This is not what she is doing. Her right to free speech is not being interfered with
Oh but her free speech is being interfered with, it's called the Chilling Effect.
In fact, what the lawyer in question seems to be seeking is the documentation on which her free speech is based, so if anything this might be closer to a press shield law issue.
What does her banking and other financial information have to do with it?
yes, asshat. there should be public policy to eliminate diseases where possible
So there should be laws to restrict what people eat then too? Like having laws that restrict a person from eating too many hamburgers and french fries? Out of personal choice I don't eat these, hardly ever that is, instead I try to eat as healthful as I can. I even eat as much organic food as I can afford. But I wouldn't mandate that others can't eat as many hamburgers as they want.
oh, then you can't be free to do whatever the hell you want, whenever you want, to whomever you want, regardless of the cost to everyone?
If you can, prove that I am harming anyone else. It's called innocent until proven guilty.
I'd much rather have a minuscule and totally unproven chance of a few kids getting autism, which is not fatal, than have a virtual certainty of thousands of kids getting fatal and/or permanently disfiguring diseases like pertussis or polio.
So you prefer laws and mandates than liberty? Also there are vaccines available without Thiomersal, mercury.
religion: While the news probably didn't reach your mom's basement, the antagonism between "science" and "religion" only started in earnest in the last two hundred years. For the thousand years before that, science and its precursors were thoroughly entwined with religion, both supported by and supporting in exchange the dominant religion of their land. Any stores you have to the contrary are, sadly, more properly called "Atheist Mythology" than anything else.
Tell that to Galileo Galilei who died forget 200 years ago, more than 300 years ago.
Yahoo isn't just stamped on them, it is them. Do a search on yahoo and a search on Alta Vista. The results are carbon copies.
I didn't know this, I don't use Yahoo! for searches and haven't for years. Most of the tyme I use Google however I also use About.com, Altavista, Ask.com, and Mooter.
The AOl, Newscorp stuff, is just business as usual, a means by which to force up M$ bid
Actually News Corp proposed joining with Microsoft to buy Yahoo! "Microsoft & News Corp. Joint Bid For Yahoo". News Corp-Microsoft talks are still going on on a joint venture to acquire Yahoo!.
In the mean time, AltaVista is standing quietly in the corner nursing its drink, trying to muster up the courage to ask ChaCha for a dance. Awwwww:(
Do a search on Alta Vista some time, the results have Yahoo! stamped all over them. Whether that's because the results come from Yahoo! or Yahoo! provides any ads or something else I don't know.
I'd rather have 2 big players instead of one colossus Search company that if things go wrong, the whole planet suffers.
I don't think this is quite true. Unlike an OS or apps it's easy to switch your search engine. While I mostly use Google I also use About, Alta Vista, Ask.com, and Mooter. On the other hand, if you're using online apps then yes it can be hard to switch. However I'd rather have my apps running and my docs stored locally. At most I'd vpn into my home server while on the road.
In a world where computers boot a simple OS, then open a web browser to get all work (email, documents, spreadsheets, everything else) done scares the hell out of microsoft. That is not the business model that microsoft has been using.
Actually MS has been working on offering software as a service for some years. Just log into the website and there's your documents, much like Google Apps.
If the *sale* goes through, Microhoo's stock will rise briefly, then go down.
From some of the comments above, that's what some are hoping for.
Note that neither scenario has Microsoft's stock going down.
Your first scenario, above, has MS stock going down after it goes up.
Shame they don't know how to make the best software - but hey, ya can't be the best at everything.
I have no doubt the engineers at MS know how to make great software, unfortunately it's those in charge that prevent them from doing so. MS releases software that's buggy and barely works at first but then slowly improves it. And with their lock on the desktop they are basically able to force people to use it, or make it expensive to switch software.
I'm sure some would switch. I don't doubt that at all, I just think it wouldn't be enough to thwart Microsoft's efforts if a move like that would be made. There are a lot of people who just wouldn't want to lose what they see being offered or how they built that into their lives.
People may not want to switch, however as MS's acquisition of Hotmail as shown they will mess up. Because of this many would switch as basically staying and switching would entail the same thing, learning news ways to do things.
Even you admit to sticking around for 10 years until you got tired of their heavy handed tactics. Most of us have been watching the same heavy handedness since Netscape went under the first time
You could say I stayed around that long but then again I don't upgrade as much as others do. The last Windows PC I bought I bought in 2000. I made do with it as long as I could, I'm on disability and don't work so I have to watch my spending more than many/.ers do. Now if cost hadn't been such an issue with me when I got that PC I would have gotten a Mac instead.
As for the MS-Netscape thing, I was really hoping the court would lay into MS, and with the Justice Department being run by a Clinton appointee it was. On appeal of the verdict though the appeals court sent it back to the lower court and Bush's appointee basically gave MS a free pass. Now we're having some of the same problems we had before.
