Posts by Oninoshiko

Options

AAPL is actually up a bit over 20 today, at the moment, so assuming you are talking about calls, things are looking good for you right now. You still need to sell them before time decay kills you, but that's always true of options.

Now if you own puts, you might be worried.

Re: Woohoo!

probably any run-of-the-mill pair of scissors. They this fiber has incredible tensile strength, that says nothing about shear strength. I did try to look up shear strength numbers, but didn't find any (although I didn't look too hard).

Re: Sell Apple Stock

AAPL is down over 200 points from its 52wk high of 705.07 (they are at 504.14 as I type this). There has been a minor bounce-back from it's 52-wk low of 418.66, so id say, if you didn't get out already, you maybe missed the boat.

Frankly, if you wait a little bit longer, AAPL might be a good opportunity. Overall, if they can deal with the blow-back from the maps issue (which I think has mostly passed), they have a lot of brand loyalty. If you had the 51,000 USD burning a hole in your pocket, it wouldn't be bad to pick up 100 shares if it drops to, say 500 again, then write covered calls against it. Overall, I think it's likely the market has already corrected for many of AAPL's current issues.

Full disclosure: I hold no market position on AAPL. This is not a recommandation to buy or sell. All securities involve risk. The projections or other information regarding the likelihood of various investment outcomes are hypothetical in nature, are not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness, do not reflect actual investment results, and are not guarantees of future results.

Re: Rather than making it legal...

As a DDOSer you are not making a point, you are not conveying an idea, you are not trying to say anything. What you are doing is making sure they I cannot say what I have to say. THIS IS NOT SPEECH, it's sole purpose it to deny the victim speech.

A flash mob may raise awareness. Normally someone will be explaining what it is all about, or have signs or some-such. A DDOS does not, because the users only see the site is slow. They do not understand your point BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT MAKING ONE.

We are not saying you have "mad haxzoring skillz" we are saying you are being destructive and disruptive to other's speech rather then taking the proper approach and legitimately speaking out, arguing what is wrong with your victim.

I have mitigated these types of attacks. The last one I did was not Anon, but the attack was much the same. It can be done, but it is expensive to do. Us in the real world are incurring costs because... well... I haven't figured out why. It's certainly not so you can speak your mind, because you aren't. If you wanted to you could put up a youtube video, or even your own web-site if you wanted.

Your goal is not the message, it is to cause harm. To be honest, I think the punishment isn't severe enough. I take speech vary seriously, even for those who have things to say I don't like. I would never harm their ability to speak their mind. It's a shame the fascists in anonymous fail to understand that.

ugh

so YOU'RE the one who like nudges.

Re: All of your Internet traffic scanned

which makes it different then the rest of my internet traffic, how?

Re: not doing what they have a legal obligation to do.

No, they do NOT have a legal obligation. THAT is the problem. If they had a legal obligation, they would be doing it or prosecuted. They can't be prosecuted because they aren't violating any laws (ie, they ARE meeting all legal obligations).

Starbucks isn't fucking you; your MP is, then complaining about how it's all really evil Starbucks fault.

Re: there's money to be made

Google wont, mostly because google doesn't make much. They are an advertising company.

Now, I can tell you what Google are interested in, people who aren't seeing their advertisements. Strangely enough, most North Koreans don't see Google's advertisements. Hrmmm...

broken audio in '79

no, I would think the absence of linux's existence in 1979 would be the bigger show-stopper then pulseaudio not working, possibly combined with the fact that it's creator was still 10 years old.

And while Linux did exists in 1991, it has just been created, and OSS wouldn't be added until the following year, so I'm not thinking anyone braking it would have been noticed.

Re: those annoying google's Windows 8 ads

I didn't comment on how ANNOYING (or not) google's ads are, just how ever-present googles ads and services are. The premise I started from was that someone might want to avoid said monopolists. Almost every site I go to sends requests to at least one of

Google AdWords

Google AdSense

DoubleClick (owned by Google since 2007)

Google Maps

Google Analytics

I'm not even counting the common js frameworks they host public copies of (such as JQuery, https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/devguide). You can talk all day about if this is good or not (having everyone using the same copy of JQuery, so they only have to cache it once, can be considered beneficial), but I think you're being more then a little disingenuous if you are going to argue random pages don't access google's properties more then microsoft's.

