Sega President Stan Thomas

[VodkaEnergee]

"In 1994, Sega president Stan Thomas launched “Sega Channel” allowing users to download 20 Sega Genesis games every month through the cable company's "On Demand" being the first platform to offer a streaming service similar to Xbox’s Game Pass."

What are y'alls thoughts on this?

 

[RanmyakuIchi's iconRanmyakuIchi]

Pretty damn ahead of it's time.

 

[Evaccaneer Doom]

I misread this as "Sega president Stan" as in "stanning the president of SEGA"
But yeah, common "too ahead of their time" moment from the company, second only to Dreamcast online play and the SEGA CD as a whole. Seriously, can you imagine a world where the CD took off and we started seeing an FMV renaissance in the early 90s instead of late?

 

[Jeanfranc]

subscription based streaming services

The beginning of the end (Well, actually it began in 1983 with Atari's GameLine)

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

Hayao Nakayama was the president and CEO of Sega from 1983 until 1998 when he stepped down. Tom Kalinske was the president and CEO of Sega of America from 1990 - 1996.

Stan Thomas was the senior vice president at Time Warner, he didn't work at Sega. Sega used Time Warner's cable service for distributing the Sega Channel and Stan Thomas was in charge of that at Time Warner. It also wasn't the first service of it's kind as both Atari and Intellivision offered similar services in the early 80s - Atari's used a phone line with a modem, and Intellivision's used a cable TV hookup like the Sega Channel did.

Stan Thomas absolutely had a part in Sega Channel, but he had nothing to do with what is being attributed to him and this is rewriting video game history.

I see these sort of posts pop up from time to time in social media and I always wonder where they come from. They get posted from so many different pages but the info is always the same and is easily disproven. And of course if I were to write this exact comment on social media someone might call me racist for correcting the misinformation.

 

[teddyfresh]

Hayao Nakayama was the president and CEO of Sega from 1983 until 1998 when he stepped down. Tom Kalinske was the president and CEO of Sega of America from 1990 - 1996.

Stan Thomas was the senior vice president at Time Warner, he didn't work at Sega. Sega used Time Warner's cable service for distributing the Sega Channel and Stan Thomas was in charge of that at Time Warner. It also wasn't the first service of it's kind as both Atari and Intellivision offered similar services in the early 80s - Atari's used a phone line with a modem, and Intellivision's used a cable TV hookup like the Sega Channel did.

Stan Thomas absolutely had a part in Sega Channel, but he had nothing to do with what is being attributed to him and this is rewriting video game history.

I see these sort of posts pop up from time to time in social media and I always wonder where they come from. They get posted from so many different pages but the info is always the same and is easily disproven. And of course if I were to write this exact comment on social media someone might call me racist for correcting the misinformation.

Actually Stan Thomas was appointed as the president of Sega Channel in May 1994. Before this role, he had an 11-year tenure at HBO and served as a senior vice president at Time Warner.

• Stan Thomas was the president of Sega Channel – This is a confirmed fact, as reported in multiple sources, including Time Warner and Sega-related publications from the time.
• He was not the president of Sega as a whole, which is why some confusion arises. Thomas was explicitly in charge of Sega Channel, not Sega of America or Sega Japan.
• He played a key role in Sega Channel’s development and launch. His background in cable and television (with HBO and Time Warner) made him an ideal choice to oversee a cable-based game distribution service

The issue seems to stem from people either over-attributing Sega Channel’s creation to him or incorrectly stating he had no involvement at all. The truth is somewhere in between—he wasn’t the inventor but was instrumental in managing and overseeing Sega Channel’s rollout.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

Actually Stan Thomas was appointed as the president of Sega Channel in May 1994. Before this role, he had an 11-year tenure at HBO and served as a senior vice president at Time Warner.

• Stan Thomas was the president of Sega Channel – This is a confirmed fact, as reported in multiple sources, including Time Warner and Sega-related publications from the time.
• He was not the president of Sega as a whole, which is why some confusion arises. Thomas was explicitly in charge of Sega Channel, not Sega of America or Sega Japan.
• He played a key role in Sega Channel’s development and launch. His background in cable and television (with HBO and Time Warner) made him an ideal choice to oversee a cable-based game distribution service

The issue seems to stem from people either over-attributing Sega Channel’s creation to him or incorrectly stating he had no involvement at all. The truth is somewhere in between—he wasn’t the inventor but was instrumental in managing and overseeing Sega Channel’s rollout.

Sega Channel, not Sega.

There'a few things wrong with the post.