Economic system resides within political system. Political system breaks, so does economics. I wish Adam Smith was around to tell us how we are fucking up and corrupting his ideas.
Thomas Jefferson warned of this.
Thomas Jefferson:
"I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of their country."
Corporations were first granted corporate charters for the common or public good. Once the corporation did not satisfy that requirement it's charter could be revoked. Of course as Thomas Jefferson warned of though corporations became too powerful.
You, or they, want to talk about a free market? Guess what? A free market demands you deliver what you promised. ISPs offered unlimited connections but now that people have taken them up on the offer they complain. Either deliver what you offer or don't make the offer.
I think it would be really interesting if they billed based on a function of their actual cost for delivering every individual packet. I.e. if it stays in their network it's really cheap, if it goes through a peer then it's still pretty cheap, and if it goes to a transit provider then it gets expensive. the upstream ISP could in turn bill based on their cost to deliver it.
I pay for my connection, whether local or on the other side of the world, and my ISP pays for it's connection as well. And the internet is a global not a local communication technology. The only problem is that ISPs claimed an unlimited connection, well now that more and more people are taking them up on the offer it's becoming obvious they made bogus claims.
On top of that, here in the US the government gave the telcos a lot of money to upgrade their networks but instead of doing that they gave themselves bonuses.
Don't underestimate the power of the 1200 dollar deck of cards. I think it was Jeff Foxworthy who said he purchased a computer because it was all the rage and discovered after a year or so, that he had a $1200 deck of cards.
While many may not switch some will. I'm a member of some Yahoo! groups and back when MS first made it's offer to Yahoo! I said I would as well as heard others say they would switch. Apple's growing market share has shown people will switch. After using MS products for about 10 years, last year I switched myself because of MS's heavy handedness, I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro in a Firefox window.
Remember, Yahoo was trading at ~$19/share, before Microsoft's offer inflated the price to ~$31. Microsoft, essentially, bid up the price. If the merger is voted against, the price will likely fall back toward $19
The buyout, buyout not merger, was voted against yet Yahoo! shares closed at $27.77 today.
Also, Microsoft can start buying up Yahoo shares on the open market in a hostile bid (from Shareholders willing to sell their shares), which are currently trading below $31/share. So I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft will get Yahoo below their current offer...
Accept as MS were to buy up Yahoo! shares the share price would increase. That's a function of supply and demand, the lower the supply gets and the higher the demand gets the higher the price. And yes, if MS were to start buying shares then others would want to buy as well.
Personally I would be, "ok you want to pay me a few billion? Hey sure and then I will start a new company again."
I hadn't thought of that and I wonder if the shareholders above thought of it too. Depending on how much they paid for their shares they may come out ahead by selling to MS then taking the money and starting a new business like Yahoo! with ads, search, and communities. The problem though would be in recruiting enough surfers.
What it's really about is Microsoft buying customers. They don't have to win anyone over if they buy the thing lock, stock, and barrell. What Microsoft isn't taking into account is the number of people who will jump ship when that happens.
Yea, I use Yahoo! mail and am a member of some groups on Yahoo! I, like others I've heard from, will simply switch to other websites if MS ends up buying Yahoo!. Also Yahoo! is a supporter of some Open Source projects, like Zimbra the open source app that replaces MS Exchange, SAMBA, and others.
Well, Yahoo has a market position that could allow MS to push it's products along. Take Yahoo games for instance, most of them can be played on winXP win2000 as well as Vista. So what if an update only allow them to be played on Vista? Lets say it isn't all of them at once but 20% of the popular ones a quart with all of them moving after 1.5 years of so.
Because it's so easy for an online gamer to switch websites MS would lose more by requiring Vista than it'd gain in people buying the OS. No, I think MS wants the eyeballs Yahoo! has and is trying to break into online ads.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not an obvious reaction - 'something bad happened, I should pour all my hatred of it into someone/something'
The "blame complex" is very much a natural human reaction. When something goes bad people want to blame somebody or something, "God" if nothing else.
FalconThis is not what she is doing. Her right to free speech is not being interfered with
Oh but her free speech is being interfered with, it's called the Chilling Effect.
In fact, what the lawyer in question seems to be seeking is the documentation on which her free speech is based, so if anything this might be closer to a press shield law issue.
What does her banking and other financial information have to do with it?
Falconyes, asshat. there should be public policy to eliminate diseases where possible
So there should be laws to restrict what people eat then too? Like having laws that restrict a person from eating too many hamburgers and french fries? Out of personal choice I don't eat these, hardly ever that is, instead I try to eat as healthful as I can. I even eat as much organic food as I can afford. But I wouldn't mandate that others can't eat as many hamburgers as they want.
oh, then you can't be free to do whatever the hell you want, whenever you want, to whomever you want, regardless of the cost to everyone?
