Google earned $721.1 million, or $2.33 a share in the quarter, compared with $342.8 million, or $1.19 a share, in the period a year ago. Excluding charges related to stock-based compensation and a gain from the sale of its shares in Baidu, the Chinese Internet company, Google earned $2.49 a share. Analysts had expected the company to earn $2.22 on that basis.
I believe the Baidu sale yielded like $60 million.
Personally, I don't care what Wall Street expects. If growth goes from 80% to 70% to 60% to 50%, our P/E will be like 10 (at $400/share), and we'll still be growing at a really high rate.
Do the math, and forget about projections. If you take the $2.33 GAAP number, and look at the run rate (this would be a middle ground between ttm and projected), $2.33 * 4 = 9.32, which gives GOOG a 43 P/E ratio.
Yes, it's a feature, it's showing what can be filled in with "AutoFill".
From the toolbar, go to "Options", and either just turn off AutoFill, or go to "AutoFill settings", and unclick "Highlight fields that AutoFill can fill in in yellow"
This academic work involves an accomplished contortionist, her bedroom, and many complex, dialogue-strewn dreams that focus on girl-girl scenes with animals as well as humans. Everyone is high on life in this journey through love, motherhood, and applepie, as the narrative covers romance, relationships, but, most importantly, superbsex, ultimately.
Since Dr. Randall Davis is an expert witness for IBM, I am guessing that SCO will say, "ain't so!" and then they will ask for time to refute Randall's findings and perhaps come up with an expert witness of their own that finds thousands of "matches."
Actually, Dr. Davis is already refuting the declaration (currently under seal) of SCO's "expert witness", Sandeep Gupta. Mr. Gupta happens to be the SCO VP of Engineering. Yeah, they searched far and wide to find that expert...:-)
Remember, SCO must present evidence, or have experts present evidence, that there is copying. IBM then just needs to show that SCO is full of it, like they did here...
6 million lines of code compared against 6 million (or more) will take a exponentially more time than 27000 vs 6 million.
That's incorrect. Comparator makes one pass over all the lines of code, computes a hash values for line triplets, sorts that hash value, and then looks for matches in adjacent values of the sorted list.
It is not an n squared algorithm, it's n log n.
By my calculations, looking at 200 times as much SCO code (6M vs 27k) would take less than 3 times as long.
Tanenbaum didn't write Minix to be a competitor to Unix - he wanted to use it primarily for teaching. See here.
Years later, I was teaching a course on operating systems and using John Lions' book on UNIX Version 6. When AT&T decided to forbid the teaching of the UNIX internals, I decided to write my own version of UNIX, free of all AT&T code and restrictions, so I could teach from it.
He even said that he rejected many patches from people trying to make it more "useable", because he wanted it to remain simple enough to teach from.
BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement. SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar...
Gosh, making accusations, and not providing any specifics! That's horrible!!!!! I'm sure SCO is outraged.
I am writing to inform you of a potentially serious situation. I
represent a company with a very large and well-funded legal
department, hereafter referred to as "Your Worst Nightmare." YWN may
or may not possess significant amounts of Intellectual Property
("IP"). Said "IP" may contain, but is not limited to, patents,
copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, methods, know-how, information,
thoughts, and/or beliefs. It is YWN's strong, steadfast conviction
that you personally, your company as a whole, all of your company's
customers, and your entire board of directors and their families may
or may not have willfully and deliberately committed acts in direct
violation of our "IP rights". YWN has a fiduciary responsibility to
protect any and all rights that it may or may not possess, and is
therefore writing this letter to appraise you of the situation.
Despite the ironclad position based on overwhelming indisputable
evidence that may have been presented in this letter, YWN is very
reasonable. YWN believes that you represent an honest, American,
patriotic company, not a bunch of communist hippies that want to steal
YWN's "IP rights", completely contrary to the Constitution of the
United States of America. In order to avoid a potentially ugly
situation, which may or may not involve multiple lawsuits, damaging
press releases, and unpleasant medical exams, LWN proposes the
following solution. Please forward us a check for $1,000,000^H^H^H^H^H^H $250,000^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
$10,000 as a token of your gull^H^H^H^H sincerity. Please identify yourself
on the face of your check with your company name, and any "IP rights"
you think you may be violating.
As the article points out, Bell Labs still exists - at Lucent. In the breakup, "Bell Labs" stayed with Lucent. AT&T Labs was formed, and got some of the Bell Labs people - but the name (and most of the people) went to Lucent.
