anyone tell what size it is? Yes, this is tongue in cheek...

No, that's the main thing I was looking for, proof of scale.

Without it's tentacles wrapped around an average-sized human, it's most certainly fake.

Re:Ya sure... (1)

Nrrqshrr (1879148) | about 2 years ago | (#42509935)

Ironically, from the popularity of that kind of animes, I bet that you won't have too much trouble finding a volunteer to get "wrapped" by those "tentacles"... if you see what I mean.

Nonsense (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508423)

They had footage of one of those back in 1954. (It nearly killed the captain of the sub, too.)

Discovery.com teasers (3, Funny)

Ol Biscuitbarrel (1859702) | about 2 years ago | (#42508523)

TFA's suggestions for what "YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE" sound like juicy reading: "Pop Star Claims Sex With Ghost." "Curiosity: The Orgasm Gap." "Shrunken Head DNA Proves Horrific Folklore True." Now that's internets you can wrap fish in!

Re:Discovery.com teasers (2)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#42508625)

TFA's suggestions for what "YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE" sound like juicy reading: "Pop Star Claims Sex With Ghost." "Curiosity: The Orgasm Gap." "Shrunken Head DNA Proves Horrific Folklore True." Now that's internets you can wrap fish in!

Wha...? I'm not seeing them!?
Aah... it may be the tracking cookies on your browser that bring those suggestions.

Re:Discovery.com teasers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42508975)

We must not allow an orgasm gap!

Re:Discovery.com teasers (1)

ittybad (896498) | about 2 years ago | (#42509247)

I see the same suggestions. I find it awful to see what Discovery has reduced itself to.

...that one movie... (1)

kilroy77 (2810321) | about 2 years ago | (#42508823)

Isn't this the thing that grabbed Jack and drug him to the depths while Rose watched from atop the floating debris?

Re:...that one movie... (1)

cusco (717999) | about 2 years ago | (#42510001)

I wish. At least then there would have been 30 seconds of that dreadful piece of drek that might have been worth watching.

Misread the title... (3, Funny)

CmdrPorno (115048) | about 2 years ago | (#42509135)

I thought it said "Geek Squad Filmed in Natural Habitat for the First Time."

Can't wait to see this (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 2 years ago | (#42509345)

I've seen quite a few documentaries were this animal is discussed, but no scientists ever had the footage. The neatest attempt I'd seen was sticking a camera to a sperm while and watching its pod descend, but unfortunately it became dislodged before they found any prey.

The decline of Discovery Channel. (3)

MaWeiTao (908546) | about 2 years ago | (#42509407)

Honestly, I'm surprised that Discovery Channel is still involved with projects like these as they appear to be headed on the same path as TLC (The Learning Channel, talk about an oxymoron). They seem to be firmly ensconced in reality television, what with quality content like Property Wars, Moonshiners and Amish Mafia. I predict this giant squid footage is going to be presented in a heavy-handed manner where it's all going to feel like we're watching footage of the Loch Ness monster. A legitimate topic is going to be presented like it's pseudo-science.

Clearly, management has decided they weren't making enough money by going the educational route. So they're trying to appeal to a dumber demographic who's less likely to be analytical about the advertising they're exposed to and more likely to spend money carelessly. This is my fear with the government withdrawing support for public television. It's only a matter of time before they devolve into the same sort of crap.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

cusco (717999) | about 2 years ago | (#42510053)

I give it until the next presidential election before PBS and NPR are just plain auctioned off. They're doing their best to 'privatize' (aka 'sell public property for pennies on the dollar) everything else. Before long the Pentagon will be the only thing the taxpayers still hold the title to, and that will just be so that we can pay to protect the mega-corps overseas properties at no charge to them.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

Jonner (189691) | about 2 years ago | (#42510187)

I give it until the next presidential election before PBS and NPR are just plain auctioned off. They're doing their best to 'privatize' (aka 'sell public property for pennies on the dollar) everything else. Before long the Pentagon will be the only thing the taxpayers still hold the title to, and that will just be so that we can pay to protect the mega-corps overseas properties at no charge to them.