If you can, prove that I am harming anyone else. It's called innocent until proven guilty.
FalconI'd much rather have a minuscule and totally unproven chance of a few kids getting autism, which is not fatal, than have a virtual certainty of thousands of kids getting fatal and/or permanently disfiguring diseases like pertussis or polio.
So you prefer laws and mandates than liberty? Also there are vaccines available without Thiomersal, mercury.
Falconreligion: While the news probably didn't reach your mom's basement, the antagonism between "science" and "religion" only started in earnest in the last two hundred years. For the thousand years before that, science and its precursors were thoroughly entwined with religion, both supported by and supporting in exchange the dominant religion of their land. Any stores you have to the contrary are, sadly, more properly called "Atheist Mythology" than anything else.
Tell that to Galileo Galilei who died forget 200 years ago, more than 300 years ago.
FalconExcept for the fact that it would need Internet Explorer to get all the features.
While that would be a stupid move I can see Microsoft requiring IE for web based apps.
FalconYahoo isn't just stamped on them, it is them. Do a search on yahoo and a search on Alta Vista. The results are carbon copies.
I didn't know this, I don't use Yahoo! for searches and haven't for years. Most of the tyme I use Google however I also use About.com, Altavista, Ask.com, and Mooter.
FalconThe AOl, Newscorp stuff, is just business as usual, a means by which to force up M$ bid
Actually News Corp proposed joining with Microsoft to buy Yahoo! "Microsoft & News Corp. Joint Bid For Yahoo". News Corp-Microsoft talks are still going on on a joint venture to acquire Yahoo!.
In the mean time, AltaVista is standing quietly in the corner nursing its drink, trying to muster up the courage to ask ChaCha for a dance. Awwwww :(
Do a search on Alta Vista some time, the results have Yahoo! stamped all over them. Whether that's because the results come from Yahoo! or Yahoo! provides any ads or something else I don't know.
FalconI'd rather have 2 big players instead of one colossus Search company that if things go wrong, the whole planet suffers.
I don't think this is quite true. Unlike an OS or apps it's easy to switch your search engine. While I mostly use Google I also use About, Alta Vista, Ask.com, and Mooter. On the other hand, if you're using online apps then yes it can be hard to switch. However I'd rather have my apps running and my docs stored locally. At most I'd vpn into my home server while on the road.
FalconIn a world where computers boot a simple OS, then open a web browser to get all work (email, documents, spreadsheets, everything else) done scares the hell out of microsoft. That is not the business model that microsoft has been using.
Actually MS has been working on offering software as a service for some years. Just log into the website and there's your documents, much like Google Apps.
FalconYup, Yahoo! is now officially dead and the buzzards are just fighting to see who gets to rip off the more choice hunks of meat from the bones.
Wow, $4 billions in profits is dead?
FalconIf the *sale* goes through, Microhoo's stock will rise briefly, then go down.
From some of the comments above, that's what some are hoping for.
Note that neither scenario has Microsoft's stock going down.
Your first scenario, above, has MS stock going down after it goes up.
Shame they don't know how to make the best software - but hey, ya can't be the best at everything.
I have no doubt the engineers at MS know how to make great software, unfortunately it's those in charge that prevent them from doing so. MS releases software that's buggy and barely works at first but then slowly improves it. And with their lock on the desktop they are basically able to force people to use it, or make it expensive to switch software.
FalconI'm sure some would switch. I don't doubt that at all, I just think it wouldn't be enough to thwart Microsoft's efforts if a move like that would be made. There are a lot of people who just wouldn't want to lose what they see being offered or how they built that into their lives.
People may not want to switch, however as MS's acquisition of Hotmail as shown they will mess up. Because of this many would switch as basically staying and switching would entail the same thing, learning news ways to do things.
Even you admit to sticking around for 10 years until you got tired of their heavy handed tactics. Most of us have been watching the same heavy handedness since Netscape went under the first time
You could say I stayed around that long but then again I don't upgrade as much as others do. The last Windows PC I bought I bought in 2000. I made do with it as long as I could, I'm on disability and don't work so I have to watch my spending more than many /.ers do. Now if cost hadn't been such an issue with me when I got that PC I would have gotten a Mac instead.
As for the MS-Netscape thing, I was really hoping the court would lay into MS, and with the Justice Department being run by a Clinton appointee it was. On appeal of the verdict though the appeals court sent it back to the lower court and Bush's appointee basically gave MS a free pass. Now we're having some of the same problems we had before.
FalconEconomic system resides within political system. Political system breaks, so does economics. I wish Adam Smith was around to tell us how we are fucking up and corrupting his ideas.
