Also......you could theoretically have bought 610,000 shares for $.0083.
Aside from the fact that you couldn't have theoretically bought the shares because of market safeguards already mentioned, that sentence is missing a very important word: 610,000 shares for $.0083 each.
From TFA:
"Mizuho Securities Co. suffered losses of at least 27 billion yen following an error on the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) in which its order to sell one share for 610,000 yen each was accidentally listed as 610,000 shares for 1 yen."
so according to TFA, an investor could in fact have booked an order for 610000 sh for exactly 1 yen, not for 610000 yen.
The original wording was correct: 610000 sh for exactly 1 yen is what was reported there and relayed here to/.
Or make the cheerleaders in the Super Bowl be "intelligent, strong, and powerful."
And if they were or appeared to be, they'd be lauded for it by the mass-media, John Madden (ok, maybe not), Camille Paglia, and pop-culture in general. Hell, there'd be an episode of Moesha or such shit dedicated to it.
All the while, if they actually WERE strong and powerful and intelligent, there would be no need for anyone anywhere to say it. It would be obvious.
The RIAA has done a stupendous job of hoarding for itself all of the arguments in support of...ahem... obliging people to pay, not for music but for the product the companies they represent are trying to sell.
Sony BMG, et al., would love for guys like you and me to forget that the product they're selling is NOT music. It's a "product", which entails some things like a jewel case, a slip cover, liner notes, a plastic CD, some shrink-wrap, maybe a DVD,...and, oh yeah, some music too.
Now, to me, that looks like a hell of a lot more than just the music, some of it I might want, so I perceive it to be something more than just the music. But in the typical airheaded mentality of media companies, this doesn't mean they're offering MORE than just the music, it means they're offering DIFFERENT than just the music, because the idea of putting it all together and selling it is a unit is what they really do.
And if you think the ancillary things included in the CD are any less important to "the product" as they think they conceive it, then you're wrong and possibly deluded.
I dont't buy a CD to prop it on edge and fucking stare at it, or read the liner notes before playing hoping to find user instructions, and **gasp** if the music sucks, then **OMG GASP** I'll throw that fucker out like hot garbage.
The moment the record companies come to understand that, this problem will vanish. Until then, and for as long as they attend to the wanked-off 2nd grade insipid marketing mind games, the only arguments not adverse to the RIAA are all ready so common and well-known that it really becomes just a tired joke to repeat them.
So if you want "equal time" (whatever that means), what would you expect to be fair ?
Slashdot Mirror
From TFA: "Mizuho Securities Co. suffered losses of at least 27 billion yen following an error on the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) in which its order to sell one share for 610,000 yen each was accidentally listed as 610,000 shares for 1 yen."
so according to TFA, an investor could in fact have booked an order for 610000 sh for exactly 1 yen, not for 610000 yen. The original wording was correct: 610000 sh for exactly 1 yen is what was reported there and relayed here to
And if they were or appeared to be, they'd be lauded for it by the mass-media, John Madden (ok, maybe not), Camille Paglia, and pop-culture in general. Hell, there'd be an episode of Moesha or such shit dedicated to it.
All the while, if they actually WERE strong and powerful and intelligent, there would be no need for anyone anywhere to say it. It would be obvious.
There's nothing wrong with big-breasted women, smart or not.
What the hell is the point of dropping an extra $2000 on an HD TV to watch the same ad-sodden, blathering noise with sharper edges ?
Evidently, most HDTV owners don't know the answer, either.
The RIAA has done a stupendous job of hoarding for itself all of the arguments in support of ...ahem... obliging people to pay, not for music but for the product the companies they represent are trying to sell.
...and, oh yeah, some music too.
Sony BMG, et al., would love for guys like you and me to forget that the product they're selling is NOT music. It's a "product", which entails some things like a jewel case, a slip cover, liner notes, a plastic CD, some shrink-wrap, maybe a DVD,
Now, to me, that looks like a hell of a lot more than just the music, some of it I might want, so I perceive it to be something more than just the music. But in the typical airheaded mentality of media companies, this doesn't mean they're offering MORE than just the music, it means they're offering DIFFERENT than just the music, because the idea of putting it all together and selling it is a unit is what they really do.
And if you think the ancillary things included in the CD are any less important to "the product" as they think they conceive it, then you're wrong and possibly deluded.
I dont't buy a CD to prop it on edge and fucking stare at it, or read the liner notes before playing hoping to find user instructions, and **gasp** if the music sucks, then **OMG GASP** I'll throw that fucker out like hot garbage.
The moment the record companies come to understand that, this problem will vanish. Until then, and for as long as they attend to the wanked-off 2nd grade insipid marketing mind games, the only arguments not adverse to the RIAA are all ready so common and well-known that it really becomes just a tired joke to repeat them.
So if you want "equal time" (whatever that means), what would you expect to be fair ?