Who does yelling fire in a theater hurt? Moviegoers?
Besides materially affecting the thousands of investors in AAPL and in the indicies which AAPL is a part of, this affects the very trust of the market, which in turn hurts you.
Quote:
Anyone who sold without a better source than this isn't really cut out for investing in a high profile company like aapl.
For those of you like walshbj who don't understand the market, the stock dropped from short sellers and derivative plays, not so much from people selling because they thought SJ had a heart attack.
The shorts make profit as the stock drops, triggering stops from traders, upsetting options volitility that can wipe out people, and also triggering margin calls that were not expected. I happen to know a couple people who got very effected by this...to the point where they lost their capital (not some dollars of shares, but all of their money to trade with) and have to leave the market now, broke. Those who triggered the rumor, if properly positioned in derivatives, may have literally made +100% or more profit in just a few minutes time..where as selling the stock short may have only made you the 7% it dropped. For comparison, AAPL common stock took two years to increase 100%. These crooks may have achieved that in minutes on a false rumor.
It also was set up to push the stock below the critical $100 support level, which in turn affects the technical charts (which millions of traders follow) and have opened the door for continued drop (ie profit) in the stock for short sellers.
Sadly, walshbj doesn't know the first thing about how the market works, and as he said, isn't really cut out for investing...or even commenting on this board.
I am still a finance n00b (shouldn't have wasted all that education on darn Biology)... But I think your $100 support level is very interesting. AAPL is a good deal now for those that haven't bought into it yet, though in the short term, it could go lower...?
You can all cry all you want, and hope the SEC finds the guy, but it doesn't matter. ANYONE can do this over and over. And if they have a half a brain they can do it without any chance of ever getting caught. Are they breaking a law? Isn't there a saying about laws that can't be enforced? This can't be enforced, so good luck.
Didn't your mother ever tell you about life not being fair?
As for people who needed the money for vacation, etc. aapl isn't exactly the place to keep that money, so again, those people are on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McHuman
Sadly, walshbj doesn't know the first thing about how the market works, and as he said, isn't really cut out for investing...or even commenting on this board.
Don't be too sad for me. I don't claim to be a stock market genius. But I started accumulating aapl at $15 and got the bulk of it at 60. So I'm doing ok.
First rule of investing - don't put money in that you might need in the short term.
Yes they are breaking the law and it can be enforced, don't ever become a lawyer walshbj.
Thank goodness someone is at least looking into these criminals, cos they fookers think they are untouchable. AAPL has been the source of some increasingly blatant manipulation, I wonder how many stop losses were triggered by this latest stunt.
Who does it hurt? Day traders? Too bad. Where do we draw the line on stuff like this? If I say it as a joke in a bar on Wall Street can I be prosecuted? If it were April 1 would you want the SEC to go after this guy? Should whoever made the mistake at Bloomberg last month be jailed?
Ask your question to the stock holders of United Airlines. A few weeks ago somebody posted a news article from Google saying United was going bankrupt. The article was from 2002. The stock went from $9 to .30.
Yes they are breaking the law and it can be enforced, don't ever become a lawyer walshbj.
I'm under attack.
You can't enforce it if you can't find the person. You can investigate people who profited and MAYBE find a link back to the person behind the hoax. But not if they're smart. That's my point: The anonymity of the Internet makes it possible - in fact easy - to commit this "crime" without getting caught.
You can't find the perpetrator, you can't enforce the "law". The law is useless.
Back to you McHuman: Does the fact that you have friends who lost everything on this rumor make YOU the market expert? I assume you have other credentials.
Who says it is difficult to find this person? FBI can find them pretty quickly especially if CNN helps. IP address, it is not difficult to bounce right back to the originator. Public machine? No problem. Behind multiple firewalls? No problem. Internet service providers all have records of every IP address you have accessed for the last 5 years and are compelled to keep them by law. It will take a little time, but it ain't that difficult. The process can still be completed even if the person is located overseas, in a land unfriendly to US laws. Nowhere to hide. Notice the child porn rings that get busted, and in those rings the service providers and the participants are doing everything they can to conceal their real identity.
My guess is that SJ himself called this one in, in typical pissed off fashion, yelling that he is fine and wants to know why someone would make this up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshbj
You can't enforce it if you can't find the person. You can investigate people who profited and MAYBE find a link back to the person behind the hoax. But not if they're smart. That's my point: The anonymity of the Internet makes it possible - in fact easy - to commit this "crime" without getting caught.
You can't find the perpetrator, you can't enforce the "law". The law is useless.
Apple representative Steve Dowling flatly denied the report, saying it was simply "not true." The incident follows a regular series of rumors and speculation prying into Jobs' health ever since he underwent treatment for pancreatic cancer in 2004, and his more recent struggle with related nutrition issues that have since contributed to visible weight loss. [...]
