red_king_cyclops wrote:

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/314268/

So the revival was locked as well. And this time the users were not spamming or chatting. The revival was locked because it was too broad, and could lead to the same problems as the original topic. The revival's revival might still have a chance if it is more focused. If that revival fails then a studio should be made.

(Quoting because discussing the same thread)
I think Paddle should have made it clearer in the old thread what the scratch team wanted the thread to be- the original closing post just said the problem was too much spam, not that the thread was too broad.

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/315071/

Am I the only one who is laughing at this suggestion. I mean, I can think of a Scratch Theme Park in my head, but for Scratch that would be crazy. That would be probably like thousands or millions of dollars.

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/315314/

I support the above suggestion, even though it was rejected.

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/301/

The above suggestion was locked because it will be implemented in Scratch 3.0. What if Scratch 3.0 doesn't implement the suggestion and the topic was locked for no reason?

https://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/316340/

lucas24709 wrote:

A. A block that has an FM radio connection

So…a block that turns your computer into an FM radio?

Ehh…

Not to be mean, but here's a list of all the reasons this would be infeasible:

1. This suggestion implies the use of software to do something that the hardware is incapable of. In simpler terms, it's kind of hard to use a program to listen to the radio when the computer does not physically have a radio in it.
   
2. To keep in line with Scratch's requirement of all content needing to be family-friendly, every single FM radio station in the entire world would need to be monitored 24/7 to make sure that they are not broadcasting anything objectionable, and block or replace the station's content if there was something objectionable. There are around ten thousand FM radio stations in the US alone, and no doubt many more worldwide.
   
3. Due to the localized nature of FM radio, you would not only need to monitor every single station, but also take each station's antenna height, effective radiated power, and surrounding terrain into account to make an educated guess of what stations are available in one's location. Everyone also would have different reception setups and different weather situations, which would complicate this even further. Getting one's location could also be considered an invasion of privacy.
   
4. A smart person could track one user and gather a list of FM stations they use in their projects, then use the locations of the stations to triangulate that user's rough location, which could also be considered an invasion of privacy.
   
5. Because of FM's localized nature, stations available in one's area may not be available in another's. For example, let's say that Alice uses this block to listen to the hypothetical radio station KFOO:
   

   listen to radio (95.5 v) FM :: sensing

   Now, let's say Bob opens the project in an entirely different area. Where he is, 95.5 may be the frequency given to hypothetical radio station KBAR, completely destroying the effect that Alice was going for unless the two stations just so happened to air very similar programming, which for any two stations in the US, is probably around as likely as you getting attacked by a shark.*
   
6. To get around the localization issue, and the issue of computers not having FM radios in them, in theory, Scratch could set up listening stations that would pick up stations all across the world. The problem with this is that the number of listening stations required would be obscene, anywhere from 25% to 50% of the number of FM stations in the world or more depending on the density of stations. The amount of bandwidth required to deliver all of this audio would also be ludicrous. Let's say that each station in the US is given a 64 kbps AAC stream, a fairly mediocre level of audio quality. That would be 625 Mbps, which while not sounding like much, all of which would needed to be gathered from thousands of locations across the country, delivered to a central server, and then served back out to millions of users, creating insane amounts of network traffic. If the streams were encoded into lower quality formats for people with slow internet, this would also require extreme levels of computing power. Add to this the monitoring and expurgation of offensive material mentioned earlier, and it would require such massive amounts of hardware that surely MIT does not have the time or money for.
   

I could probably keep going, but I think that this is enough to demonstrate the infeasibility of this block. Sorry if this came off as sounding mean, because I didn't mean to offend.

*Statistic not guaranteed to be accurate. I am not a statistician.