PBS and NPR have not been getting a majority of funding from any government so the Federal government cannot "privatize" them.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42510423)

Don't talk common sense. Just let cusco go on with the misinformation that he/she read at the Huffington Post. This is about partisan politics, not facts.
 
If people really cared that much about the truth they wouldn't have voted in November. They would have rioted.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

cusco (717999) | about 2 years ago | (#42511099)

They're still government properties, their frequencies, brands, copyrights and studios belong to the taxpayers, who paid to develop all of it. They'll be on the block soon, just like many municipal water utilities and public power utilities already are. More of the neo-liberal hogwash about how private industry is always more 'efficient' somehow will be used as the justification, or maybe "deficit reduction".

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (4, Informative)

Jonner (189691) | about 2 years ago | (#42511665)

They're still government properties, their frequencies, brands, copyrights and studios belong to the taxpayers, who paid to develop all of it. They'll be on the block soon, just like many municipal water utilities and public power utilities already are. More of the neo-liberal hogwash about how private industry is always more 'efficient' somehow will be used as the justification, or maybe "deficit reduction".

You are dead wrong. According to PBS [pbs.org] themselves, they are not and never have been part of any government:

PBS is a private, nonprofit corporation, founded in 1969, whose members are America’s public TV stations -- noncommercial, educational licensees that operate more than 350 PBS member stations and serve all 50 states, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa.

.

NPR [npr.org] is a "privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization." [wikipedia.org]

Both organizations get a significant minority of funding from the Federal government-funded Corporation For Public Broadcasting [cpb.org] but neither NPR nor PBS is owned by the Federal government any more than the multitude of private organizations which receive some Federal funding. They probably wouldn't exist today if they hadn't been funded by the CPB and if the CPB stopped funding them altogether, they would suffer greatly. However, no part of the Federal government can sell either PBS or NPR and even if all Federal funding were cut off, they'd still have a chance of surviving on their other sources of funding.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

cusco (717999) | about 2 years ago | (#42512555)

Well, learned something new today. Thanks for that.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#42511113)

I give it until the next presidential election before PBS and NPR are just plain auctioned off.

That would be really really stupid for anyone in government to demand - with PBS and NPR cut loose from the federal government, they'd have no reason to continue pussyfooting around the criminals in Washington or Wall Street.

Now, of course, the fact that it would be really stupid is no protection from it actually happening.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

Jonner (189691) | about 2 years ago | (#42510165)

TLC [wikipedia.org] has been owned by the same company as the Discovery Channel since 1991 so you shouldn't be surprised that the channels are moving in similar directions. I already noticed shows in common between the two channels in the mid-90s. Until I just read the Wikipedia article, I was completely unaware of TLC's origins from Federal agencies. It sounds like it may have been much better in the 70s and 80s.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

filthpickle (1199927) | about 2 years ago | (#42510781)

We should be thankful for TLC (it isn't even programmed on my TV at home, but I do have to hear people talk about some of the shows at work). Anyway, TLC is the poster child for why we should never cut all funding for PBS. Because that is what the lowest common denominator turns it into.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

Jonner (189691) | about 2 years ago | (#42511157)

We should be thankful for TLC (it isn't even programmed on my TV at home, but I do have to hear people talk about some of the shows at work). Anyway, TLC is the poster child for why we should never cut all funding for PBS. Because that is what the lowest common denominator turns it into.

Indeed, I hope more people are inspired to fund PBS. I haven't done my part so far but I plan to rectify that.

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 2 years ago | (#42510797)

the same sort of crap.

You mean mermaids aren't real [discovery.com] ?!!!

Re:The decline of Discovery Channel. (1)

sp0tter (1456139) | about 2 years ago | (#42519067)

For the last time, those are SALMON!

Colossal Squid (1)

It's the tripnaut! (687402) | about 2 years ago | (#42522511)

An even bigger invertebrate inhabits the deep. I hope they get to film the Colossal Squid [wikipedia.org] next.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?