Pump and dumps are for little bitty companies that don't really do anything (most aren't operating) think Infinium Labs (maker of the Phantom console). It would take billions to pump and dump a listed stock.
Domestic sources couldn't be ramped up to meet our needs faster than building your nuclear plants, besides then we'd just be dependant on foreign Uranium. Doing anything besides pulling oil out of the ground is 99% something to look good on TV by "Doing something about the problem". The US burns almost 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day, we pull about 5,000,000 out of the ground in our own territory. About 10,000,000 barrels are imported as oil and the remainder is imported as refined product (we haven't built enough refineries to fully support US demand either).
http://www.nd.gov/ndgs/NDNotes/ndn9_h.htm
There are lots of fossils of sea creatures in west at all elevations. Most creationists would say that dragons were the remaining dino decendants of the ones who went on the ark.
Re:Piracy is marker of immature market
on
Piracy Economics
·
· Score: 1
I wasn't sure, but as I was writing I realized that most monopolies that continue today are natural monopolies (especially in technology).
Re:Piracy is marker of immature market
on
Piracy Economics
·
· Score: 1
Monopolies don't require a market with network effects, but products that have network effects, will typically result in a natural monopoly (meaning that two or more companies will eventually become one through competitive results).
Re:Piracy is marker of immature market
on
Piracy Economics
·
· Score: 1
The biggest difference is that F1 is a road course (meaning there are many turns of different directions and angles) while Indycar is a track course (typically an oval). F1 cars must essentially be general purpose (to turn left right and such) while Indycars are like most NASCAR races (go fast turn left) but faster. F1 is globally more popular while Indy was more American focused, and is even more so following the split of CART and IRL (due to racing politics).
I read two papers daily, and one weekly paper (in dead tree form). I know that if the newspaper industry disappeared it would be very bad. However, most local city papers are pieces of crap, they need to change to survive, and not just because the internet threatens them. They grew very soft from the 1950s to the 1990s and were in a slow decline prior to the internet becoming a strong competitor to them, they'd already bleed most national accounts, and were holding on to their local ties. Most city papers in the country are essentially an AP/Reuters/Knight-Ridder national feed with a page of local news, and classifieds stuck on the back. That's obviously not going to last now that classifed isn't nearly as profitable as it had been. Anyone can get an AP feed online for free obliviating 90% of the value of the pages in the paper.
Papers that continue to deliver relavent, exclusive information (because they are uncovering and featuring it) are experiencing circulation (as well as revenue and profit) increases, but too many papers in this country are wasting effort duplicating things that don't add value (there is little need for more than 3 international staffs) and not adding value to the news they repackage (reprinting an AP story a day later is also pretty easy to replicate). That business worked when the value came from being the classified market place, but they have been seriously challenged there, and now need to make news delivery pay or they will effectively die.
Here's my prediction, Windows will be free too, but the money will be in providing the internet offered services to those $100 dollar computers. Why do you think Microsoft was willing to lose $2 billion/yr on the xBox project? (Hint, they could care less about bringing FPS to non-geeks). Do you really think search engine ads were going to be worth $100 billion?
There are two reasons. There are millions of racing fans, (the Indy 500 will probably have 5 million viewers) including many of the higher ups in most of the US auto industry. Second it's like product placement so people can't just get up and leave during the commercials (they're watching the cars and then see the ads. He might want to think about partnering the effort with Intel/AMD/HP/Oracle/Dell/IBM who could then foot a portion of the bill and could add further legitimacy.
Exactly, I read every page of the Financial Times daily (with relish on Saturdays), and the Economist weekly. Both papers are doing quite well with revenue and circulation up, and profits for the group up 50% last year.
A better answer would be to not compete by offering something the internet rarely offer's well, not news but thoughtful analysis (it's going to take time to generate that so the slower delivery is far less meaningful).