A month ago, Jobs made an off-hand comment to CNBC's Jim Goldman, in which he appear to blame the incessant reports focusing on his health on hedge funds who are seeking to profit in the short term on market panic created by false reports and unsubstantiated, speculative reporting.
Apple investors have expressed frustration that the company has not been more forthcoming about Jobs' health. Ryan Jacob of the Jacob Internet Fund, an Apple shareholder since 2003, told Bloomberg, "It's a tough position to be in. They [Apple] don't continually want to field questions and make news when there is no news. We as investors have to hope that if there is something material to say, they will comment quickly."
"Leaving it to rumor and speculation is reckless,'' said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, another investor who has owned Apple shares since Jobs returned to the company in 1997. "If he is healthy, they should say so. If he's not, we should know that too.''
I welcome the S.E.C. investigation because an unknown Apple representative cannot legally bind Apple and the Apple Board of directors if it turns out that his OPINION on Steve Jobs' health is less than genuine, less than the full truth.
And I second Jeffrey Sonnenfeld's comment that it is irresponsible of Apple to leave everything to rumors, speculation and "off the record" comments. Either there is no reason to be concerned about Steve Jobs' health - AND - Apple should say so clearly through an official (actionable) statement issued by the Apple Board of directors, - OR - there is clearly reason to be concerned as evidenced by Steve Jobs' physical look in every one of his public appearance.
Who says it is difficult to find this person? FBI can find them pretty quickly especially if CNN helps. IP address, it is not difficult to bounce right back to the originator. Public machine? No problem. Behind multiple firewalls? No problem.
If it was done from a public machine, then they need some sort of record of who was at that machine. Heck, someone can go to some open AP in any subdivision and send something from there and that's a pretty dry trail unless there's a surveillance video that catches a license plate at the time of access.
Quote:
Internet service providers all have records of every IP address you have accessed for the last 5 years and are compelled to keep them by law..
Heck, someone can go to some open AP in any subdivision and send something from there and that's a pretty dry trail unless there's a surveillance video that catches a license plate at the time of access.
Exactly. Open wifi changes everything about the ease of Internet anonymity. Yes, you can catch the lazy ones. But with minimal effort you can be anonymous.
Internet service providers all have records of every IP address you have accessed for the last 5 years and are compelled to keep them by law.
No they don't. Businesses are required to record customer financial transactions for a certain length of time. Storing ISP logs is not required. A recent law was raised in the UK that would force them to log data for 12 months:
Concerning the actual poster of the heart attack news, what exactly will they be charged with? Lying on the internet? How is that a criminal act? If the president can get away with it then surely some no-name journalist can too - it's only fair really.
The real problem lay with people reacting to anonymous articles. Did the stock market react when it came to light that Bill Gates runs like a girl?
Surely that would have sent the cool factor plummeting. Investors need to focus a company's success on the actual products. Apple's products haven't changed so the stock should by all rights drop like a stone until they move their ass but absolutely nothing should happen concerning news about Steve.
I bet if Phil Schiller had a heart attack, nobody would bat an eyelid. Poor fat bastard, nobody cares about him.
Not a surprise coming from the drones following the Clinton News Network.
You're going to have to come up with something different. This is the 21st century and last time I checked the staff of CNN was engorged on the Chicago Network News Syndicate.
I bet if Phil Schiller had a heart attack, nobody would bat an eyelid. Poor fat bastard, nobody cares about him.
Yeah, he's actually at high risk of some serious health problems... Heart attacks, diabetes, etc. He's really quite overweight. If I was a shareholder or stakeholder somehow, I'd be concerned for Phil's health. As much if not more so than Steve's issues.
Right, it's coming, but it can't be used for 'anything', it will only be used in child abuse cases.
Who says that? If it is there it can be used. Where in the bill does it say that records will be only used in child abuse cases? Its like busting Capone for tax evasion or the umbrella of racketeering. Can you find in the bill where it says that the gathered information will only be used for child abuse cases. Frequently this is how riders make it into law, read that this is a good tool for homeland security, just in a bill that deals with child abuse. Notice that the subcommittee is Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. OK clearly this deals with child abuse but also note that terrorism and homeland security could be impacted, again nothing says that it can only be used for child abuse cases.
Who says that? If it is there it can be used. Where in the bill does it say that records will be only used in child abuse cases? Its like busting Capone for tax evasion or the umbrella of racketeering. Can you find in the bill where it says that the gathered information will only be used for child abuse cases. Frequently this is how riders make it into law, read that this is a good tool for homeland security, just in a bill that deals with child abuse. Notice that the subcommittee is Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. OK clearly this deals with child abuse but also note that terrorism and homeland security could be impacted, again nothing says that it can only be used for child abuse cases.
