
Microsoft Eyes UK Digital TV Provider 190
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."
rumours (Score:3, Informative)
is it me? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:is it me? (Score:3, Insightful)
Particapation is not voluntary, you just have a choice as to who you chose to particapte with(Unless you want to live in a cave and hunt your food). As corporate consolidation continues, your choice will disapear as well.
I disagree. I think its about, you know, making money. "Control" is a lot of work. It is much easier to just make money by making a product and then selling it for money.Microsoft may just want to make money, but they need to exert control over the consumer and the market to make more. To do that they need to goverment on their side. Thinking otherwise is just naive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:is it me? (Score:2, Insightful)
tr.v. controlled, controlling, controls
1:To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct. See Synonyms at conduct.
2:To adjust to a requirement; regulate: controlled trading on the stock market; controls the flow of water.
3:To hold in restraint; check: struggled to control my temper.
4:To reduce or prevent the spread of: control insects; controlled the fire by dousing it with water.
There is more to the word control then just your black and white, Orwellian or not view of it. When microsoft goes around buying up companys like there going out of style, thats control(of the market). When you can't by an OEM computer without windows on it, thats control(of the conusmer). There are lots of exapmples of companys removing choice from the consumer, ala "control". the best example is media conglomerates. The next time you watch the news,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i second that (Score:1)
nice to see some realism overhere @
(ps. he *really* uses frontpage to create his webpage, amazing
Re:is it me? (Score:1)
not control here (Score:2)
What they are trying to do is expand into other markets. All big corporations try to 'diversify,' otherwise they get bloated, top-heavy and sink. MS is just looking around for other markets to get into in order to keep themselves going.
Re:not control here (Score:1)
Not necessarily. Companies that succeed may invest in other good companies, true, but other good investments would be:
As an example of (2), consider the privatization of CompUSA. 51% ownership went to private ownership in Mexico. The rest was divided up amongst one of the baby Bell telephone companies, Microsoft, and someone else (don't remember right now; not important here). IIRC, MS got about 10% of Comp and may still have it.
CompUSA was not anybody's model of a successful company. But without Comp, MS would have lost a large chunk of their retail presence.
In this case, (British TV), it does look like they're trying to get a foothold in a new market. But is it to make a profit out of TV production or because a new, national WindowsTV would make big bucks in license sales?
Re:not control here (Score:3, Interesting)
No Surprise (Score:3, Interesting)
At one point there was a rumor that MS wanted to have a controlling investment in a communications satellite. I don't know what happened with that.
Re:is it me? (Score:2)
If you ask me, they should also release an X-Box with a built in decoder. I despise Microsoft, and I'm perfectly happy with my PS2, but I'd be very likely to pay £199 for an X-Box that came with Sky One for a year.
Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga continues (Score:1)
Lets hope the consumer wins out - but then again
<i>"British Government has decided that all TVs will have to switch over to digital by 2010"</i>
Hmmmm
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:2)
...and then we can have another spectrum auction and sting the telcos again :-).
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:2, Insightful)
We have BBC vs Channel 4, that's no bad thing.
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:1)
Hmmmm ...
The plan being to license the space that is used by terestial TV broadcast to mobile phone companies(and others) for use with new digital services including not only voice but data services. I doubt the mobile phone companies will be interested though since they have been stuck with a rather large bill for the 3G licenses which no customers seem intested in using.
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:2)
It's not that we're not interested, it's just that there's nothing for us to buy yet! I think GPRS is the only new technology that's appeared since that auction, and that's really not what 3G is about.
According to Nokia [nokia.com]:
* 3G is being on a train and watching clips from your favorite soap
* 3G is being out and sending images back to headquarters
* 3G is using your phone to take holiday pictures to instantly send to friends at home
* 3G is using your phone for a videoconference in a taxi
I think we'd best wait until there's a product that actually does this before declaring that customers aren't interested in the technology!
Re:Microsoft vs. AOL Time warner - the saga contin (Score:2)
An STB costs £100 a throw. My video is analogue, I have 3 analogue TVs. My WinTV card is analogue. My Tivo is analogue.
Before this switchover is even going to be remotely realistic then STBs have to be down to about £10 or less. All new videos and TVs have to be equipped with digital. Conversion of existing sets must be available at a minimal cost.