The problem with most news papers isn't that they publish yesterday's news today, it's that there's aproximatly 0 usefulness accompanying the news. When the analysis exists, the papers continue to do well. Too many papers depended on their local monopoly on classified advertising for far too long and publish a shoddy product. That monopoly is fast loosing value to the internet and most firms were caught flat footed. E-paper isn't going to change that shift.
How much of that cost would be paid even during peace time, many of the solders would still be solders, and most of the equipment would still be owned, so I'm not sure that you can attribute all of the costs of war to the war (I think the key question is, "is having a military a sunk cost for a country?").
Undersecretary Armitrage did the leaking in the Plame case. He was the primary source to both Woodward and Novak (who broke the story and appears to have told others prior to breaking the story), but because Armitrage didn't break the specifics of the law, the special prosicutor needed a head to roll and Libby's testimony was the easiest to get a conviction from. Also, Libby was Cheney's aide, not Rove's.
Compared with software that advertises, "hack me, please" cars are a step up. I agree that they are pretty insecure, I've picked a lock or two, and own one of the cars that is worth taking to the chop shop (and is consequently one of the more stolen vehicles out there). My point was that even if software makers get their %*@$ in line, there is still room for a security industry (albeit a vastly smaller security industry).
On a related note, it's certainly possible to build a secure car, but there isn't much demand out there, since as you note, most cars aren't worth stealing. The real question is what level of security is required in software to deter enough intrusion that most users stop caring. As you note, there are thousands of car thefts annually, but most people don't care, and even my inurance company only charged 2% of the car's value to insure against theft (on the most stolen car in the nation), suggesting that it wasn't much of an issue to them either.
While the software industry has substantial room for improvement, look at cars. Most cars are fairly secure out of the box (far more than most software), but LoJack still finds a decent market.
I was taking price optimization to be price discrimination with a consultant approved euphemism. There are all sorts of ways to price discriminate, senior discounts, airline ticketing processes, branding, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Pump and dumps are for little bitty companies that don't really do anything (most aren't operating) think Infinium Labs (maker of the Phantom console). It would take billions to pump and dump a listed stock.
Um Bob, Clippy? Don't be forgetting Microsoft's contribution to innovation!
So all you're going to see in this thread is, "move along, nothing to see here."
Domestic sources couldn't be ramped up to meet our needs faster than building your nuclear plants, besides then we'd just be dependant on foreign Uranium. Doing anything besides pulling oil out of the ground is 99% something to look good on TV by "Doing something about the problem".
The US burns almost 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day, we pull about 5,000,000 out of the ground in our own territory. About 10,000,000 barrels are imported as oil and the remainder is imported as refined product (we haven't built enough refineries to fully support US demand either).
Ironic, that the solution to that massive problem, created a much longer lasting problem in the Middle East.
http://www.nd.gov/ndgs/NDNotes/ndn9_h.htm There are lots of fossils of sea creatures in west at all elevations. Most creationists would say that dragons were the remaining dino decendants of the ones who went on the ark.
I wasn't sure, but as I was writing I realized that most monopolies that continue today are natural monopolies (especially in technology).
Monopolies don't require a market with network effects, but products that have network effects, will typically result in a natural monopoly (meaning that two or more companies will eventually become one through competitive results).
My favorite is the "lose a turn" feature set.
The biggest difference is that F1 is a road course (meaning there are many turns of different directions and angles) while Indycar is a track course (typically an oval). F1 cars must essentially be general purpose (to turn left right and such) while Indycars are like most NASCAR races (go fast turn left) but faster. F1 is globally more popular while Indy was more American focused, and is even more so following the split of CART and IRL (due to racing politics).
Yep, sad isn't it, and he seems to be doing his best work to bust up the American Gran Prix, as well.
I read two papers daily, and one weekly paper (in dead tree form). I know that if the newspaper industry disappeared it would be very bad. However, most local city papers are pieces of crap, they need to change to survive, and not just because the internet threatens them. They grew very soft from the 1950s to the 1990s and were in a slow decline prior to the internet becoming a strong competitor to them, they'd already bleed most national accounts, and were holding on to their local ties.
