Microsoft Eyes UK Digital TV Provider

xiox writes: "This story by the BBC claims that Microsoft are planning to "rescue" the failed digital TV provider in the UK, ITV Digital. This would enable them to get a large share of the British TV market, as the British Government has decided that all TVs will have to switch over to digital by 2010."

Comments

Actually I think it'd be great - No more football

[Moderation abuser]

Just think, a world without all the dull dull dull football matches on TV. The more football clubs going bust, the better.

In fact. it'd be good if Sky bought all the football matches forever then we wouldn't have to have it on every channel every saturday.

The TV Tax

[lostchicken]

In England, there really is a monopoly on TV.

The BBC, the state-owned station, collects a tax on ANYONE using a colour TV. That cost is higher for digital TV.

The BBC has said they have systems to detect RF emmissions from PAL sets, so they drive down streets, checking houses without TV licences to see if they have a set. With such a monopoly in place, many Brits don't want to pay for something else. Would you buy a satellite dish if you had to keep paying for cable?

The UK has already lost one satellite company, and I don't see MSFT really able to save this one.

[OT] Airline_Sickness_Bag - 3 criteria of evidence

[leonbrooks]

see above

Sorry, but the second that you add supernatural, you make the following to be meaningful:

1. Explain the data
2. Be falsifiable
3. Make predictions.

Errr, I couldn't agree more...? (-: I think you meant to say `meaningless'. Pressing on with that assumption:

Creationism.

1. Explain the data

   Goddoneit

2. Be falsifiable

   Goddoneit, and then made it look different (think of the "Flood").

3. Predictions

   Godwilldoitagain

This seems to be your favourite strawman.

I don't see why you expect God to make a special and unprovoked exception in, for example, whether your car starts on a given day or not. Cars have run for very long distances without petrol in response to prayer, but I don't expect that this is an experiment which would work very well for someone in your frame of mind.

Before we look for some realistic answers for you, let's phrase your response after the same pattern, but from an evolutionary perspective - just to see how it looks.

1. Explain the data

   Chance done it. Who can explain chance?

2. Be falsifiable

   It had to be chance because no other forces are at work, we excluded them by definition. Who needs falsifiable?

3. Predictions

   We're all going to die.

...or, on a slightly more serious note...

1. Explain the data

   It's mostly missing, but we think chance done it, otherwise we risk having to submit to an external authority, and we wouldn't like that

2. Be falsifiable

   Since we can be bent to fit any shape, twisted to explain anything - in the absence of observation - we can explain it away even if we can't be falsified

3. Predictions

   Completely random formation of characteristics, little stability of characteristics, little if any speciation, gobs of transitional forms in the fossil record... oops.

Now a more realistic Creationist perspective (Creationism and Materialism aren't the only possible perspectives):

1. Explain the data

   The earth was created de novo, ex nihilo, kiloyears ago, and then totally inundated some centuries later.

2. Be falsifiable

   Continents have not had time to wear down, rivers have not had time to cut long beds or deposit more than several thousand annual layers of silt, helium, salt and other environmental substances have not had time to reach equilibrium. If they have, the theory is false.

3. Predictions

   Large numbers of well speciated fossils will be found within alluvial and volcanic rock, usually buried with signs of great violence and/or speed. Alluvial rock layers will often be found to be thin, relatively homogeneous, and widespread. Layers will follow a general order which varies gradually with location, but occasionally will be found disordered, even reversed. Occasional rock formations will be hairpinned. Strata will occasionally exhibit Z-shaped seams. Etc ad nauseum...

Nick off, you're scaring the crows...

BTW, I think /. character-per-line counting sucks, not to mention that you can fool it, kinda, and that it leads to padding, rather than to concise, direct reasoning and expression. The only reason for this paragraph's existence is to bump that CPL figure up past 35 from about 24. Waffle, waffle, waffle. The internet regards all blockages (such as censorship and pointless rules for posting comments) as errors and routes around them, don't'cha know? So if /. will kindly nudge the limt down to about 20, everyone can get on with their lives with no loss of functionality to this accursed weblog. Type, type, type, yawn, yawn, yawn, 35.7 and counting, type type type type type type type type yadda yadda yadda drone drone drone drone waffle waffle jaw jaw rabbit on gibber gibber. 37.6 blah blah blah and on and on and on, sigh. 38.0 blah blah blah and on and on and on, blah blah blah and on and on and on some more. Steadily the annoying counter is nudged upwards. Nudge, nudge, push I think I'll switch to kuro5hin now. Yay, we topped 40.