Bell Labs has certainly had lots of layoffs at Lucent - but not as bad as what is being described at AT&T.
I'd certainly tell you that Bell Labs has lots of great people, and is doing lots of great research - but I'm probably a bit biased...:-)
The Islandia, N.Y., company, one of the biggest makers of corporate software, said that although it signed the licenses, it didn't pay for them -- and never would.
Just wanted to point out that BayStar doesn't necessarily have any belief in SCO at all.
They consummate the deal (or even before they do it), they hedge hedge hedge - i.e. short (close to) as many shares of SCO as they are getting in this deal. They will likely have a negative carry cost, meaning that they make money while holding a fully hedged position, because of the high dividend SCO is probably paying them.
And as someone else pointed out, these securities often have a "death spiral" feature - which means that if SCO stock goes down, BayStar gets more stock, and potentially makes more money.
No conspiracy theories needed - this is probably a great money maker for BayStar. And can you blame SCO for selling stock at these prices to raise cash???
Tree in the forest with no one around, my friend. No one reads the AP wire. No paper will pick it up. No one will read your story.
Everyone is talking about "papers" and "print it". Who cares about the written word? Not all (any?) of SCO's releases are in the paper. I just want Yahoo to associate it with SCOX in its news listing.
I really don't think there's a high hurdle for that to happen...
Re:It is a press release already.
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Interesting - this shows up under SGI and IBM - but not SCOX!!!!
Re:Let's make this a press release!
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 1
But whenever a company is being sued for some kind of securities fraud - you always see all the law firms issuing press releases that they are launching class action suits.
These are not huge companies issuing releases, and yet they show up with the target company's news listings.
Re:Let's make this a press release!
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Thing is, to successfully issue a press release, the press has to give a shit who you are.
This is not true. If you subscribe to a service, and submit a press release, the wire services will pick it up. When I had a small company, we issued press releases. We paid our couple hundred bucks, our press release got out.
It's different than holding a news conference.
Let's make this a press release!
on
Back To SCO
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Is anyone or their linux-related company a member of any wire associations? Some anti-FUD articles really need to be filed as a press release, specifically mentioning SCOX.
Right now, if you go to Yahoo, and search for news on SCOX, you only find their press releases. We need to get some of our opinions out there so they'll show as news on SCO!
Can anyone help? Doesn't this seem like an important thing to do??
If I go to Yahoo, and look at news related to SCOX, this doesn't show up. Here is the open source community trying to help find any misappropriated IP - and no one that doesn't read slashdot/eWeek will know about it!
Isn't there someone who subscribes to a wire service, that can issue a press release? In order to fight FUD, we have to get info out to people that don't read slashdot!!
There have been lots of statements made by various good guys trying to refute some of SCO's FUD - but none of it seems to be "press releases". When I had a small company, I thought we paid like a couple hundred bucks to join a news service - then we could issue a press release and have it picked up by that service.
When I go to Yahoo, and lookup info on SCOX, I think it picks up all news releases that mention SCOX. (I know that when there are class action lawsuits against companies, they manage to get their press releases to show up on a search of the news of that target company.) Currently, all the news on SCO is from their PR department.
So, if we make a press release and mention SCO, and it shows up under SCO news, then maybe we'll reach a much larger audience in our attempts to dispel their FUD.
I don't think it's a "scam". The RIAA is not trying to trick you into giving out your info so they (or someone else) can sue you. The amnesty only applies to people they don't currently have evidence against, and, if you stop sharing after you sign, then obviously they won't be able to get any evidence in the future.
It seems to me like there are a few main reasons they're doing this:
If lots of people reply, they can boast "We stopped 10,000 users that were sharing 1,000,000 songs" through our actions.
Afterwards, when they do sue (more) people, for PR, they can say, "Look, we gave you a chance for amnesty, and you didn't take it."
They can set up scripts to automatically monitor those people's PC, to make sure their sharing really stops. (OK, maybe this one is close to a "trick"...)
Actually, see this thread on Via's board. Someone has reverse-engineered the mpeg driver. It seems possible that hardware support for the Epia will get standardized after all.
Mike
OK, I just spoke to a DB colleague (I'm not a DB guy). StarFish was built to be a general storage system. It is not specific to databases.