Most city papers in the country are essentially an AP/Reuters/Knight-Ridder national feed with a page of local news, and classifieds stuck on the back. That's obviously not going to last now that classifed isn't nearly as profitable as it had been. Anyone can get an AP feed online for free obliviating 90% of the value of the pages in the paper.
Papers that continue to deliver relavent, exclusive information (because they are uncovering and featuring it) are experiencing circulation (as well as revenue and profit) increases, but too many papers in this country are wasting effort duplicating things that don't add value (there is little need for more than 3 international staffs) and not adding value to the news they repackage (reprinting an AP story a day later is also pretty easy to replicate). That business worked when the value came from being the classified market place, but they have been seriously challenged there, and now need to make news delivery pay or they will effectively die.
Here's my prediction, Windows will be free too, but the money will be in providing the internet offered services to those $100 dollar computers. Why do you think Microsoft was willing to lose $2 billion/yr on the xBox project? (Hint, they could care less about bringing FPS to non-geeks). Do you really think search engine ads were going to be worth $100 billion?
There are two reasons. There are millions of racing fans, (the Indy 500 will probably have 5 million viewers) including many of the higher ups in most of the US auto industry. Second it's like product placement so people can't just get up and leave during the commercials (they're watching the cars and then see the ads. He might want to think about partnering the effort with Intel/AMD/HP/Oracle/Dell/IBM who could then foot a portion of the bill and could add further legitimacy.
I'm not sure if there is a difference between the Times and P-I, they share many of the functions that separate the Sun from the Guardian.
Exactly, I read every page of the Financial Times daily (with relish on Saturdays), and the Economist weekly. Both papers are doing quite well with revenue and circulation up, and profits for the group up 50% last year.
A better answer would be to not compete by offering something the internet rarely offer's well, not news but thoughtful analysis (it's going to take time to generate that so the slower delivery is far less meaningful).
The problem with most news papers isn't that they publish yesterday's news today, it's that there's aproximatly 0 usefulness accompanying the news. When the analysis exists, the papers continue to do well. Too many papers depended on their local monopoly on classified advertising for far too long and publish a shoddy product. That monopoly is fast loosing value to the internet and most firms were caught flat footed. E-paper isn't going to change that shift.
How much of that cost would be paid even during peace time, many of the solders would still be solders, and most of the equipment would still be owned, so I'm not sure that you can attribute all of the costs of war to the war (I think the key question is, "is having a military a sunk cost for a country?").
Undersecretary Armitrage did the leaking in the Plame case. He was the primary source to both Woodward and Novak (who broke the story and appears to have told others prior to breaking the story), but because Armitrage didn't break the specifics of the law, the special prosicutor needed a head to roll and Libby's testimony was the easiest to get a conviction from. Also, Libby was Cheney's aide, not Rove's.
I've just booked a ticket to Soviet Russia, can someone point me in the direction of the nearest time machine station?
In Europe, several countries still have a church tax because the church is state supported. The visitors aren't paying for it, but non-attendees are.
Compared with software that advertises, "hack me, please" cars are a step up. I agree that they are pretty insecure, I've picked a lock or two, and own one of the cars that is worth taking to the chop shop (and is consequently one of the more stolen vehicles out there). My point was that even if software makers get their %*@$ in line, there is still room for a security industry (albeit a vastly smaller security industry). On a related note, it's certainly possible to build a secure car, but there isn't much demand out there, since as you note, most cars aren't worth stealing. The real question is what level of security is required in software to deter enough intrusion that most users stop caring. As you note, there are thousands of car thefts annually, but most people don't care, and even my inurance company only charged 2% of the car's value to insure against theft (on the most stolen car in the nation), suggesting that it wasn't much of an issue to them either.
While the software industry has substantial room for improvement, look at cars. Most cars are fairly secure out of the box (far more than most software), but LoJack still finds a decent market.
I was taking price optimization to be price discrimination with a consultant approved euphemism. There are all sorts of ways to price discriminate, senior discounts, airline ticketing processes, branding, etc.