Slashdot Mirror

because Diebold is a leading producer of banking ATMs.

From here:
Diebold controls roughly two-thirds of the North American ATM market, and trails only rival NCR (NYSE: NCR) in global sales.

Motley Fool article about Baystar and SCO.

IMHO if it were $250/yr contributing to a legal defense fund, I'd go for it.

OTOH, If it's $250/yr to fund payouts, perhaps I should start looking if I have any IP in Linux that I can collect royalties on. :-)

At any rate, I hope one of your offerings is $250 for a legal-defense fund to fight such lawsuits instead to pay for them to go away.

Is it just me, or does Clear Channel own stock in XM? Who knows what will happen in a few years when Satellite Radio becomes the preferred medium for radio. Will Clear Channel try to buy out a portion of stations, and homogenize them the way they have to FM radio? If one of the features of Satellite radio is being able to listen to your station no matter where you are in the continental US, doesn't Clear Channel do that already with voicetracking DJs, syndicated morning shows, and cloned stations all over the country? Yeah, now we can listen to redundant top 40 crapathon KISS-FM no matter where we are in the USA! Who needs satellite!?

= 9J =

" So, it should come as no surprise that SCO Group's (Nasdaq: SCOX) lawsuit against the Linux industry has produced what could either be a profitable new market niche or a spectacular new scam: open source insurance."

Personally, I hope they take their time and nail this guy to the wall.

You're not the first to tell me that. :)

I know exactly what you're saying, because that's precisely the issue I've been tossing around in my mind for the last 3 years.

Here's the problem though: Economics is another data-driven major, just like accounting, finance, radiology, engineering, and so on. Again, the Internet has practically eliminated the transaction costs of transferring data. Predictably then, economics jobs are reportedly being offshored as well, though not at the same rate as IT. So, a BS in Econ. probably isn't the best route either. Regardless, without a Master's or PhD in Econ. and the tons of econometrics that come with that, there's really nothing terribly-useful one can do (except prepare taxes for people - a job that will ultimately be "outsourced" to software like TurboTax). Not that a master's in Econ. (or CS) would be out of the question for me, but I still don't see why that level of education should make any difference if the job is going overseas anyway.

How about IP law (given that you're a lawyer)? I've considered that since high school, half for the money, half because the issues surrounding Napster, open-source, privacy, battles like SCO v. IBM, etc. are inherently interesting. Trouble is, lawyers are getting their jobs are being offshored to a certain extent as well. Moreover, the number of applications submitted to law schools has increased by about 30% or more during this recessionary period, as is always the case during a recession... As if the legal profession wasn't crowded enough as it is...

I'm a huge fan of the iTunes music store.. So huge, in fact, that I'm actually PURCHASING music through this outstanding service and bought myself a 20 gig ipod. My inclination is hardly to convince the world to pay for their music vs. downloading them ilegally; rather it's because I happen to like paying only $10 for an album. I'm a bargain hunter.

It was bad enough that the RIAA shunned legal digital downloads long enough for the pirates to take over the industry. Add to that their decision to continually fight a customer-driven demand for a more flexible (and cheaper) medium of distribution.. Now just when something out there is working, they want to jack the price up to a level that will send all of those wouldbe legal customers back to the P2P world using anonymousnetworks.

The RIAA needs to wake up and recognize their issues here.. Their customers want a more flexible delivery mechanism, they want to pay less, and need the flexibility they currently have with a CD. Apple accomplished much of this with their product, which the RIAA will subsequently destroy with their greedy price increases.

Let's face it - in business customers drive the industry. When Americans stopped buying domestics, the industry responded with better products that met customer needs. When New Coke flopped, Coca Cola wisely switched back to the old formula.

The RIAA and its member companies had an opportunity in 1997 when illegal MP3's first surfaced to nip this problem. The early adopters were trading heavily on the IRC network, which led the rise of Napster and later Kazaa. These networks suceeded because it was just so darn tough for file traders to find the songs they were looking for. Had the RIAA member companies set up a site at any point between 1997 and 2000 (even without digital rights management), they could have easily circumvented the rise of these illegal networks. CD's themselves were insecure enough to create this massive proliferation in the first place!!

Fight them. Write to them and tell them what a stupid decision this is.

