No, it's dead, there isn't a snowball's chance that they'll be able to convince a judge that the deal doesn't violate Clayton. They might be able to venue shop for one that's more amenable to such moves, but I doubt it. The law is pretty clear that a merger like this isn't allowable. They floated the proposal hoping that the DoJ would look the other way the way that it did under the previous administration and are about to get owned.
At this point they'd be better off praying for more customers and fewer expenditures.
Not just that depending upon how the FCC chooses to handle AT&T's request for a dismissal there's all sorts of documents involved that could spur regulatory reform and make it harder for conservatives to turn a blind eye to the cartel.
Is it though? Since the RIAA started fighting piracy seriously its sales have dropped dramatically from where they were in the late 90s. They might be having success with piracy, but it's not likely to be helping their bottom line.
False dichotomy, there's no reason why there couldn't be a medium of some sort here. In fact for decades that's how it worked out. People will figure out how to get around restrictions if need be, but you can't do that if the media isn't being produced in the first place.
As far as that goes we'd have to come a lot further towards totalitarianism before that becomes a serious issue. For all the well justified hubbub we'd be better of just contributing to pay off the few suits that the *AA actually bothers to file.
Because when even many liberals don't see what's wrong with it those of us that do end up with no representation. I'm going to be flying again in a couple months and I'm going to take a plane out of Canada because I'm not interested in putting up with that unconstitutional crap.
I remember thinking that Compuserve was pretty sweet at that point. And had to be explained to as to why this "internet" thing was such a big deal. Sigh, live and learn.
You're right it's not their responsibility to do that. But not for the reason that you think, they've unleashed this pox upon the gaming community, but it isn't their responsibility because their responsibility is purely to the shareholders.
Just like how there's no guarantee that they won't at some future time take everybody's games away or require a subscription to access them.
Depends on your perspective. I have no doubt that if you compare a current dSLR with a current bridge that the dSLR is going to win hands down, assuming that it was even halfway competently designed. However, if you compare it to an older one from a few years back, the images I've seen are much more favorable.
Ultimately, bridges really shouldn't be seen as a replacement for a dSLR unless one can't take that much gear on a trip. If one is just wanting to learn how to use a camera, they have a good selection of modes and controls and are small enough to carry with you. But, ultimately they are going to suffer compared with a full sized dSLR, it's essentially inevitable.
It persists in large part because Steam allows it to. Considering how dominant it is as a store, I have a hard time believing that they're being strong armed on the issue.
At present there is no shortage of food, there's excesses in some areas and shortages in others. If the distribution system was better there would be no starvation.
However, if we start burning food for fuel that could very well change. And quickly.
That's true, but some of the bridge cameras are pretty damn impressive these days. Definitely a world better than the dSLRs were back a decade ago.
As for lens size, that's somewhat debatable. The problem being that a 100mm lens is a 100mm lens no matter what format you're dealing with, you get no more magnification on a 4/3 body than on a FFS or 1/2.3" for that matter.
Indeed, I'm waiting for my Canon PowerShot SX40 HS to arrive for simply that reason. I'll be spending a lot of time outside the country during the next year and I don't realistically have the space to lug around 30-40 lbs., of gear with me everywhere.
The camera doesn't have a couple things I really think it should, like raw, but it does allow manual control, has a wide range of view, IS and usable pics at high sensitivity. I might not get quite the images that I would have gotten with my other set up, but it's something that I can reasonable carry with me without having to carry a huge bag.
That if they're not responsible for $bazillions in transactions and the NASDAQ is, then perhaps NASDAQ ought to be hiring somebody that knows what they're doing. The fact that there's a large volume of transactions only makes it more important that the machines be properly maintained and patched. What's more it's not like they can't take them down during the week end.
No, I'm not missing the big picture the idiots running Yahoo more or less ran themselves out of business. Unless they get a new and competent board I can't imagine things turning around.
You'd be surprised at how much inertia factors into these things. How many of those people created those accounts recently versus still have them from years back? I personally still have a lycosmail account which I've had since before they acquired mailcity.