Thomas Jefferson warned of this.
Thomas Jefferson:
Falcon"I hope we shall take warning from the example and crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of their country."
Corporations are run to turn a profit first
Corporations were first granted corporate charters for the common or public good. Once the corporation did not satisfy that requirement it's charter could be revoked. Of course as Thomas Jefferson warned of though corporations became too powerful.
Falconthis
You, or they, want to talk about a free market? Guess what? A free market demands you deliver what you promised. ISPs offered unlimited connections but now that people have taken them up on the offer they complain. Either deliver what you offer or don't make the offer.
FalconI think it would be really interesting if they billed based on a function of their actual cost for delivering every individual packet. I.e. if it stays in their network it's really cheap, if it goes through a peer then it's still pretty cheap, and if it goes to a transit provider then it gets expensive. the upstream ISP could in turn bill based on their cost to deliver it.
I pay for my connection, whether local or on the other side of the world, and my ISP pays for it's connection as well. And the internet is a global not a local communication technology. The only problem is that ISPs claimed an unlimited connection, well now that more and more people are taking them up on the offer it's becoming obvious they made bogus claims.
On top of that, here in the US the government gave the telcos a lot of money to upgrade their networks but instead of doing that they gave themselves bonuses.
FalconDon't underestimate the power of the 1200 dollar deck of cards. I think it was Jeff Foxworthy who said he purchased a computer because it was all the rage and discovered after a year or so, that he had a $1200 deck of cards.
While many may not switch some will. I'm a member of some Yahoo! groups and back when MS first made it's offer to Yahoo! I said I would as well as heard others say they would switch. Apple's growing market share has shown people will switch. After using MS products for about 10 years, last year I switched myself because of MS's heavy handedness, I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro in a Firefox window.
FalconRemember, Yahoo was trading at ~$19/share, before Microsoft's offer inflated the price to ~$31. Microsoft, essentially, bid up the price. If the merger is voted against, the price will likely fall back toward $19
The buyout, buyout not merger, was voted against yet Yahoo! shares closed at $27.77 today.
Also, Microsoft can start buying up Yahoo shares on the open market in a hostile bid (from Shareholders willing to sell their shares), which are currently trading below $31/share. So I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft will get Yahoo below their current offer...
Accept as MS were to buy up Yahoo! shares the share price would increase. That's a function of supply and demand, the lower the supply gets and the higher the demand gets the higher the price. And yes, if MS were to start buying shares then others would want to buy as well.
FalconYang has his head up his a** and he is so darn proud that "oh no this company cannot get taken over by Microsoft."
Except some of Yahoo!'s largest shareholders want Microsoft to raise it's bid: "Yahoo's second-largest shareholder says Microsoft will need to up ante". "Legg Mason Offers Yahoo Some Support".
Personally I would be, "ok you want to pay me a few billion? Hey sure and then I will start a new company again."
I hadn't thought of that and I wonder if the shareholders above thought of it too. Depending on how much they paid for their shares they may come out ahead by selling to MS then taking the money and starting a new business like Yahoo! with ads, search, and communities. The problem though would be in recruiting enough surfers.
FalconThe would probably win a proxy fight because those investors who have shares in Yahoo have more shares in MSFT.
Except some of Yahoo!'s largest shareholders want Microsoft to raise it's offer before they will approve it: "Yahoo's second-largest shareholder says Microsoft will need to up ante". "Legg Mason Offers Yahoo Some Support".
Falcon2. Yahoo predictably resists the offer, to the point where it's arguably *not* acting in the best interests of it's shareholders.
Except some of Yahoo!'s largest shareholders want Microsoft to raise it's bid: "Yahoo's second-largest shareholder says Microsoft will need to up ante". Legg Mason Offers Yahoo Some Support.
FalconWhat it's really about is Microsoft buying customers. They don't have to win anyone over if they buy the thing lock, stock, and barrell. What Microsoft isn't taking into account is the number of people who will jump ship when that happens.
Yea, I use Yahoo! mail and am a member of some groups on Yahoo! I, like others I've heard from, will simply switch to other websites if MS ends up buying Yahoo!. Also Yahoo! is a supporter of some Open Source projects, like Zimbra the open source app that replaces MS Exchange, SAMBA, and others.
FalconWell, Yahoo has a market position that could allow MS to push it's products along. Take Yahoo games for instance, most of them can be played on winXP win2000 as well as Vista. So what if an update only allow them to be played on Vista? Lets say it isn't all of them at once but 20% of the popular ones a quart with all of them moving after 1.5 years of so.
Because it's so easy for an online gamer to switch websites MS would lose more by requiring Vista than it'd gain in people buying the OS. No, I think MS wants the eyeballs Yahoo! has and is trying to break into online ads.
Falcon