For a full updated list of sites pulling april fools jokes see here

Some of the latest enteries:
livejournal.com - on userinfo pages, "Friend"/"Friend Of" -> "Stalking"/"Stalked By"
www.gpf-comics.com - Comic mirrored.
smh.com.au - Yum-cha trolleys with "L" plates
www.clutchfans.com - Patrick Ewing returning to NBA
www.freeciv.org - Freeciv ANSI client
www.rav4world.com - Closed? Should have announced that TOMORROW!
www.retrocrush.com - Nude pics of Jaclyn Smith
westcoaster.net - Roller coaster site turned into teen girl site
www.meowpawjects.com - Sock people forced webmaster to take website down.
miceage.com - Disney merges with Walmart
www.badgerbadgerbadger.com - Badgers replaces with zombies
skepdic.com - Skeptic's Dictionary closing
fool.com - Buffett buys Krispy Cream
launch.com - Britney Spears & Jason Alexander To Renew Wedding Vows
MetaFilter.com - Turned in to a Wiki for the day
www.ddrkc.com - owner sold site to a user that is unpopular
brownpau.com - March for Web Standards
www.beyondunreal.com - ut2k4 production suspended
globetechnology.com - Microsoft Solitaire
www.modernwiccan.com - Randomized Color Scheme
bbs.fuckedcompany.com - Site shutting down
www.diary-x.com - looks like diaryland!
theprp.com - Music site to "Previously Ridden Ponies"
mpx200.org - Pocket PC with 2Gb system memory/Smart Drunk Pocket PC application
www.macosxhints.com - triple G5 Powermacs
www.slyfx.com - AOL buys slyfx
palminfocenter.com - Palms for toddlers.
www.carniola.org - fake news story
eikenes.alvestrand.no - Considering porn spam to be in a separate dialect to everything else
defunctgames.com - Pimps At Sea fox xbox

For a full updated list of sites pulling april fools jokes see here

Some highlites:
livejournal.com - on userinfo pages, "Friend"/"Friend Of" -> "Stalking"/"Stalked By"
www.gpf-comics.com - Comic mirrored.
smh.com.au - Yum-cha trolleys with "L" plates
www.clutchfans.com - Patrick Ewing returning to NBA
www.freeciv.org - Freeciv ANSI client
www.rav4world.com - Closed? Should have announced that TOMORROW!
www.retrocrush.com - Nude pics of Jaclyn Smith
westcoaster.net - Roller coaster site turned into teen girl site
www.meowpawjects.com - Sock people forced webmaster to take website down.
miceage.com - Disney merges with Walmart
www.badgerbadgerbadger.com - Badgers replaces with zombies
skepdic.com - Skeptic's Dictionary closing
fool.com - Buffett buys Krispy Cream
launch.com - Britney Spears & Jason Alexander To Renew Wedding Vows
MetaFilter.com - Turned in to a Wiki for the day
www.ddrkc.com - owner sold site to a user that is unpopular
brownpau.com - March for Web Standards
www.beyondunreal.com - ut2k4 production suspended
globetechnology.com - Microsoft Solitaire
www.modernwiccan.com - Randomized Color Scheme
bbs.fuckedcompany.com - Site shutting down
www.diary-x.com - looks like diaryland!
theprp.com - Music site to "Previously Ridden Ponies"
mpx200.org - Pocket PC with 2Gb system memory/Smart Drunk Pocket PC application
www.macosxhints.com - triple G5 Powermacs
www.slyfx.com - AOL buys slyfx
palminfocenter.com - Palms for toddlers.
www.carniola.org - fake news story
eikenes.alvestrand.no - Considering porn spam to be in a separate dialect to everything else
defunctgames.com - Pimps At Sea fox xbox

"SCO Group's (Nasdaq: SCOX) lawsuit against the Linux industry has produced what could either be a profitable new market niche or a spectacular new scam: open source insurance....a New York-based start-up called Open Source Risk Management has decided to sell insurance to companies using open source software that fear they may be sued."

Funny, the media didn't recognise is as a scam when HP did it.

To the government MS is simply a healthy company bringing in a boatload of cash, who cares if they don't play by the rules [of capitalism].

In addition to the horrific, self-inflicted damage to its reputation, the licensing-lawsuit strategy is delivering a one-two punch to SCO's bottom line. Efforts to license Linux cost SCO $3.4 million in the first quarter. That's right, one-third of total revenue was wiped out. The payback? Twenty thousand dollars. That's not a typo. I know guys who make that much mowing lawns for a summer. Moreover, the balance sheet already currently lists $8 million in liabilities to legal firms. That number is likely to increase with the company's new lawsuit against AutoZone

Translation: every new lawsuit that SCO initiates costs SCO money in legal fees (and you know Boies doesn't work cheap) and other costs.

The whole article is here.

According to The Motley Fool, they won't much longer. SCO is fast becoming solely a litigation engine. They have no new products. Their sales of older product lines are dropping off fast. They've alienated a huge number of people. They're bleeding red ink, and the legal bills are mounting.

Motley Fool - an cool investment column - has this to say about the wisdom of SCOs antics. I especially like the part about the return on investment of $20,000 being what an enterprising kid mowing lawns could make in a summer. This for an investment of $3.4 million in the first quarter.