Because you don't staff guards like that. Keep in mind that this is a prison which means that you have to have sufficient guards to deal with whatever happens. Waiting for outside help is generally not reasonable except under extraordinary circumstances. You might be able to get by with fewer guards on rove, but you're not going to be able to cut any as you still have to have them there for when the robots break or when something starts.
In the US where we have more concern for money than human life it might work out like that, but anybody with knowledge of staffing in the industry isn't going to fall for that.
It's impossible for the merger to go forward ultimately. If by the grace of God the DoJ and the FCC sign off on it all that means is that it goes to court when Verizon or Sprint files their own antitrust lawsuit against AT&T. Which ultimately they would almost certainly win because this is about as blatant a violation of Clayton as has ever been committed. You cannot buy up a competitor when it substantially lessens competition, and in a case like this where there are only a total of 4 to begin with, yeah, that's going to substantially lessen competition.
It is, but I bet when they were doing the numbers the expected value of proceeding made the $4bn risk worthwhile. It would be a bit like you paying me a quarter where I pay you a dollar if it comes up heads. The expected value would be more than a quarter so you'd likely go for it.
In this case the calculations are more involved and the sums greater, but it's the same basic idea.
Not really, if they managed to merge the money would be long gone as the money would go to T-Mobile's parent company.
And really as long as the GOP doesn't retake the White House in 2012, the likelihood of this merger going through is precisely nihil. If the DoJ or the FCC was interested in letting it go through it wouldn't be challenged to this extent. Under the Bush administration the DoJ was essentially sitting on its hands whenever these things came through apart from the rubber stamp.
That might be so, but they're a hell of a lot better than Comcrap and Qwest. I see their trucks all over the place these days and it's way more frequently than can reasonably be explained by maintenance. I never saw this many Qwest or Comcast vehicles doing maintenance.
Plus, they've actually upgraded the service that they're willing to provide over what Qwest was providing.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's dead, there isn't a snowball's chance that they'll be able to convince a judge that the deal doesn't violate Clayton. They might be able to venue shop for one that's more amenable to such moves, but I doubt it. The law is pretty clear that a merger like this isn't allowable. They floated the proposal hoping that the DoJ would look the other way the way that it did under the previous administration and are about to get owned.
At this point they'd be better off praying for more customers and fewer expenditures.
Not just that depending upon how the FCC chooses to handle AT&T's request for a dismissal there's all sorts of documents involved that could spur regulatory reform and make it harder for conservatives to turn a blind eye to the cartel.
Is it though? Since the RIAA started fighting piracy seriously its sales have dropped dramatically from where they were in the late 90s. They might be having success with piracy, but it's not likely to be helping their bottom line.
False dichotomy, there's no reason why there couldn't be a medium of some sort here. In fact for decades that's how it worked out. People will figure out how to get around restrictions if need be, but you can't do that if the media isn't being produced in the first place.
As far as that goes we'd have to come a lot further towards totalitarianism before that becomes a serious issue. For all the well justified hubbub we'd be better of just contributing to pay off the few suits that the *AA actually bothers to file.
Because when even many liberals don't see what's wrong with it those of us that do end up with no representation. I'm going to be flying again in a couple months and I'm going to take a plane out of Canada because I'm not interested in putting up with that unconstitutional crap.
An excellent way to justify singling out Chinese tourists if ever I saw one.
If they agreed to stop studying climate change the GOP would probably let them have their funding back.
I remember thinking that Compuserve was pretty sweet at that point. And had to be explained to as to why this "internet" thing was such a big deal. Sigh, live and learn.
You're right it's not their responsibility to do that. But not for the reason that you think, they've unleashed this pox upon the gaming community, but it isn't their responsibility because their responsibility is purely to the shareholders.
Just like how there's no guarantee that they won't at some future time take everybody's games away or require a subscription to access them.
Depends on your perspective. I have no doubt that if you compare a current dSLR with a current bridge that the dSLR is going to win hands down, assuming that it was even halfway competently designed. However, if you compare it to an older one from a few years back, the images I've seen are much more favorable.
