TiVo Community Forums Archives - CSI Miami (Possible Spoiler?) / Tech in TV

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

CSI Miami (Possible Spoiler?) / Tech in TV
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: voidptr

Did anyone else notice just how wrong this was on CSI Miami tonight (And am I the only one that it irks this bad?) I mean, is it that hard to get something like this close to right instead of just making it up?
http://www.csh.rit.edu/~sunday/misc/csi_ip.jpg

Posted by: swifty

I think they want to avoid using anything that's near real to avoid getting sued.

Posted by: Skyler

They're using a fake/impossible IP address for the same safety/legal reason that most TV/Movie phone numbers start with "555-xxxx" -- if they used a real number, the owner of the real number would get harassed by fanatics who try calling/probing the number to see who it really belongs to.

Posted by: BattMan

I am more and more disenchanted with CSI:MIami.

Posted by: doom1701

quote:
Originally posted by swifty
I think they want to avoid using anything that's near real to avoid getting sued.

I'm certain that's the reason, although I would have rather seen them use a 172. address (the least used of the private address ranges).

Posted by: Frylock

Doom's right. Use something that just won't resolve. Don't make up a number!

Movies use 555-XXXX. Not 55-XXXX.

Posted by: Jonathan_S

I don't object to the impossible ip address as much as I do to that silly "IP Address Translation" which appears to be totally meaningless.
Not to mention making a huge deal out of a simple whois request.

All they got was the information for doing a
> whois 310.27.901.33.1109
lookup.
The tool is installed on every almost every unix box, and a free download for windows machines. It is a basic networking tool, and they made it look like some spiffy law enforcement only database like CODIS.

Posted by: dengel

They should have used a non-routable ipv6 address. That would have been cooli!

d.

Posted by: GDG76

They did the same thing on CSI a while back and I started a thread bitching about it. At least get the number of bytes and their high limits of digits (3) correct. There are about 17 million private addresses they could use. Hell, be creative and grab some extra IPs and point them to the CBS or CSI websites. Like David Caruso, this is just plain terrible.

drew

Posted by: HTH

I can forgive the >255 octets, but 5 of them? The last should have been a port number, separated by a colon.

But what about their misuse of the term "warchalking"?

Posted by: JustAce

I wish I had a WiFi connection that could go at 55+mbps. :(

Posted by: cynthia

Most of us out there had no idea and couldn't care less. That's probably what they're counting on.