I've been working on a time machine. I've got it to the stage where it can make small jumps into the future. Right now it can go one minute ahead. You just get in, sit in the chair, and press the button. It's not (yet) instantaneous, though. It takes about 60 seconds to complete the trip. I just need some more funding. Look for my kickstarter project soon. If it passes the $100K level I'll put in a more comfortable chair, which would open the way to longer journeys.
Why is there an abhorrence of paying for things? As if it's the dumbest thing in the world to do whenever there's a chance of avoiding it, even if it means ignoring some added effort for the "free" alternative. But even forgetting that, if a person finds something they like and appreciate, why is it so crazy to pay money to the creator of that thing?
If that's the case, and you're confident that the move was due to this tweet, then you had an opportunity to make money.
Overly sharp moves are not, by themselves, an indication of irrationality. Suppose, for example, you had a large sum of money on deposit in a particular bank. And you heard a rumor that the bank was about to fail. If the rumor seemed to you to be reasonably credible you'd want to move your money to another bank. And so would many others who heard that rumor. Maybe nothing will happen, but how much did it hurt to move your money? On the other hand, if the bank fails it's a big headache for you. the result is a run on the bank.
Consider instead that you had a position in oil. And you hear this rumor. Maybe it's crap, but one thing you're pretty sure of is that the price of oil is not going to *rise* on this news, and it might drop. So the sensible thing is to temporarily reduce your position. Others think the same way. And so the result is this "irrational" price drop. But all it really reflected was a change in the estimated risk of having a position in oil. If the risk goes up the price goes down.
My guess is they want to hurt Google, which this will. And then when Google eventually starts ignoring it they can trumpet that fact and hurt them some more.
But understand that it will cause massive unhappiness for the majority of cases
A good start would be at least a 72 hour waiting period, during which Apple sends notifications to all of the devices and all points of contact. That would stop this sort of fraud in the large majority of cases, including this one.
And so yet another group has figured out how to profit from piracy. It's now in their best interest for piracy to continue. If they stamp it out their business model fails.
For sufficiently small values of whoosh. I'm sure the OP saw the "joke." It's not only not funny, it's not even really a joke because it relies on an invalid interpretation of the sentence. In essence, it turns out it's the joke that's nonexistent.
appstore takes care of your bandwidth costs and hosts promotional content and puts you in a place where costumers can actually find you
And deals with payment processing and identification and fraud. Those are an extraordinary burden on the small developer. A 30% fixed and predictable cost is a big win.
On your planet you apparently get to invent your own definitions for terms. A chunk is simply a piece of something. Also known as a percentage. 6% is not a large percentage.
So if the analysts say you should see a +5% quarterly growth, and you "only" see 4.8%, your results are 'disappointing'.
That's just short-term thinking. Long term it doesn't matter what the analysts say. Take Apple, for instance. They will make more than $40 per share in net profit this year. Next year it will be more than $50 per share. over time that is reflected in the stock price. The simplest explanation is that if Apple has so much cash that it starts paying a dividend of $40 per share, a measly 3% yield puts the stock price at 1200. And that completely ignores any growth possibility. Apple is clearly going to keep raking in the dough for some time, and the fact that analysts were disappointed this quarter doesn't mean squat in the long run.
Selective disclosure is actually the law. Companies going public are not allowed to talk about that stuff to the general public. The law was put in place to prevent companies from over-selling good news, as the GP is deemed "not qualified" to properly evaluate the hype. The unintended consequence of that law is that FB was legally obligated to *not* disclose to the GP the problems, but only to those "qualified" to evaluate it.
From the sellers' point of view it was priced just fine. It turns out that those whose job it was to evaluate the company thought it was worth a lot more than it actually is.
Anyone who had taken a rational look at the data would have come to a much better conclusion, but there was all that magic hand-waving that essentially said "the numbers don't tell the story! This is something special!" Sometimes that works (see the current Amazon absurdity*, for example), but not this time.
*Sooner or later everyone will decide that Amazon is not worth a more-than-two-centuries-of-profit valuation, and it will come crashing down hard. As soon as there's a stumble that can't be hand-waved away its price will be cut in half inside of a week, and only continue down from there. And people will be up in arms about manipulation and Wall Street greed, but the reality is it's flat-out insane to own that stock.