When I used the word "replication" above, I hadn't realized that there are specific database semantics for that word. I should have said that it does data replication, not database replication. (Of course, when I made my post, I didn't know the difference...:-) )
StarFish looks just like a regular SCSI disk to the OS. It's almost like a RAID, except instead of having n disks in a chassis, you can have n disks spread out geographically. Writes are essentially replicated synchronously, except that you can specify how many copies need to be written before acknowledging the write. For example, if you have 8 storage elements (like the blades in a RAID), you can acknowledge the write to the host OS once any 2 of them have written the data to disk. You don't have to wait for all of them to commit. Each storage element (when the system is not experiencing any failures) has a complete copy of the data.
It is distributed block level storage. It does not have any specific features for database implementation (other than the fact that it's block level, it does not reorder writes/cache things/play any tricks).
[ shameless_plug ] StarFish is a block-level storage system allowing on-the-fly geographic replication, that would work with any database. It was OpenSourced by Lucent a few months ago. It won the Best Paper award at Freenix '03.
[/shameless_plug ]
Slashdot Mirror
From the NY Times:
I believe the Baidu sale yielded like $60 million.Personally, I don't care what Wall Street expects. If growth goes from 80% to 70% to 60% to 50%, our P/E will be like 10 (at $400/share), and we'll still be growing at a really high rate.
Do the math, and forget about projections. If you take the $2.33 GAAP number, and look at the run rate (this would be a middle ground between ttm and projected), $2.33 * 4 = 9.32, which gives GOOG a 43 P/E ratio.
How does that make GOOG way overvalued?
From the toolbar, go to "Options", and either just turn off AutoFill, or go to "AutoFill settings", and unclick "Highlight fields that AutoFill can fill in in yellow"
So unless Alcatel goes up a lot, LU will actually go down, not up. The stock had already risen in (over-)anticipation of the deal.
Therefore, coming soon to a theater near you:
The Contortionist
This academic work involves an accomplished contortionist, her bedroom, and many complex, dialogue-strewn dreams that focus on girl-girl scenes with animals as well as humans. Everyone is high on life in this journey through love, motherhood, and applepie, as the narrative covers romance, relationships, but, most importantly, superb sex, ultimately.
Actually, Dr. Davis is already refuting the declaration (currently under seal) of SCO's "expert witness", Sandeep Gupta. Mr. Gupta happens to be the SCO VP of Engineering. Yeah, they searched far and wide to find that expert... :-)
Remember, SCO must present evidence, or have experts present evidence, that there is copying. IBM then just needs to show that SCO is full of it, like they did here...
MIke
That's incorrect. Comparator makes one pass over all the lines of code, computes a hash values for line triplets, sorts that hash value, and then looks for matches in adjacent values of the sorted list.
It is not an n squared algorithm, it's n log n.
By my calculations, looking at 200 times as much SCO code (6M vs 27k) would take less than 3 times as long.
Mike
Mike
Gosh, making accusations, and not providing any specifics! That's horrible!!!!! I'm sure SCO is outraged.
Mike
I am writing to inform you of a potentially serious situation. I represent a company with a very large and well-funded legal department, hereafter referred to as "Your Worst Nightmare." YWN may or may not possess significant amounts of Intellectual Property ("IP"). Said "IP" may contain, but is not limited to, patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, methods, know-how, information, thoughts, and/or beliefs. It is YWN's strong, steadfast conviction that you personally, your company as a whole, all of your company's customers, and your entire board of directors and their families may or may not have willfully and deliberately committed acts in direct violation of our "IP rights". YWN has a fiduciary responsibility to protect any and all rights that it may or may not possess, and is therefore writing this letter to appraise you of the situation.
Despite the ironclad position based on overwhelming indisputable evidence that may have been presented in this letter, YWN is very reasonable. YWN believes that you represent an honest, American, patriotic company, not a bunch of communist hippies that want to steal YWN's "IP rights", completely contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America. In order to avoid a potentially ugly situation, which may or may not involve multiple lawsuits, damaging press releases, and unpleasant medical exams, LWN proposes the following solution. Please forward us a check for $1,000,000^H^H^H^H^H^H $250,000^H^H^H^H^H^H^H $10,000 as a token of your gull^H^H^H^H sincerity. Please identify yourself on the face of your check with your company name, and any "IP rights" you think you may be violating.
Thank you in advance.
A Faceless Lawyer in a Sea of Litigators
As the article points out, Bell Labs still exists - at Lucent. In the breakup, "Bell Labs" stayed with Lucent. AT&T Labs was formed, and got some of the Bell Labs people - but the name (and most of the people) went to Lucent.