Ultimately, bridges really shouldn't be seen as a replacement for a dSLR unless one can't take that much gear on a trip. If one is just wanting to learn how to use a camera, they have a good selection of modes and controls and are small enough to carry with you. But, ultimately they are going to suffer compared with a full sized dSLR, it's essentially inevitable.
Out of curiosity which camera do you have?
It persists in large part because Steam allows it to. Considering how dominant it is as a store, I have a hard time believing that they're being strong armed on the issue.
And yet Steam has that USD=Euro conversion and region locked pricing.
At present there is no shortage of food, there's excesses in some areas and shortages in others. If the distribution system was better there would be no starvation.
However, if we start burning food for fuel that could very well change. And quickly.
That's true, but some of the bridge cameras are pretty damn impressive these days. Definitely a world better than the dSLRs were back a decade ago.
As for lens size, that's somewhat debatable. The problem being that a 100mm lens is a 100mm lens no matter what format you're dealing with, you get no more magnification on a 4/3 body than on a FFS or 1/2.3" for that matter.
Indeed, I'm waiting for my Canon PowerShot SX40 HS to arrive for simply that reason. I'll be spending a lot of time outside the country during the next year and I don't realistically have the space to lug around 30-40 lbs., of gear with me everywhere.
The camera doesn't have a couple things I really think it should, like raw, but it does allow manual control, has a wide range of view, IS and usable pics at high sensitivity. I might not get quite the images that I would have gotten with my other set up, but it's something that I can reasonable carry with me without having to carry a huge bag.
You can't drop lighter than air objects. Dropping requires an object to fall when released.
That if they're not responsible for $bazillions in transactions and the NASDAQ is, then perhaps NASDAQ ought to be hiring somebody that knows what they're doing. The fact that there's a large volume of transactions only makes it more important that the machines be properly maintained and patched. What's more it's not like they can't take them down during the week end.
No, I'm not missing the big picture the idiots running Yahoo more or less ran themselves out of business. Unless they get a new and competent board I can't imagine things turning around.
You'd be surprised at how much inertia factors into these things. How many of those people created those accounts recently versus still have them from years back? I personally still have a lycosmail account which I've had since before they acquired mailcity.
lol, worst troll ever.
Because you don't staff guards like that. Keep in mind that this is a prison which means that you have to have sufficient guards to deal with whatever happens. Waiting for outside help is generally not reasonable except under extraordinary circumstances. You might be able to get by with fewer guards on rove, but you're not going to be able to cut any as you still have to have them there for when the robots break or when something starts.
In the US where we have more concern for money than human life it might work out like that, but anybody with knowledge of staffing in the industry isn't going to fall for that.
Perhaps I can buy Yahoo. On second thought, that's probably too steep.
It's impossible for the merger to go forward ultimately. If by the grace of God the DoJ and the FCC sign off on it all that means is that it goes to court when Verizon or Sprint files their own antitrust lawsuit against AT&T. Which ultimately they would almost certainly win because this is about as blatant a violation of Clayton as has ever been committed. You cannot buy up a competitor when it substantially lessens competition, and in a case like this where there are only a total of 4 to begin with, yeah, that's going to substantially lessen competition.
It is, but I bet when they were doing the numbers the expected value of proceeding made the $4bn risk worthwhile. It would be a bit like you paying me a quarter where I pay you a dollar if it comes up heads. The expected value would be more than a quarter so you'd likely go for it.
In this case the calculations are more involved and the sums greater, but it's the same basic idea.
Not really, if they managed to merge the money would be long gone as the money would go to T-Mobile's parent company.
And really as long as the GOP doesn't retake the White House in 2012, the likelihood of this merger going through is precisely nihil. If the DoJ or the FCC was interested in letting it go through it wouldn't be challenged to this extent. Under the Bush administration the DoJ was essentially sitting on its hands whenever these things came through apart from the rubber stamp.
That might be so, but they're a hell of a lot better than Comcrap and Qwest. I see their trucks all over the place these days and it's way more frequently than can reasonably be explained by maintenance. I never saw this many Qwest or Comcast vehicles doing maintenance.
Plus, they've actually upgraded the service that they're willing to provide over what Qwest was providing.