SCOX has been shedding a lot lately too - $6 since January.

I wonder if the Google search rates on "how to shortsell stock" and "SCO" have gone up.

Guess what? The Motley Fool said much of the same thing - SCO Digs a Deeper Hole. It concludes by saying "With declining revenues, increasing losses, and an expensive and damaging litigation policy, SCO looks like one of the best short candidates I've seen in a while."

Motley Fool

You're telling me that Slashdot is the only major discussion board around? You must be kidding. What about FlyerTalk, or to a lesser extent the Motley Fool?

You have to be careful about conventional wisdom when it comes to economics.

Here's a pretty good case study from the Motley Fool on why taking on corporate debt is often better than trading away shares to make acquisitions. Basically, in this case, taking on a lot of debt is fine if it increases cash flow.

In general, if a company's risk rating is good, you could say that it is in fact wasting money by NOT taking on some debt in order to build infrastructure or make acquisitions.

As the Economist points out in an article called Debt is Good For You," "dividends are paid out of companies' net-of-tax income,and are then taxed again in the hands of the recipients. Interest payments on debt, on the other hand, are tax-deductible."

"This means that a firm's overall value should increase as it substitutes debt for equity."

The article

"Let's do the math: According to its latest earnings report, Apple averaged $349 in revenue per iPod sold. If prices remain stable, 3 million iPods would generate more than $1 billion in revenue. Four million units could produce $1.4 billion in sales. Apple sold $345 million in iPods during fiscal 2003.

Turning the dial to iTunes, Apple says that more than 30 million songs have been sold to date, with 17 million of those coming during the Christmas quarter. The Pepsi promotion should dramatically increase iTunes traffic. Add in the help from HP and paid downloads could pass 100 million during 2004. At that level, Apple should make a few pennies per song, up from zero now."

Basic economics, pay reflects supply and demand, not skill-level/education required to do the job.

i think you want this link in paticular

M$ fraud #1

or

M$ fraud #2

Motley Fool is pretty bullish on Akamai. Of course, they better be since they're a customer. However, many large companies rely on Akamai, including Best Buy, McAfee and MSNBC. Given that a good caching service can reduce bandwidth usage by 50% or more, any large website that uses a caching service is highly dependent on it. However, it'd be hard to run any type of large site without one - Akamai or whomoever.

Changing a caching provider is relatively easy once a contract is signed. A caching network is largely a DNS configuration change. One shouldn't need to change any telecommunications connections or reconfigure applications.

Parent is correct, but does not explain it well for the uninitiated. A better way to learn about shorting stocks can be found Here. Have fun, dont risk your house.

This is the WORST possible choice of lawsuit for SCO, considering that the burden of proof will solely be on them to prove that Novell slandered them. Proving actual malice is difficult when what Novell says is true. However, even if the copyright claims made by Novell are proven to be wrong, SCO will still have difficulty proving Novell acted with actual malice, since Novell believes their statements to be true.

This is another blowhard public relations stunt by _SCOX_. I use the stock ticker symbol because that's the exact reason SCO is filing these lawsuits. As long as their stock performs, they'll have the cash to file lawsuits.

Let's get the facts straight. SCO is posturing since their lifeline is running dry. The recent Motley Fool article shows that the investment community is losing patience with scox. Once the investment runs out, the litigation runs out. Period.

"A consortium of Linux developers called the Open Source Development Labs (OSDL) launched a $10 million legal fund to protect any Linux user from SCO's courtroom hounds. The OSDL's roster includes: Cisco (Nasdaq: CSCO), Dell (Nasdaq: DELL), Ericsson, Fujitsu, Hitachi, HP, IBM, Intel (Nasdaq: INTC), Nokia, Red Hat, Sun Microsystems (Nasdaq: SUNW), Toshiba, and others." source

It's intersting that the GPL, a license designed to encourage voluntary cooperation between programers is now encouraging cooperation between lawyers as well. If there is strength in a distributed coding effort, is there as much strength in a distributed legal effort?

Expect a significant selling pressure on the SCO stock after this publication.

Another FA you can avoid R'ing (link found at Groklaw): the Motley Fool looks at the 'shakedown' of Linux providers: "with the entire computing world putting its money behind Linux, it appears that, for SCO, the apocalypse is now."

I'd give up on trying to measure market reaction via SCOX's price. Many companies have investors who dont know what they're pouring money into. Case in point: the dot-com days when all an investor looked for was ".com" But more recently, this hilarious story.

Correction to myself: Trade deficits exist, but they are not inherently harmful.

See here.

See here.

See here.

See here.

Most importantly, read this entire CBO report on the effects of NAFTA.

It amazes me just how many people don't understand the basic mechanics of the stock market.