First, it credits Stan as the "president of Sega". The president of Sega at that time was Hayao Nakayama, and the president of Sega of America was Tom Kalinske. Stan was the senior vice president of Time Warner, he didn't work at Sega at all. Sega Channel was a collaborative project between Sega of America and Time Warner (with additional support from TCI). Stan Thomas was the president of Sega Channel where he oversaw business and operations on the side of distribution of the service through Time Warner's cable service. Everything on the gaming side was handled by Sega.

The problem here is that he is being credited as the president of Sega, which isn't true. He was the senior vice president of Time Warner and the president of Sega Channel. Normally I would attribute this to a typo but this exact post gets reposted time and again by different pages with the exact wording and phrasing and NOBODY corrects this point.

Second, they're saying he launched it. I suppose you could say that since he was the president of the project but that's giving one man credit for something that teams within 3 separate companies collaborated together on. You can't credit that sort of thing to one person. This is no different than Elon Musk saying that he landed a rocket. Musk led a team of people who landed a rocket, Musk did not land a rocket.

The third problem is that they're claiming it was the first service of it's kind, which ties into the the previous issue in that thr poster is trying to make him out to be some kind of visionary who shaped the history of gaming by creating the concept of streaming games on demand. The problem with this is that Sega Channel wasn't the first of it's kind. Intellivision launched a service in 1980 which allowed users to download games with a cable hookup - exactly the same as what Sega Channel did. Atari launched a similar service in 1983 which used a phone line and a modem. There was also Telenet for home computers. Sega also had the MegaNet service in Japan which launched in 1990 and allowed Mega Drive users with the modem peripheral to download games.

Sega Channel wasn't the first service of it's kind - in fact, it was far from it.

An accurate post would be something like this:

"In 1994, Time Warner senior vice president Stan Thomas served as the president of the "Sega Channel" service - a joint collaborative effort between Sega of America and Time Warner with additional support from TCI - which followed in the footsteps of earlier services and allowed users to download a number of Sega Genesis games "On Demand" every month through Time Warner's cable service. Sega Channel - along with prior services such as Intellivision's PlayCable, Atari's Game Line, or the Telenet service for home computers - shares many similarities with modern streaming services such as Microsoft's Xbox Game Pass."

I would like to dismiss it as a typo, but it seems to be intentional. Stan Thomas obviously played a very large role in Sega Channel but he was not the president of Sega and their trying to credit him with an honor that goes to the team at General Instrument and Mattel who created the concept in 1979 (launched in 1980).

 

[ATenderLad]

That's funny, maybe it's like AI re-hashing other AI content over and over, like a game of telephone that wastes enough electricity to power a city block.

 

[VodkaEnergee]

That's funny, maybe it's like AI re-hashing other AI content over and over, like a game of telephone that wastes enough electricity to power a city block.

Egg (McMuffin) Man and teddyfresh posts are Imperative for Topics like this, because it Inspires others to not just See a' Something and Believe or Think it is True at Face Value. It inspires others to Look and Search deeper and into these Areas, to help clear Confusion and Unhealthy Questioning, such as Over Questioning. Working together and not Arguing on Topics like this, could help with more Accurate to the then True Information. That rids away with Facts, because facts are Assistance for finding the Truth. Truth can not be Debated, but Facts can...

It is Imperative for Folk not to be Blinded so much, to Spread Stuff and just say Certain Things without; Proof, telling Others to look deeper into, asking their thoughts on it, inspiring to think more by providing Alternate forms of thought and how, and so on...

As for this Topic. Maybe others know more Info, info not found Online. Positive Things could come from Talks and Topics like this, and Other Topics at that.

What are your and other's Thoughts?

 

[kanesha]

What are your and other's Thoughts?

My thoughts are that you should beg mods to allow you to delete this thread and never again blindly repost stuff you know nothing about

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

That's funny, maybe it's like AI re-hashing other AI content over and over, like a game of telephone that wastes enough electricity to power a city block.

It very well could be but I would like to assume that it's just someone who got it wrong and other people thought it was neat and reposted it, kind of like the claim that George Washington Carver created peanut butter. George Washington Carver made significant contributions to agricultural science, but peanut butter isn't one of them. But I don't think that anyone who says that is knowingly pushing misinformation, it's just a popular misconception.

But on the other hand, I regularly see stuff that IS from AI, like these two below.

My favorites are the ones that talk about people who lived hundreds or even thousands of years ago and then have AI generated "photographs" and there will always be simpletons in the comments who think it's real.