None of this is happening. The adoption of digital won't realistically even *start* until this is true. It is currently impossible to by a 14" portable digital set. The smallest digital TV available is a 28" widescreen and it weighs in at £700. OK for rich ubergeeks, but for the other 99% of the population conversion isn't practical.
My mother saw the pace STB on breakfast TV, and since she had some money spare decided to get one. Looked at it, phoned me in confusion, then sent it back. It only supports SCART input (which she can't use)... great f*cking move guys...
Consortium? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why on earth do they need a consortium? ITV Digital's debts are in the region of a few hundred million pounds, as far as I know, but Microsoft is sitting on an actual cash pile of tens of billions. If they truly want it, then the only reason not to buy it outright is surely a political one, not problem of means!
Re:Consortium? (Score:1, Informative)
If you had lots of cash in the bank, would you spend some of it on a loss-making business?
Re:Consortium? (Score:2)
Microsoft do not have much experience in the TV business and none in the UK. Partners bring more to the table than money, they bring contacts and expertise.
A TV station needs content, content providers need a distribution channel. Practicaly every cable TV station has significant ownershop from the cable networks.
Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:5, Funny)
So will Microsoft be giving away a new version of the X-Box as a digital tv receiver? That'd be about the only way to boost sales of X-Box games there.
Re:Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:1)
In that situation people would probably keep trying to fit their rented movies into it.
Consumer: "Well, it came from the TV provider, and it's as big as a VCR..."
Re:Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:1)
Re:Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:2)
Re:Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:2)
Re:Boost X-Box Sales? (Score:1)
That said, I have contemplated picking up an Xbox for two simple reasons
a) I really want to play Halo.. Microsoft should use that Warthog Jump video as a promotional item.. just watching that made me want the game
b) I have been offered an Xbox for £75 ($109) - even if I decide it sucks I can sell it back on for double what I bought it for
Microsoft buys UK (Score:5, Interesting)
If this happens we may need to float the british iles off into the mid atlantic and quietly sink them.
Re:Microsoft buys UK (Score:2)
Or attach them to the USA and make them another state.
Re:Microsoft buys UK (Score:1)
The UK is only one of the countries in the British Isles. In Ireland we're not kowtowing to Microsoft to quite the same degree as His Tonyness... although Microsoft is a huge employer here, they haven't yet shown any interest in taking us over completely.
Re:Microsoft buys UK (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft buys UK (Score:1)
The_Shadows[LTH], out.
This is EXACTLY what we need (Score:2, Funny)
Wow wont it be great when everything is controlled by microsoft?
Just think: Microsoft TV can hype Microsoft OS that is bundled with Microsoft Internet that wont let you see all that nasty "free" and "good" stuff available.
and noone will have to worry about incompatibilities! it's all microsoft, you know how well their stuff plays with their stuff
wait.......
lacking one weakness (Score:2)
They could possably expand a working network to do alot of the neat digital tv stuff that people have been talking about, but not actually making/getting.
My point is that, while the problems with MS are obvious (to us), there are also some possable good things that could come from this.
I've thought this for a long time. (Score:2)
Microsoft/Gates VS News Corp/ Murdoch.
Mark My Words.
Re:I've thought this for a long time. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I've thought this for a long time. (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe its because I'm English and see more of Murdoch - but I think he's as sociopathic a megalomaniac as Gates is. I think you can read a lot into a corporation from its chief controlling founder's personality. I tend to see AOL/TW/Case as just more of your everyday (very successful) capitalists just following the megacorporation-HOWTO.
Gates + Murdoch I find a bit scary as personalities. All just my opinions of course , and all total conjecture.
Re:I've thought this for a long time. (Score:1)
What about AOL-Time-Warner-RoadRunner-Turner-CNN-etc.
There are a few more megas than you think...
Re:I've thought this for a long time. (Score:1)
ITV Digital (Score:2, Interesting)
ITV had already a dwindling population of subscribers and now that the bad PR of current people will not flock back.
And the second biggest money maker (after drugs) for the UVF and IRA in Northern Ireland was too sell chipped ITV decoders.
Re:ITV Digital (Score:1)
Because not all of us can put a dish up, and are not in cable areas. So digital reception through the arial is the only way to get certain channels.
