The price corrected in under 4 minutes... and for every high-frequency-trading algorithm that got robbed of that 1%, there was another algorithm that struck it rich.
If you're average holding period of a stock is 3 minutes, then this caused damage. Otherwise you wouldn't notice. #cnbc
More antitrust coverage on Gawker/Valleywag, wow. Okay, I'm not complaining -- I love this stuff -- but for this post I must request: If you're going to do an antitrust analysis, then do an antitrust analysis. It would be a necessary piece on an interesting topic, and a win for Gawker.
Also, is Andy Kessler (A Wall Street Journal op-ed, written by a Silicon Valley hedge fund manager) back to managing money? Because my understanding was that he's been out of that game for almost ten years now.
oh, c'mon, stop being naive & blinded by your hate for Apple - they're just another giant corporation with another giant corporate CEO. and so btw is AT&T. both giant corporations have a ton to lose if people start using other technologies, so seriously, in these overly-corrupt, greedsoaked & violent times, you thought, what? that the giant corporations were gonna act cool...
@gnipgnop: This is acknowledged very openly in the post. Ryan Tate is actually asking for the flip side of your request - stop acting like Apple is some sort of wonderful, gleaming symbol of Silicon Valley perfection.
And as a neutral outsider on the topic, I have to say it's a bit startling how many Apple devotees there are.
I don't know if you're one of them, but I think your comment seems a bit reactionary - where's the hate? Apple has behaved badly. This is pointing that out. There are many people out there who don't like to admit Apple behaves badly, and thus it needs to be said, and clearly.
@NoelleBlue: believe me i'm no apologist for any corporation, I'm just not gullable.
i suppose i should have said "blinded by his fashionable outrage" - just what you get when you call someone "evil" - puts a bias to it, you know, hate because Ryan's is a rant against a man: "Apple is uniquely molded to the whims of a single man..." & not to shock you, sweetie, but bigger picture - this has very little to do with one man, that's the play.
and Noelle, this isn't a new story - been soaking the trades for like a month, pointed out by everyone from techcrunch to gigaom to mashable, it's definitely "out there." so i guess i'm just saying that if ryan wants to take down some corporate douchebags, tell us something we don't know.
@gnipgnop: Hmmm, I disagree with you, darling, I don't think this has anything to do with gullibility. The bigger picture has been shown again and again you're ignoring the reality that it is Apple.
If you read the trades then you should know that Steve Jobs and his vision and priorities are massively important to his company and the decisions it makes. That's just the way it is, and has been confirmed. New facts have come out, this addresses them. *Shrug* You're trying to discredit the post on several fronts, but I'm not seeing a central point.
What about Skype being operational and useful on a new version of the iPod Touch to be unveiled soon? That way Apple pries itself away from AT&T and revolutionizes mobile communications by making VoIP something everyone can use.
Either that or Steve Jobs is just obsessed with control.
Duh. Neither Apple (Jobs) nor AT&T wanted Google Voice approved. But if AT&T took responsibility, there could be legal issues. So, Apple says, "we made the decision independently."
@iplaudius: Yeah. I lean toward a scenario somewhere between this one and the idea of Apple doing it under an implicit (not explicit) threat of litigation by AT&T under terms of their contract. Thus AT&T has plausible deniability even though it ultimately has at least some degree of responsibility.
The thing I find fascinating in strings like this is how adept a lot of people are at putting themselves in the shoes of the CEOs involved and understanding their interests. Congratulations. But you know what, you don't actually run any of these companies, so who gives a fuck? Better to argue your own interests as a user, no?
The bigger issue here is, why should any device be locked to a specific service provider rather than you take the service THAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR to whatever device you feel like? These exclusive contracts should be flat-out banned by the FCC.
And before any CEO-for-a-day bitches that this would be unfair gub'mint intrusion in the "free market," the correct, non-bullshit answer is, no, an FCC ban would make for a FREER market, with more competition on both service and hardware. The current behavior of the companies that provide those products, not the regulatory framework, is what's anti-free market in the setup we have. You need rules to have capitalism, assholes.
Google is an OS competitor in the handheld market now. Being that this is the situation, I don't see why Apple should be under any obligation to let Google sell its wares (which, simply by being Google products, are likely to increase the profile of Android, and therefore Android-based handsets) on the iphone app store.
How many apps are being developed for the iphone by Microsoft? Not many. And that's because they have their own handheld OS to market, and they don't really gain any profile by legitimating the Apple product by creating new functionality for it. Google, on the other hand, is a fledgling competitor in the handheld OS market. They have a lot of profile to gain by selling Google iphone apps, getting users addicted to them, and then saying "Hey, it works well on the iphone, but it fully integrated and works much better over here on the Android handsets." Exactly why Apple should have to let them do this, under threat of being deemed "evil," eludes me.
Apple's informal motto "Don't be Microsoft" is now officially tossed out in Jobs' final death throes. You want to understand the man, the myth? See what he does now that his legendary life is nearly over.
C'mon, you all know he's probably got at max a cancerous decade left of stealing himself some new ice-filled-bathtub organs. Does he go out and donate his fortune as a last goodwill gesture like Gates? Nope. Still parking in the handicapped spot. Without a license plate. Still playing God like a fuckface.
Lighten up "Steve". Go do hookers and blow like anyone else who is dying would do. I hear it's legal in Mexico now.
@RunningLowOnPills: It's hard to disagree with any one particular point there. Except for maybe playing God. The guy's company built a portable music player and some computers that have an okay interface. Not really godlike. Maybe crazy genie, but not godlike.
