Stock options as compensation
on
SCO News Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As another user pointed out, this seems wrong.
Let's expand - this is wrong. Remember all those dot-bombs that offered stock options as compensation, and promptly died in the late 1990s? Now we have something similar. Payment with stock options.
SCOX is currently hovering around $15-17/share, but now they're filing lawsuits like McCarthy threw accusations of communism around. And at the rate they're going, they're going to discredit themselves and self-destruct, probably filing Chapter 11 in the process.
Chapter 11.
Funny thing that, Ch. 11. It's used for companies who can prove they have less assets than their debts. That's what bankruptcy is, you have more debt than assets, you'll never be able to pay it off, bang, discharged. But waitasec, SCO had that US$50M gift/grant/bribe/whateveritwas. They can afford it. Dismissed. Maybe.
I dunno, I'm with everyone else here, SCO is dead where they stand, they're just buying themselves time so they can pay off the lawyers with the pump-and-dump schemes they're running.
We could do like Moon Base Alpha! But then, it would be a nuclear disposal site, and would knock the moon out of orbit when a weird electrical storm overtook the disposal site.
On occasion, I will respond to the 419ers by requesting a deposit of US$10Million so I can get them started over here for an easy move. I have received one response - basically telling me that what they wanted was much simpler - out of about three dozen of these sent.
They are slightly smarter than they look, but they are no foxen.
Remember, everyone on the 'net is affected negatively by spam - including the Death Star themselves. As such, if they patent this, they make it harder for spammers to deal with circumventing filters.
That AT&T came out and did this, frankly, rocks. Good show, guys.
The only concern I have is that there is prior art, which will come up as a double-edge sword again. Prior art will protect the good guys from frivolous patent filings (Amazon, anybody?), but as such I'm concerned that the spammers will pull the prior art card against AT&T. On the other hand, AT&T's interest - protecting their network - and the fact that they probably have infinitely larger amounts of money than your spammers just might put an end to them for now.
Last I checked, Speakeasy allows transactions over port 25, as long as you're not running dialup or anything with dynamic IP. The rationale is that if you're running a DSL on their name, you're making a hefty investment; OTOH, just about anybody can get a throw-away dialup account, so blocking port 25 on a dialup is just something with the territory.
Besides, if you have dynamic IP on your box, you probably shouldn't be running an SMTP server to begin with.
Well, I guess I better get off my sorry ass and vote him out of office RIGHT NOW.
Oh, wait, the primaries, let alone the generals, don't actually happen until 2004. Guess I gotta wait and spend the time bitching about Dubya, don't I?
This is just what we need. More people on cell phones talking about greenish nasal discharges while walking through the pudding aisle in the supermarket - and now because their home phone number is attached to a device on their hip that is maybe the size of a deck of cards.
OK, they're paying people to leave Linux. This seems like a really thin cover (read: saran wrap) over what this is really about - decimating Linux. But we already knew that.
If we really wanted fully functional and highly secure voting setups via computer here in the US, the government would require it to be written entirely in Ada.
The proper thing to do is to send these emails to 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov if you're in the United States. This is my source, courtesy of Randy Cassingham, author of This Is True".
Point noted there in the case of dress code and porn; had I mod points (or not posted here) you would go up. =)
To clarify, I'm talking the more banal complaints (the high hemline argument you present) and selling of pornography in public venues where it shouldn't be (IE, you won't find playboy at Disneyland).
So where does this enter it? To get to the point, often I've seen people play the "Unconstitutional" card during disputes as a shallow means of defending their own arguments - they rarely have a leg to stand on. It's almost like Godwin's Law, except unlike Godwin (where traditionally the violator just loses by default by the mere mention of Hitler &c), it might be used as more of a last gasp of sorts.
SCO says GPL is unconstitutional. Many public school students feel that school dress codes violate the first amendment. Some people feel that corporate restrictions on the distribution of pornography violate *their* first amemdment rights. Invariably, these people are corrected and accordingly embarrassed when the authorities say "Um, no it's *not*."
Slashdot Mirror
Let's expand - this is wrong. Remember all those dot-bombs that offered stock options as compensation, and promptly died in the late 1990s? Now we have something similar. Payment with stock options.
SCOX is currently hovering around $15-17/share, but now they're filing lawsuits like McCarthy threw accusations of communism around. And at the rate they're going, they're going to discredit themselves and self-destruct, probably filing Chapter 11 in the process.
Chapter 11.
Funny thing that, Ch. 11. It's used for companies who can prove they have less assets than their debts. That's what bankruptcy is, you have more debt than assets, you'll never be able to pay it off, bang, discharged. But waitasec, SCO had that US$50M gift/grant/bribe/whateveritwas. They can afford it. Dismissed. Maybe. I dunno, I'm with everyone else here, SCO is dead where they stand, they're just buying themselves time so they can pay off the lawyers with the pump-and-dump schemes they're running.
Must have been the press release.
We could do like Moon Base Alpha! But then, it would be a nuclear disposal site, and would knock the moon out of orbit when a weird electrical storm overtook the disposal site.
That would be the Federal Communications Commission.
They are slightly smarter than they look, but they are no foxen.
That AT&T came out and did this, frankly, rocks. Good show, guys.
The only concern I have is that there is prior art, which will come up as a double-edge sword again. Prior art will protect the good guys from frivolous patent filings (Amazon, anybody?), but as such I'm concerned that the spammers will pull the prior art card against AT&T. On the other hand, AT&T's interest - protecting their network - and the fact that they probably have infinitely larger amounts of money than your spammers just might put an end to them for now.
Start here.
This looks like something you might expect on comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy or something.
...when featured on Slashdot, now, is he? =^^=
Besides, if you have dynamic IP on your box, you probably shouldn't be running an SMTP server to begin with.
Oh, wait, the primaries, let alone the generals, don't actually happen until 2004. Guess I gotta wait and spend the time bitching about Dubya, don't I?
Microsoft is declaring open source dead? This is kind of like declaring Keith Richards to be alive.
Many thanks to the funny candy company for making this all possible.
"alwayson-network". There's just something wrong about a machine posted on slashdot by that name.
I hope to God that this doesn't mean the volunteers run around wearing brightly colored spandex.
I was wondering when Armageddon was gonna come out! Go Bruce Willis, j00 r0x04!
Me, I just hope I can see it - rain's predicted for southern California.
This kind of says it all.
OK, they're paying people to leave Linux. This seems like a really thin cover (read: saran wrap) over what this is really about - decimating Linux. But we already knew that.
OK, notional moderation, -1e+06, pun. =^_^=
If we really wanted fully functional and highly secure voting setups via computer here in the US, the government would require it to be written entirely in Ada.
The proper thing to do is to send these emails to 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov if you're in the United States. This is my source, courtesy of Randy Cassingham, author of This Is True".
I use emacs. What's the big deal?
To clarify, I'm talking the more banal complaints (the high hemline argument you present) and selling of pornography in public venues where it shouldn't be (IE, you won't find playboy at Disneyland).
So where does this enter it? To get to the point, often I've seen people play the "Unconstitutional" card during disputes as a shallow means of defending their own arguments - they rarely have a leg to stand on. It's almost like Godwin's Law, except unlike Godwin (where traditionally the violator just loses by default by the mere mention of Hitler &c), it might be used as more of a last gasp of sorts.
SCO says GPL is unconstitutional. Many public school students feel that school dress codes violate the first amendment. Some people feel that corporate restrictions on the distribution of pornography violate *their* first amemdment rights. Invariably, these people are corrected and accordingly embarrassed when the authorities say "Um, no it's *not*."