It would just be, for MS, an extension of their cable set top boxes business. I could see them switching everyone over to Windows CE based hardware. Finally, I can get read of the crap box I have now that crashes every 3 days to one that crashes every 7
Re:ITV Digital (Score:1)
Non-subscription digital boxes are supposed to be going on sale here soon and I'm sure itv digital is capable of broadcasting unscrambled signals, especially when those signals will be receieved by the x million homes without SKY in the uk.
Well, I've just booked my plane ticket out of here anyway.
The biggest money maker for the IRA ... (Score:2)
Great (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great (Score:1)
It astounds me that Steve Ballmer hasn't had a heart attack or somthing yet.. not that I wish the guy any ill health, but just watching the famous Steve Ballmer videos, he exhausts himself just bouncing round a stage for 30 seconds - and can barely get his breath back for almost as long.
Digital switch in 2010 (Score:1)
And I doubt many people will be using Digital Terrestrial, as unfortunately it's pathetic (Note: This is my experience after prolonged use).
Oh great (Score:5, Informative)
For those Americans Not in the Know obout our state of affairs accross the pond, ITV digital has Over bidded to get the TV rights to most Football (Soccar) games over here and as a result has gone bust. It's parent companies (both established broadcasters "Carlton" and "Granada" are using Legagal technicalities to get out of paying the Football clubs the money they were promised. This has left a lot of smaller, less well off clubs facing financial ruin, unless a buyer can be found. Whilst it is true that I think Microsoft is Vile, if it saves all of the threatened clubs my opinion of them will increase dramatically.
Re:Oh great (Score:1)
Re:Oh great (Score:1)
FYI, Telewest (one of the (two?) large UK cable co.'s) is 23% owned by MS already. (and guess who owns the only cable down my street....)
Re:Oh great (Score:2)
You don't really think MicroSoft (or any other big company for that matter) would buy the TV station to save the local football clubs, I hope... Big companies like that don't care at all about such things. As a matter of fact, neither do the vast majority of smaller ones.
To let your opinion of a company be influenced by this kind of "accidental" benefit is a recipe for serious disillusionement.
Re:Oh great (Score:3, Informative)
Not at all. Carlton and Granada are limited liability companies; this is what limited liability means - they are not liable for ITV Digital's debt just because they own a majority of the shares ('stock'). How would you like it if a compnay went bankrupt and you found yourself liable for their debt because you owned some shares in them?
The F.A. were greedy. Football players were greedy. ITV Digital were greedy. You may have noticed, there's been a lot of this in the last few years....
Re:Oh great (Score:2)
Carlton and Granada's limited exposure is because _ITV Digital_ is a limited company.
However the football clubs have been threatening to sue Carlton and Granada anyway.
http://www.football-league.co.uk/today/v
"The Board is clear that in such an eventuality Carlton Communications plc and Granada plc would be liable to fulfil the obligations under the contract between The Football League and ITV Digital, a company jointly and equally owned by Carlton Communications plc and Granada plc."
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7
http://media.guardian.co.uk/city/story
http://spurs.blogfootball.com/stories/storyRead
However there are rumours of shareholder guarantees in the football contract, i.e. for Granada & Carlton to pay the contract if ITV Digital can not, although this is where it gets really messy (if you haven't given up or fallen asleep by now), the actual signed contract does NOT appear to contain any shareholder guarantees BUT the original tender documents do."
Actually I think it'd be great - No more football (Score:3, Troll)
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.
Re:Oh great (Score:1)
Our Canadian cousins say "aboot." You guys say "obout." As an American, I say "about." Isn't global diversity wonderful?
Third Choice (Score:2)
There will be third choice rolling out nationally sometime next year. This project (www.kitv.co.uk), true Interactive DTV is
currently only available in Kingston up Hull. It will be available nationally from some time next summer.
It's already offer more services (DTV,VOD,Internet,Email, Fax Bridge) than the established players. Ultimately it will support any Service available over IP.
Microsoft and ITV (Score:5, Interesting)
Almost all of the people who were cut were developers and technical people.
Since the restructure, they're attempting to target the low-end middleware platform. For example the software that runs on a Motorola DCT-2000 cable box, and gives you the channel listings, and in the future VOD and purchase control.