A bunch of /. users planning to buy stock is not collusion. As this is a public forum, it is no more different than a group of users from The Fool discussing investment strategies and all agreeing on a common course of action. Regardless, there is absolutely nothing illegal with the suggestions made here.

motley fool is only slightly more credible than slashdot in regards to investment advice.
You adverstise, they suggest your stock. Sad but true :/

Memo to Darl: Call Hsia @ Fool.com re: advertising.

..doesn't appear impressed with SCO either!

There's an article over at Motley Fool that gives some insight into the minds of investors on this issue:

...on Friday, The SCO Group postponed filing its fourth-quarter earnings report until December 22. The reason: To allow time to hammer out the details of its $50 million private placement.

While the company insists this would not affect its prior guidance for revenues of $22 million to $25 million, it does seem strange that a public company would have problems with what looks to be a relatively routine process. For short sellers, this is a textbook clue that there may be internal disarray or perhaps, even some finagling.

I guess today's post by Linus will also help investors get out while the gettin's good.

More fodder for the fire, folks.

Foolish words.

th3m0nk

Just found a link to The Motley Fool that very much suggests that file-sharing isn't taking any revenue. If this is truly the case, how do they justify the restraint of freedom induced by laws and methods of enforcement? This appears to be less a case of protecting revenues as a simple imposition of unjustified power.

More musings on power and on civil disobedience. I should say that I admire the independent artist who chooses to share samples, and do not especially admire those who trade music illegally, but here, punishment is disproportionate.

Microsoft doesn't pay taxes anyway.

S

Perhaps this report may be of interest. Certainly worth considering before plunging into AT&T's more expensive services.

A team of 5 interesting, friendly people will ALWAYS outperform a lone social outcast barricaded in his single office.

Wow. Either you are trolling or you just came out of Proctor and Gamble's manager in training program. I swear, that's how these guys think (they certainly did when I was an intern there) and it did not help the company much in the last few years.

I know this is off-topic, but...you might also want to read The Motley Fool's opinion on Red Hat.

it was BayStar Capital:

see these:

here
and here

- just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're really not out there.

FWIW, you might want to read Motley Fool's Tom Taulli's take on this. th3m0nk

From what I've heard pilots make very little when starting out as a pilot -- $20K in some cases. Fool.com has data on the salary range of pilots and $250K is on the high end. Some of them qualify for welfare! Michael Moore writes:

"That's right -- $15,000 for the person who has your life in his hands. Until recently, Continental Express paid a little over $13,000 a year. There was one guy, an American Eagle pilot , who had four kids so he went down to the welfare office and applied for food stamps -- and he was eligible! " Google Cache

If they hang in there and are lucky they might get a shot at the $250K. Besides, as you pointed out, people's lives are in their hands. It's worth paying them for quality work.

1. Collect underpands
2. ???
3. Profit

See more South Park's Investing Lesson

As for the auction, the poster is absolutely correct: it's likely to suffer from the 'winner's curse.' The shares will be sold to the bidders with the very highest expectations for the stock value, making it unlikely that there will be a pool of even more bullish investors around to push the value of the stock higher in the future.

Not only that, but the vast majority of IPO's come back down rather substantially right after the initial ride up (and then either go up again, or bomb completely...), here is one example I read an article about this (I think it was on the fool but I can't find it now). If I was more of a risk taker, I would consider a short position on this one right after the trading starts...

A recent issue of Barron's points out Google has reached conditions that require it to make reports to the SEC, much like public companies are required to do. It's a 1934 law which takes affect once companies have 500 shareholders and $10 million in assets. There's a reference to it on Motley fool: Gunning for Google

So, while you're right, and realize unlike some others around here that IPOs are not pure good, for Google, if they have to open up their business like this and make these reports like a public company, why not reap the financial rewards of an IPO? This is part of what's motivating them.

There is an SEC regulation that effectively forces Google to IPO (or to beg for an exemption), so it isn't "greed" but rather simply accommodating financial regulations.

Just in case someone doesn't understand this and wants to know more about what "shorting" a stock means:

http://www.fool.com/FoolFAQ/FoolFAQ0033.htm

Yeah, I know I can potentially lose an unlimited amount of money. I was wondering what others thought the chances of that are. I looked on Motley Fool and they argued that shorts are often not as risky as people make them out to be. The price doesn't usually go up that much and stay up that much. But I'd like some historical examples if someone has them. Also, if anyone has the "days to cover" for SCOX, I'd love to hear it.

Also, here is what I think I stand to lose if I buy 30 shares of SCOX at say $16. Suppose the unlikely event that the price goes to $100 and stays there. Then I lose $2520. I'm not excited about that, but I am not totally appalled by it either. Now if it went up to Washington Post (WPO) prices around $700, then I'd be pissed. Then I'd be out more like $20K. So I'm wondering if something like that has ever happened.