Who says that? The bill says that. It doesn't say anything about any other use for them, as a matter of fact they clearly go out of their way to elaborate it's for child abuse/pornography.
Comments
Who does it hurt? Day traders? Too bad.
Who does yelling fire in a theater hurt? Moviegoers?
Besides materially affecting the thousands of investors in AAPL and in the indicies which AAPL is a part of, this affects the very trust of the market, which in turn hurts you.
Anyone who sold without a better source than this isn't really cut out for investing in a high profile company like aapl.
For those of you like walshbj who don't understand the market, the stock dropped from short sellers and derivative plays, not so much from people selling because they thought SJ had a heart attack.
The shorts make profit as the stock drops, triggering stops from traders, upsetting options volitility that can wipe out people, and also triggering margin calls that were not expected. I happen to know a couple people who got very effected by this...to the point where they lost their capital (not some dollars of shares, but all of their money to trade with) and have to leave the market now, broke. Those who triggered the rumor, if properly positioned in derivatives, may have literally made +100% or more profit in just a few minutes time..where as selling the stock short may have only made you the 7% it dropped. For comparison, AAPL common stock took two years to increase 100%. These crooks may have achieved that in minutes on a false rumor.
It also was set up to push the stock below the critical $100 support level, which in turn affects the technical charts (which millions of traders follow) and have opened the door for continued drop (ie profit) in the stock for short sellers.
Sadly, walshbj doesn't know the first thing about how the market works, and as he said, isn't really cut out for investing...or even commenting on this board.
Didn't your mother ever tell you about life not being fair?
As for people who needed the money for vacation, etc. aapl isn't exactly the place to keep that money, so again, those people are on their own.
Sadly, walshbj doesn't know the first thing about how the market works, and as he said, isn't really cut out for investing...or even commenting on this board.
Don't be too sad for me. I don't claim to be a stock market genius. But I started accumulating aapl at $15 and got the bulk of it at 60. So I'm doing ok.
First rule of investing - don't put money in that you might need in the short term.
Thank goodness someone is at least looking into these criminals, cos they fookers think they are untouchable. AAPL has been the source of some increasingly blatant manipulation, I wonder how many stop losses were triggered by this latest stunt.
These people belong in jail, plain and simple.
Who does it hurt? Day traders? Too bad. Where do we draw the line on stuff like this? If I say it as a joke in a bar on Wall Street can I be prosecuted? If it were April 1 would you want the SEC to go after this guy? Should whoever made the mistake at Bloomberg last month be jailed?
Ask your question to the stock holders of United Airlines. A few weeks ago somebody posted a news article from Google saying United was going bankrupt. The article was from 2002. The stock went from $9 to .30.
Yes they are breaking the law and it can be enforced, don't ever become a lawyer walshbj.
I'm under attack.
You can't enforce it if you can't find the person. You can investigate people who profited and MAYBE find a link back to the person behind the hoax. But not if they're smart. That's my point: The anonymity of the Internet makes it possible - in fact easy - to commit this "crime" without getting caught.
You can't find the perpetrator, you can't enforce the "law". The law is useless.
Back to you McHuman: Does the fact that you have friends who lost everything on this rumor make YOU the market expert? I assume you have other credentials.
You can't enforce it if you can't find the person.
What makes you think they can't find the person?
I predict that, by next week this time, we'll know.
What makes you think they can't find the person?
I predict that, by next week this time, we'll know.
I don't mean they can't find them. But do you have to think really hard to come up with a way to post anonymously on CNN? It's not that hard.
If the person was sloppy he'll be found. If he was the least bit crafty and careful he won't be caught.
My guess is that SJ himself called this one in, in typical pissed off fashion, yelling that he is fine and wants to know why someone would make this up.
You can't enforce it if you can't find the person. You can investigate people who profited and MAYBE find a link back to the person behind the hoax. But not if they're smart. That's my point: The anonymity of the Internet makes it possible - in fact easy - to commit this "crime" without getting caught.
You can't find the perpetrator, you can't enforce the "law". The law is useless.
Apple representative Steve Dowling flatly denied the report, saying it was simply "not true." The incident follows a regular series of rumors and speculation prying into Jobs' health ever since he underwent treatment for pancreatic cancer in 2004, and his more recent struggle with related nutrition issues that have since contributed to visible weight loss. [...]
A month ago, Jobs made an off-hand comment to CNBC's Jim Goldman, in which he appear to blame the incessant reports focusing on his health on hedge funds who are seeking to profit in the short term on market panic created by false reports and unsubstantiated, speculative reporting.
Apple investors have expressed frustration that the company has not been more forthcoming about Jobs' health. Ryan Jacob of the Jacob Internet Fund, an Apple shareholder since 2003, told Bloomberg, "It's a tough position to be in. They [Apple] don't continually want to field questions and make news when there is no news. We as investors have to hope that if there is something material to say, they will comment quickly."