It makes me wonder what they're trying to accomplish by purchasing yet another small itv company in the UK when they don't make enough money to support their own engineering efforts.
Aaron
Re:Microsoft and ITV (Score:1)
Re:Microsoft and ITV (Score:2)
I've been looking... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I've been looking... (Score:5, Informative)
I used to have one and the top list of annoyances has to be:
1) The channel refusing to change at all, despite having new batteries in the remote
2) The channel change refusing to take the second digit of a channel change - "No goddamnit I said channel 26 not channel 2"
3) Flipping through channels takes ages as it takes almost two seconds to buffer enough data to display a new channel, so scrolling from Sky 1(26) to MTV(33) would take 15 seconds...annoying if you're just checking to see if JackAss has come on yet.
4) Having to walk over to the box to reboot it (by pulling the power cable out)about once a week, as the box refuses any input from the remote (including on/off)
5)Super low picture quality. I don't know what codec they were using, but from the banding it looked like they were converting the image to 16-bit before converting it into a mpeg-type stream. This is okay for normal shots such as people in a room, but for Star Trek it sucked as any subtle colourations in the background would be displayed as three bands across the screen.
But at least they weren't owned by Rupert "Pay no taxes" Murdoch. I suspect M$ won't buy them as their tech is so bad and they are direct competitors to R.Murdochs Sky One in the UK, and it would probably be a mistake for Microsoft to make him a strategic opponent.
Re:I've been looking... (Score:2)
Re:I've been looking... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, me for instance.
My digibox regularly locks up and refuses input until it is unplugged. It also occasionally loses the sound on a channel - but if you switch channels, and then back again... sound is back. You'd think with all the time they've had, they'd have sort this kind of crap out long ago.
Quite apart from the all the bugs in the digibox itself; Sky Active is obnoxious and slow (unusable in fact), and there are increasing number of logos and nags (press the red button - piss off!).
And all that for the ever-increasing price and ever decreasing quality.
Re:I've been looking... (Score:2)
Having good scart cables is really essential with these things... the bog standard £5 jobbies just won't cut it.
I agree with the other points, though... I've lost count of the number of times I've recorded 2 hours of teletext instead of dr.who.
Blah (Score:1)
At least I don't have to have a Passp0rt just to read it!
Yet...
<mumble> Sensationalist <mutter> (Score:5, Informative)
ITV Digital? "Large share"? Don't make me laugh. Many of us can't even get channel 5 properly, yet, in spite of being in a major city. Those who have satellite and/or cable forget that there are still many, many people in the UK who don't.
This whole story is one big sensationalist rumour. I've heard so many "possibler buyer" stories about ITV Digital in the past couple of weeks that I've lost track. Why is this one any more likely?
Re: Sensationalist (Score:1)
probably not enough demand for 1st division to convince people to switch over from rupert murdoch's stranglehold, but its another(?) exclusive on TW/NTL's list
No Money To be Made From Grimsby vs. Gillingham (Score:3, Informative)
The number one reason for Murdoch's success with Sky was that he managed to get rights for the Premiership football, which meant anyone who wanted to watch the matches (which is a lot of people in the UK) had to get Sky.
ITV tried the same trick with the Football League rights but somehow didn't understand that very few people would subscribe just to be able to watch Football League matches.
Premiership football has (inter)national appeal, people all over the country (and indeed the World) will watch it because it is one of the top three domestic leagues in the World (along with the La Liga in Spain and Serie A in Italy), the quality is good and many of the World's top players play in the Premiership. In contrast, the lower levels of football have only regional appeal. When Grimsby play Gillingham the only people interested are those in Grimsby and Gillingham (and many of these will actually go to the game rather than watching it on TV) the rest of the country doesn't care.
However, I think (though I may be wrong) that the rights have already reverted back to the Football League so that they can resell them to the highest bidder (which is bound to be much lower than the original deal), so Microsoft acquiring ITV Digital would not necessarily mean Microsoft acquiring the broadcasting rights for the Football League.
Testcard (Score:1)
Whatever keeps them out of the software biz... (Score:3, Interesting)
We know TV's already full of crap. M$ can't do any harm there. Its already down to the lowest common denominator. Let M$ go broke trying to get into HDTV. Its just a mirage as far as I can tell.
There are still no real standards.