@TruPhan: that's not correct. Apple is totally built on a cult around Steves. All the secrecy, the fans flocking to MacWorld of WWDC like pilgrims going to see the Pope, etc. It's all about Steves The Creator. Nevermind the people who actually make it a happen.
@frederic: So Steve Jobs has never unveiled anything of value to the public? People just continue to eat up Apple products because there's so much good will stored up for Steve Jobs? That seems somewhat implausible. I think that, of the millions of people who own ipods and iphones and macbooks, only a relatively small percentage actually have a clue who Steve Jobs is (such that they could be trapped inside his "cult" of personality), aside from possibly having heard or read his name in passing.
"Self defeating"?! They're making buttloads of money AND a phone tens of millions greatly enjoy using. The Pre is dying on the vine, the G1 is a steaming pile (and can't be upgraded past Cupcake), and WinMo is such a clusterfu¢k that it makes the Zune look well-conceived. So, I don't see anything "disgraceful" about Apple's decisions, self-serving and lucrative? Yes, but disgraceful? No.
To be fair, it's in Apple's contract with AT&T. So they didn't do this just for the fun of it.
"There is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining AT&T’s permission."
As a nebbishy man who stands a towering 5'4", when it comes to Jim Goldman, I would totally hit that.
First, I'd hit that in the face. Then, I'd hit that in the face again. Then, I'd follow up with a couple of body blows before tackling him to the ground.
Which Eastern European dictator-run brain washing TV station had that sign language person in the corner who sabotaged it by signing "lies, lies" or something?
Can you even imagine something like that happening in this here "free" country?
@Niko Bellic: That’s awesome. I have known many people from Eastern Europe, but I have never heard that story. If you find out where it happened, please post a rejoinder.
10/26/09
If you're average holding period of a stock is 3 minutes, then this caused damage. Otherwise you wouldn't notice. #cnbc
10/26/09
10/26/09
10/26/09
08/22/09
Also, is Andy Kessler (A Wall Street Journal op-ed, written by a Silicon Valley hedge fund manager) back to managing money? Because my understanding was that he's been out of that game for almost ten years now.
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
you must be fun to play at poker...
08/22/09
And as a neutral outsider on the topic, I have to say it's a bit startling how many Apple devotees there are.
I don't know if you're one of them, but I think your comment seems a bit reactionary - where's the hate? Apple has behaved badly. This is pointing that out. There are many people out there who don't like to admit Apple behaves badly, and thus it needs to be said, and clearly.
08/22/09
i suppose i should have said "blinded by his fashionable outrage" - just what you get when you call someone "evil" - puts a bias to it, you know, hate because Ryan's is a rant against a man: "Apple is uniquely molded to the whims of a single man..." & not to shock you, sweetie, but bigger picture - this has very little to do with one man, that's the play.
and Noelle, this isn't a new story - been soaking the trades for like a month, pointed out by everyone from techcrunch to gigaom to mashable, it's definitely "out there." so i guess i'm just saying that if ryan wants to take down some corporate douchebags, tell us something we don't know.
08/23/09
If you read the trades then you should know that Steve Jobs and his vision and priorities are massively important to his company and the decisions it makes. That's just the way it is, and has been confirmed. New facts have come out, this addresses them. *Shrug* You're trying to discredit the post on several fronts, but I'm not seeing a central point.
08/22/09
Either that or Steve Jobs is just obsessed with control.
08/21/09
08/22/09
The thing I find fascinating in strings like this is how adept a lot of people are at putting themselves in the shoes of the CEOs involved and understanding their interests. Congratulations. But you know what, you don't actually run any of these companies, so who gives a fuck? Better to argue your own interests as a user, no?
The bigger issue here is, why should any device be locked to a specific service provider rather than you take the service THAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR to whatever device you feel like? These exclusive contracts should be flat-out banned by the FCC.
And before any CEO-for-a-day bitches that this would be unfair gub'mint intrusion in the "free market," the correct, non-bullshit answer is, no, an FCC ban would make for a FREER market, with more competition on both service and hardware. The current behavior of the companies that provide those products, not the regulatory framework, is what's anti-free market in the setup we have. You need rules to have capitalism, assholes.
08/21/09
How many apps are being developed for the iphone by Microsoft? Not many. And that's because they have their own handheld OS to market, and they don't really gain any profile by legitimating the Apple product by creating new functionality for it. Google, on the other hand, is a fledgling competitor in the handheld OS market. They have a lot of profile to gain by selling Google iphone apps, getting users addicted to them, and then saying "Hey, it works well on the iphone, but it fully integrated and works much better over here on the Android handsets." Exactly why Apple should have to let them do this, under threat of being deemed "evil," eludes me.
08/21/09
C'mon, you all know he's probably got at max a cancerous decade left of stealing himself some new ice-filled-bathtub organs. Does he go out and donate his fortune as a last goodwill gesture like Gates? Nope. Still parking in the handicapped spot. Without a license plate. Still playing God like a fuckface.
Lighten up "Steve". Go do hookers and blow like anyone else who is dying would do. I hear it's legal in Mexico now.
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/22/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
"There is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining AT&T’s permission."
08/21/09
06/09/09
First, I'd hit that in the face. Then, I'd hit that in the face again. Then, I'd follow up with a couple of body blows before tackling him to the ground.
06/09/09
Can you even imagine something like that happening in this here "free" country?
06/09/09
06/09/09
[eng.globalaffairs.ru]
06/09/09
06/09/09