These two in particular are the first I think of because I've seen a few variations of them for a few years now, but of course there are many others. Another that I've seen makes the claim that Einstein was a hack and that ActUaLLy his wife was the genius who did everything. I often wonder where this shit comes from. Who's taking the time to have AI generate this stuff, and why pay so much money to have social media platforms put it into my feed? This is why I absolutely believe in the dead internet theory.

Post automatically merged: Feb 10, 2025

My thoughts are that you should beg mods to allow you to delete this thread and never again blindly repost stuff you know nothing about

Bro you need to lighten up. He saw something and thought it was neat so he wanted to share, there's nothing wrong with that. If the information is incorrect than provide a correction, there's no need to be rude about it.

 

[VodkaEnergee]

It very well could be but I would like to assume that it's just someone who got it wrong and other people thought it was neat and reposted it, kind of like the claim that George Washington Carver created peanut butter. George Washington Carver made significant contributions to agricultural science, but peanut butter isn't one of them. But I don't think that anyone who says that is knowingly pushing misinformation, it's just a popular misconception.

But on the other hand, I regularly see stuff that IS from AI, like these two below.

My favorites are the ones that talk about people who lived hundreds or even thousands of years ago and then have AI generated "photographs" and there will always be simpletons in the comments who think it's real.

These two in particular are the first I think of because I've seen a few variations of them for a few years now, but of course there are many others. Another that I've seen makes the claim that Einstein was a hack and that ActUaLLy his wife was the genius who did everything. I often wonder where this shit comes from. Who's taking the time to have AI generate this stuff, and why pay so much money to have social media platforms put it into my feed? This is why I absolutely believe in the dead internet theory.

View attachment 23647View attachment 23648

Why not instead of dismissing as A.I, try and gather Specific Info just as You did with your response to Teddyfresh? Not any go at it with any Aggression, but provide what Info you've gathered and try to have, Healthy Talks with others. I'd brought this up in a Response to ATenderLad. Folk have and still are trying to separate Fact from Truth. We can't let A.I be a Escape Goat, Excuse, Other Negatives along with the Old Negatives. We have to try and work together, ask questions, not argue, bring forward things. To help see and know, what is what. Help put these Healthy Thoughts & Actions into Practice with more People. Some don't know better and just Share. Or some may not know how to Healthy Develop a Talk for a Post, which then allows Chaos through Negatives, Ignorance and Confusion...

We can't always just respond Negatively or Attack to get rid of. But respond in ways to Positively Progress topics, and Help each other for The Better. Not fight each other.

What are your and other's thoughts?

 

[kanesha]

He saw something and thought it was neat so he wanted to share, there's nothing wrong with that. If the information is incorrect than provide a correction, there's no need to be rude about it.

That was this thread until he decided to continue to push it through a wall of largely meaningless text that amounts to "I know nothing, but I won't back down cause maybe nobody knows anything who knows?". Not surprising you gonna defend that behavior though, as you have proven incapable of admitting goofs like that yourself in another thread.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

That was this thread until he decided to continue to push it through a wall of largely meaningless text that amounts to "I know nothing, but I won't back down cause maybe nobody knows anything who knows?". Not surprising you gonna defend that behavior though, as you have proven incapable of admitting goofs like that yourself in another thread.

I'm not defending anything, I'm telling you that you're being very combative (just as you were in the vegan thread).

And that "goof" that you're referring to in the other thread is only the fault of your own reading ability. I literally quoted the message and it didn't say what you accused it of saying.

 

[kanesha]

you're being very combative

Thanks for the compliment!

And that "goof" that you're referring to in the other thread is only the fault of your own reading ability. I literally quoted the message and it didn't say what you accused it of saying.

Oh, yes, yes, you won, glorious victory. Unfortunately you still don't get it, though I pretty sure you're just pretending that you don't get it and that next time you'll do better.

 

[VodkaEnergee]

I'm not defending anything, I'm telling you that you're being very combative (just as you were in the vegan thread).

And that "goof" that you're referring to in the other thread is only the fault of your own reading ability. I literally quoted the message and it didn't say what you accused it of saying.

There will be People who will try to Derail things or try to get things Closed with Negativity. Instead lets not feed into it, and just ignore the Negatives, and try to further provide further Positive Things. Lets try to proceed with Providing such Positive Stuff to this Topic, for the sake of Enlightenment. Not just Ours, but Others. Lets try to be a Positive Example to Others, and Ourselves, on how to handle Certain Things and Situations. For not just this Topic, but Other Topics as well.