The competition is already there and its dog-eat-dog.
The margins are razor thin.
It'd be something else they'd give up on eventually. (I haven't seen any plans for X-Box][ or X-Box ]|[. Have you?
And they'd be at the whim of their advertisers. It'd be great to see M$ pandering instead of patronizing. M$s share holders will watch the share values drop like a stone but since Bill's still richer than Creosus, he won't care and he still holds the majority so their opinion counts for squat.
I can see it now:
"Debby Does Redmond!"
"M$ Where more that you system goes down!"
"Digitized 'Chech & Chong' in:
'Gotta Crash' "
"MSNBC and CNet television in HDTV.
Boredom with a 9x16 aspect ratio."
I gave up on TV years ago. Don't even own one anymore. Waste of time. When I found yourself flipping through 50+ channels trying to see if there's anything on that caught my attention for more that a second, it was time to abandon it (I just didn't pack it a couple of ago,) and get a life.
Maybe the world'd get usable software instead of Win-doze.
Oh, wonderful... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Oh, wonderful... (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally I think the digital transmission system should be handed over to the BBC (as they used to own and run the analogue system) - I suspect they're the only organisation that could actually get people to watch it AND utilise the possibility of data display as well as video.
They have a long history of stuff like this - they "sponsored" the BBC model computers - they transmitted computer programs over the airwaves years ago - They still seem to like teletext which is rapidly becoming obsolete AND they have a pretty good website setup too. I seem to remember multiformat computer casettes as well.
In 2010 it could be sold off with the government keeping a "golden share". AFAIK it still has this in the analogue system.
All you need now is a good receiver/decoder (set top box) - I'm not sure this is ready yet. Some of the STBs in the UK are DIRE!!! The Telewest Digital box should be studied by EVERYBODY doing HCI as a example of how NOT to build a user interface!!!! Slow, clunky, confusing and the remote was not designed - they simply took a load of buttons and stuck the to a brick! I'd far rather have a Gamecube than more TV.....
L8rs!
Enough Microsoft already! (Score:1, Offtopic)
Another article (Score:3, Informative)
Don't get too excited (Score:3, Insightful)
This is probably a non-story. There's a $250 million poisoned chalice attached to buying ITV Digital as a going concern, let alone the fact that it makes a loss ever second it's on air. That's not pocket change, even for Microsoft, and bearing in mind their internal beaurocracy, they probably won't be able to commit to taking it on in time to buy the business outright.
Chances are, nobody else will either, and the company will fold, default on its debts, and then have its assets (i.e. its license and equipment) bought by a new bidder. Most likely (wait for it) is the current owners, who are chuckling all the way to the bank at the thought of being able to effectively just wipe all the debts and start clean. Microsoft doesn't like to get involved in bidding; they like deals to be done behind closed doors and controlled entirely by then. Actually bidding on an open market would be... unseemly.
I think we can sleep easy. But then, I'm already a UK Telewest customer, and Microsoft's already got their finger in that pie, so I may be suffering the first signs of Infestation. Make up your own minds. ;-)
Re:Don't get too excited (Score:2)
When its something they want bad enough, that is pocket change. Case in point, Xbox. They're supposed to eat over $1 billion (closer to $2 billion, I think) before they break even. Basically, if the brains at Microsoft have some great way to take ITV Digital and make a great profit from it, then eating $250 million and operating losses for a little while doesn't sound all that outlandish to me.
Re:Don't get too excited (Score:2)
But Xbox is the perfect example of how slowly they move, and how much their culture is dominated by political infighting. Sure, $250+ million is chump change to Microsoft as a whole, but it will be an individual VP in charge of a smaller subdivision who will have to sign on the dotted line. I just don't think they will be able to organise it in time. I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Switching over to digital by 2010 (Score:1)
Digital terrestrial includes many new non-analogue including BBC3 and BBC4.
And as others have pointed out, ITV Digital's service is very poor. Microsoft will face a challenge bringing it up to scratch. Having said that, if any company can transform ITV Digital, it's Microsoft.
Re:Switching over to digital by 2010 (Score:2)
Examples:
Andersen Consulting is now "Accenture"
The Post Office is now "Consignia"
If this tactic fails, simply rename again!