Re: Level 3 offenders

Not all "Predatory" offenses are directed at children, and that's the problem with this law. Here is a list of offences that require registration:

http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/nsor/sortab1.htm

sexual misconduct (which can be interpreted widely enough to include public urination)

patronizing a prostitute in the second degree (good to know jonhs won't be playing WOW)

promoting prostitution in the second degree (nor pimps, because all pimps are pedophiles)

disseminating indecent material to minors in the first degree (and inattendent porno shop operators)

Do you really think that every offense on this list really means you are likely to target children?

Re: App stores in the clear?

As I read it, this particular system is voluntary. Complying with the regulation is not. (you CAN use your own system, but if it doesn't comply you are fined).

Maybe Iain Thomson could clarify?

Re: Angry Birds does it

yes, but angry birds already make noise, and because I'm expecting noise when I hear noise (provided it's out greatly out of the range I'm expecting) it's not jarring, and therefor not as annoying. Pandora does it as well, and as long as the volume is inline with the music, it's not too annoying.

When I am silently reading a page and I get a booming voice showing, "FOR JUST TWELVE EASY PAYMENTS OF NINETEEN NINEDY FIVE..." It makes me jump, which means that I am absolutely not planning on buying your product, and the site hosting the ad just made my shit list.

Sounds like an evolutionary dead end to me...

Tag it a joke all you want, but obviously this alone is not how it happend. Until we can come up with something that allows the hoxd13 expression to be non-fatal, we can't be vary sure that's what happened at all. Maybe something else modified 5’Hodx transcription.

Interesting, and a couple of good lines of continued research, but it "hints" the same way as our knowledge of physics "hints" at the possibility of a Alcubierre drive. I still don't plan on launching next week!

Go on more research!

Re: real cyborgs

The lady is a real cyborg.

TBH, I can't imagine being a quadriplegic, but I do image, if I where, having my mind control a hand for the first time in a decade would have me smiling ear-to-ear for the next month. This is a huge advance, and I only hope we can use it to expand on what she can do, and help more people like her.

Re: Rackspace and Citrix....?

Citrix is a neat idea, but their license management makes vm-"we've changed our model again"-ware seem downright friendly. Then there "support" number leads to a IVR so hostile it makes me long for a Microsoft license audit.

The only thing about Citrix I find exciting is I've managed to pawn if off on some other poor sod.

Re: Wow

well researched facts.

If this keeps up we'll get a reputation.

Re: Trucrypt != Guilt

Truecrypt has a" Hidden Volume" function, but if you let others know you are using it, it defeats the advantage of that function. Under UK law (unlike US law) you can be compelled to provide a key. Failure to provide the key is crime in-and-of itself (punishable by two years in prison).

So, using truecrypt is not a crime. Failure to provide the key is.

Re: "Immorality of tax dodgers"

Oh it gets better, lets say (for the sake of argument) that other then the laws they pass, MPs are perfectly moral (I'm sure there is some bizzaro-morality where it works).

So MP says google is immoral for following the law.

Therefore the law google is following must be immoral.

Laws are made by MPs

QED: MPs are (by admission) immoral, for making immoral laws.

Re: Quick way to solve this

did you not read the article?

"Fellow "tax-avoiding" firms Amazon, Google and Starbucks have all told UK officials that they follow international tax laws, but MPs have said that while their actions might be perfectly legal, they're also immoral."

That means they are paying the correct tax, which is to say "what is required by law." If said MPs are not happy with that amount of tax, the correct response is to change the law. Once the law is changed such that the correct amount if tax is what said MPs want, MSFT/GOOG/AAPL/etc. will began to pay it.

If they are not paying a "moral" amount and cannot be charged with a crime, it is the MPs fault for writing immoral laws.

Seems you cared enough to complain.

In addition 4 people felt strongly enough to read almost a page of comments to thumbs up you in agreement for not caring.

Re: The library one

Why would I turn off my phone in the library?

I would think putting it on "silent" (which is what I do) would be fine.