:-)
Bell Labs has certainly had lots of layoffs at Lucent - but not as bad as what is being described at AT&T.
I'd certainly tell you that Bell Labs has lots of great people, and is doing lots of great research - but I'm probably a bit biased...
Mike
Mike
We can Slashdot them instead... :-)
Mike
They consummate the deal (or even before they do it), they hedge hedge hedge - i.e. short (close to) as many shares of SCO as they are getting in this deal. They will likely have a negative carry cost, meaning that they make money while holding a fully hedged position, because of the high dividend SCO is probably paying them.
And as someone else pointed out, these securities often have a "death spiral" feature - which means that if SCO stock goes down, BayStar gets more stock, and potentially makes more money.
No conspiracy theories needed - this is probably a great money maker for BayStar. And can you blame SCO for selling stock at these prices to raise cash???
Mike
Tree in the forest with no one around, my friend. No one reads the AP wire. No paper will pick it up. No one will read your story.
Everyone is talking about "papers" and "print it". Who cares about the written word? Not all (any?) of SCO's releases are in the paper. I just want Yahoo to associate it with SCOX in its news listing.
I really don't think there's a high hurdle for that to happen...
Interesting - this shows up under SGI and IBM - but not SCOX!!!!
But whenever a company is being sued for some kind of securities fraud - you always see all the law firms issuing press releases that they are launching class action suits.
These are not huge companies issuing releases, and yet they show up with the target company's news listings.
Thing is, to successfully issue a press release, the press has to give a shit who you are.
This is not true. If you subscribe to a service, and submit a press release, the wire services will pick it up. When I had a small company, we issued press releases. We paid our couple hundred bucks, our press release got out.
It's different than holding a news conference.
Is anyone or their linux-related company a member of any wire associations? Some anti-FUD articles really need to be filed as a press release, specifically mentioning SCOX.
Right now, if you go to Yahoo, and search for news on SCOX, you only find their press releases. We need to get some of our opinions out there so they'll show as news on SCO!
Can anyone help? Doesn't this seem like an important thing to do??
Mike
Why isn't this a press release?
If I go to Yahoo, and look at news related to SCOX, this doesn't show up. Here is the open source community trying to help find any misappropriated IP - and no one that doesn't read slashdot/eWeek will know about it!
Isn't there someone who subscribes to a wire service, that can issue a press release? In order to fight FUD, we have to get info out to people that don't read slashdot!!
Mike
There have been lots of statements made by various good guys trying to refute some of SCO's FUD - but none of it seems to be "press releases". When I had a small company, I thought we paid like a couple hundred bucks to join a news service - then we could issue a press release and have it picked up by that service.
When I go to Yahoo, and lookup info on SCOX, I think it picks up all news releases that mention SCOX. (I know that when there are class action lawsuits against companies, they manage to get their press releases to show up on a search of the news of that target company.) Currently, all the news on SCO is from their PR department.
So, if we make a press release and mention SCO, and it shows up under SCO news, then maybe we'll reach a much larger audience in our attempts to dispel their FUD.
Any takers?
Mike
It seems to me like there are a few main reasons they're doing this:
Mike
Actually, see this thread on Via's board. Someone has reverse-engineered the mpeg driver. It seems possible that hardware support for the Epia will get standardized after all.
Mike
OK, I just spoke to a DB colleague (I'm not a DB guy). StarFish was built to be a general storage system. It is not specific to databases.
:-) )
When I used the word "replication" above, I hadn't realized that there are specific database semantics for that word. I should have said that it does data replication, not database replication. (Of course, when I made my post, I didn't know the difference...
StarFish looks just like a regular SCSI disk to the OS. It's almost like a RAID, except instead of having n disks in a chassis, you can have n disks spread out geographically. Writes are essentially replicated synchronously, except that you can specify how many copies need to be written before acknowledging the write. For example, if you have 8 storage elements (like the blades in a RAID), you can acknowledge the write to the host OS once any 2 of them have written the data to disk. You don't have to wait for all of them to commit. Each storage element (when the system is not experiencing any failures) has a complete copy of the data.
It is distributed block level storage. It does not have any specific features for database implementation (other than the fact that it's block level, it does not reorder writes/cache things/play any tricks).
[ shameless_plug ] /shameless_plug ]
StarFish is a block-level storage system allowing on-the-fly geographic replication, that would work with any database. It was OpenSourced by Lucent a few months ago. It won the Best Paper award at Freenix '03.
[