"Leaving it to rumor and speculation is reckless,'' said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, another investor who has owned Apple shares since Jobs returned to the company in 1997. "If he is healthy, they should say so. If he's not, we should know that too.''
I welcome the S.E.C. investigation because an unknown Apple representative cannot legally bind Apple and the Apple Board of directors if it turns out that his OPINION on Steve Jobs' health is less than genuine, less than the full truth.
And I second Jeffrey Sonnenfeld's comment that it is irresponsible of Apple to leave everything to rumors, speculation and "off the record" comments. Either there is no reason to be concerned about Steve Jobs' health - AND - Apple should say so clearly through an official (actionable) statement issued by the Apple Board of directors, - OR - there is clearly reason to be concerned as evidenced by Steve Jobs' physical look in every one of his public appearance.
Who says it is difficult to find this person? FBI can find them pretty quickly especially if CNN helps. IP address, it is not difficult to bounce right back to the originator. Public machine? No problem. Behind multiple firewalls? No problem.
If it was done from a public machine, then they need some sort of record of who was at that machine. Heck, someone can go to some open AP in any subdivision and send something from there and that's a pretty dry trail unless there's a surveillance video that catches a license plate at the time of access.
Internet service providers all have records of every IP address you have accessed for the last 5 years and are compelled to keep them by law..
Got a source for that?
Heck, someone can go to some open AP in any subdivision and send something from there and that's a pretty dry trail unless there's a surveillance video that catches a license plate at the time of access.
Exactly. Open wifi changes everything about the ease of Internet anonymity. Yes, you can catch the lazy ones. But with minimal effort you can be anonymous.
Internet service providers all have records of every IP address you have accessed for the last 5 years and are compelled to keep them by law.
No they don't. Businesses are required to record customer financial transactions for a certain length of time. Storing ISP logs is not required. A recent law was raised in the UK that would force them to log data for 12 months:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...ion_directive/
Don't know if it went through though. In some countries, you can simply ask for deletion so they comply with privacy laws:
http://www.out-law.com/page-7455
Concerning the actual poster of the heart attack news, what exactly will they be charged with? Lying on the internet? How is that a criminal act? If the president can get away with it then surely some no-name journalist can too - it's only fair really.
The real problem lay with people reacting to anonymous articles. Did the stock market react when it came to light that Bill Gates runs like a girl?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sckba-EX5MM
Surely that would have sent the cool factor plummeting. Investors need to focus a company's success on the actual products. Apple's products haven't changed so the stock should by all rights drop like a stone until they move their ass but absolutely nothing should happen concerning news about Steve.
I bet if Phil Schiller had a heart attack, nobody would bat an eyelid. Poor fat bastard, nobody cares about him.
Not a surprise coming from the drones following the Clinton News Network.
You're going to have to come up with something different. This is the 21st century and last time I checked the staff of CNN was engorged on the Chicago Network News Syndicate.
I bet if Phil Schiller had a heart attack, nobody would bat an eyelid. Poor fat bastard, nobody cares about him.
Yeah, he's actually at high risk of some serious health problems... Heart attacks, diabetes, etc. He's really quite overweight. If I was a shareholder or stakeholder somehow, I'd be concerned for Phil's health. As much if not more so than Steve's issues.
Got a source for that?
OK I thought this had passed, but it is coming...
H.R.837
OK I thought this had passed, but it is coming...
H.R.837
Right, it's coming, but it can't be used for 'anything', it will only be used in child abuse cases.
Right, it's coming, but it can't be used for 'anything', it will only be used in child abuse cases.
Who says that? If it is there it can be used. Where in the bill does it say that records will be only used in child abuse cases? Its like busting Capone for tax evasion or the umbrella of racketeering. Can you find in the bill where it says that the gathered information will only be used for child abuse cases. Frequently this is how riders make it into law, read that this is a good tool for homeland security, just in a bill that deals with child abuse. Notice that the subcommittee is Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. OK clearly this deals with child abuse but also note that terrorism and homeland security could be impacted, again nothing says that it can only be used for child abuse cases.
Who says that? If it is there it can be used. Where in the bill does it say that records will be only used in child abuse cases? Its like busting Capone for tax evasion or the umbrella of racketeering. Can you find in the bill where it says that the gathered information will only be used for child abuse cases. Frequently this is how riders make it into law, read that this is a good tool for homeland security, just in a bill that deals with child abuse. Notice that the subcommittee is Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. OK clearly this deals with child abuse but also note that terrorism and homeland security could be impacted, again nothing says that it can only be used for child abuse cases.
Who says that? The bill says that. It doesn't say anything about any other use for them, as a matter of fact they clearly go out of their way to elaborate it's for child abuse/pornography.