Seems perfectly fair if I agree to hold people's money and take liability for it for many years, and you disappear with no will or anything else, that I should keep the money
So if you hold my money for years, then I want it back, you have to give it to me and get nothing extra. But if I die without instructions then you get to just keep it? Seems like that gives you the wrong sort of incentive.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been working on a time machine. I've got it to the stage where it can make small jumps into the future. Right now it can go one minute ahead. You just get in, sit in the chair, and press the button. It's not (yet) instantaneous, though. It takes about 60 seconds to complete the trip. I just need some more funding. Look for my kickstarter project soon. If it passes the $100K level I'll put in a more comfortable chair, which would open the way to longer journeys.
Why is there an abhorrence of paying for things? As if it's the dumbest thing in the world to do whenever there's a chance of avoiding it, even if it means ignoring some added effort for the "free" alternative. But even forgetting that, if a person finds something they like and appreciate, why is it so crazy to pay money to the creator of that thing?
You must have never accidentally opened a huge log file. That always brings it to its knees.
Overly sharp moves are not, by themselves, an indication of irrationality. Suppose, for example, you had a large sum of money on deposit in a particular bank. And you heard a rumor that the bank was about to fail. If the rumor seemed to you to be reasonably credible you'd want to move your money to another bank. And so would many others who heard that rumor. Maybe nothing will happen, but how much did it hurt to move your money? On the other hand, if the bank fails it's a big headache for you. the result is a run on the bank.
Consider instead that you had a position in oil. And you hear this rumor. Maybe it's crap, but one thing you're pretty sure of is that the price of oil is not going to *rise* on this news, and it might drop. So the sensible thing is to temporarily reduce your position. Others think the same way. And so the result is this "irrational" price drop. But all it really reflected was a change in the estimated risk of having a position in oil. If the risk goes up the price goes down.
My guess is they want to hurt Google, which this will. And then when Google eventually starts ignoring it they can trumpet that fact and hurt them some more.
How much would you like to bet?
A good start would be at least a 72 hour waiting period, during which Apple sends notifications to all of the devices and all points of contact. That would stop this sort of fraud in the large majority of cases, including this one.
And so yet another group has figured out how to profit from piracy. It's now in their best interest for piracy to continue. If they stamp it out their business model fails.
Really? You can process credit cards at 2%?
For sufficiently small values of whoosh. I'm sure the OP saw the "joke." It's not only not funny, it's not even really a joke because it relies on an invalid interpretation of the sentence. In essence, it turns out it's the joke that's nonexistent.
And deals with payment processing and identification and fraud. Those are an extraordinary burden on the small developer. A 30% fixed and predictable cost is a big win.
On your planet you apparently get to invent your own definitions for terms. A chunk is simply a piece of something. Also known as a percentage. 6% is not a large percentage.
That's just short-term thinking. Long term it doesn't matter what the analysts say. Take Apple, for instance. They will make more than $40 per share in net profit this year. Next year it will be more than $50 per share. over time that is reflected in the stock price. The simplest explanation is that if Apple has so much cash that it starts paying a dividend of $40 per share, a measly 3% yield puts the stock price at 1200. And that completely ignores any growth possibility. Apple is clearly going to keep raking in the dough for some time, and the fact that analysts were disappointed this quarter doesn't mean squat in the long run.
Facebook the company didn't get that money. Some early investors sold some of their shares.
So blame the silly law.
Anyone who had taken a rational look at the data would have come to a much better conclusion, but there was all that magic hand-waving that essentially said "the numbers don't tell the story! This is something special!" Sometimes that works (see the current Amazon absurdity*, for example), but not this time.
*Sooner or later everyone will decide that Amazon is not worth a more-than-two-centuries-of-profit valuation, and it will come crashing down hard. As soon as there's a stumble that can't be hand-waved away its price will be cut in half inside of a week, and only continue down from there. And people will be up in arms about manipulation and Wall Street greed, but the reality is it's flat-out insane to own that stock.
Well, he didn't get the quote right. It's trading essential liberty for temporary safety.
The existence of More Crazy doesn't absolve Crazy.
Apple sends them an email. I got my notice last night, but it didn't even cross my mind that it was "slashdot-worthy."
(cue the humorous posts about that last phrase.)
Not news, of course. But that someone is probably not the bank.
So if you hold my money for years, then I want it back, you have to give it to me and get nothing extra. But if I die without instructions then you get to just keep it? Seems like that gives you the wrong sort of incentive.
Do you have some numbers to back that up?
139k visits and 117.5k unique visitors? Are people not coming back?
"Browser","Market Share % 8 Jul 2012"
This video properly explains it.