Example:
Mobile phone company Mercury became "121" and is now "T-mobile"
My analogue cable TV service has been "Encom","Bell Cable Media","Cable & Wireless" and is currently "ntl". Draw your own conclusions.
digital tv without subscription (Score:1)
MS are welcome to ITV Digital!
Interesting. Ta. (Score:2)
Microsoft's motivation (Score:2)
Rumour has it, that Microsoft wants to get their hands on TV's existing blue screen technology - ie where something simple is superimposed onto something flash to make it _look_ like something really good is going on...
darn it, could have got a first post (Score:1)
'windows needs to restart your tv to let you watch
eastenders.'
there will be a war where ms push teletext at you
with activex vulns and speak of skytext as like they do with unix,
for some stupid reason there will be IIS on set top boxes, a whole new code red variant will be able to make you watch home and away while it ddos's
Monkey! (Score:1)
Isn't this probably (Score:2)
I'm no MS fan (by a long shot), but this seems like smart business to me, by moving into other industries they're not wholly dependent on software. They're already in entertainment, tried digital communications (failed satellite venture) and just introduced a gaming device (X-Box). They know they can do entertainment (look at everything they've contributed to /. stories! ;) ), so why not expand on that?
I'm not saying they may not try to manipulate content or use another tactic, but it seems to make business sense from their past investments...
1.5 % is a large share? A bit of perspective (Score:2)
Not necessarily a good business to be in.
Re:1.5 % is a large share? A bit of perspective (Score:2)
Football Leage - association - who cares. (Score:2)
Digital = buzzword for selling crap (Score:1)
But, if Bill Gates appears in an advert were Monkey takes the piss out of him, then i might get Microsoft digital (but a hacked version, im not paying for that shit)
Microsoft's strategies (Score:1)
Will it affect Corrie? (Score:1)
Re:Will it affect Corrie? (Score:3, Informative)
They just share a similar name (Granada are/were a large shareholder to ITV digital but that's as far as it went).
Re:Will it affect Corrie? (Score:2)
Four Microsoft Articles? (Score:1)
Slashdot
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters. And Everything Microsoft Does. EVERYTHING.
Re:The TV Tax (Score:2)
They don't bother detecting transmissions from sets, although it's possible (the military developed such technology to read data from terminals remotely). There's no need, there is a central database of every house that doesn't have a license anyway.
£100 a year for 7 BBC channels (1,2,4,choice,news24,+2 childrens channels), not to mention 6 radio channels and all the BBC interactive stuff (some of which is really cutting edge) is a bargain... especially since there's no advertising to fast forward past every 5 minutes.
The UK hasn't 'lost' any satellite companies. BSB was taken over by Sky simply because Murdoch had spare change and hadn't bought any companies for a few minutes... It's a great pity the M&M commission didn't put a stop to it then, because we'd probably have some decent competition (lower prices - the full sky package weighs in at something like £50 per month).
Re:[OT] Airline_Sickness_Bag - Biology and geology (Score:2)
If you were to read Kauffman, "The Origins of Order" (Oxford University Press, 1993), you'd get a fairly solid mathematical treatment of how chaos and order combine on the boundary between them to self-modify. This process both limits and creates the evolution that darwin famously found, and the maths provides for the non-linear nature of evolution in the early stages (it's basically a log(n) relation, n=2 in the book but the general case holds. We're so far down the route that the changes are now very small).
Kauffman is a recognised authority in the field as well...
Simon.
Re:[OT] Airline_Sickness_Bag - Biology and geology (Score:2)
You have no idea how refreshing it is to get a sensible response! (-:
Unfortunately for the actual argument, which is a shame because it would be such an elegant solution and open up whole new areas of science if it were plausible, Kauffman gets short shrift [pdq.net] from Michael Behe: `Kauffman discusses his ideas in a chapter [of The Origins of Order] titled "The Origin of A Connected Metabolism," but if you read the chapter from start to finish you will not find the name of single chemical - no AMP, no aspartic acid, no nothing. In fact, if you scan the entire subject index of the book, you will not find a chemical name there either. John Maynard Smith, Kauffman's old mentor, has accused him of practicing "fact-free science."' This is amid a lot of railing about how mathematics is disconnected from practice. If you read the linked page, you'll shortcut a significant amount of objecting. (-: