> Some critics do say that Alibaba's share price will plummet from its current value of $93.60 in the same way that Facebook's and Twitter's plummeted

The vast majority of IPOs are lower in price 6 months after the issue date. Usually what happens is that company owners have some restrictions on when they can start selling stock - and those are typically 6 months or so. So on the day of initial sale supply is very constrained. Later a lot more shares flood onto the market.

For example Facebook went from $38 to $19.

Purchasing IPOs on day of issuance is a sucker move.

Hooray, getting more plastic knockoff versions of things, produced by slaves (hint: Communism doesn't treat people kindly), with zero regard for the environment, and shipped halfway across the planet.

- - - - - Trustyworthy Computing had the idea that apps could prevent you taking screenshots - - - - -

While I personally agree with your point, organizations with strong security requirements have to at least attempt to forestall the Ivan Vorpatril security hole.

sPh

- - - - - the industry's decades-long conversation around - - - - -

"Conversation" is bad enough, but what does the word "around" in this type of sentence even mean? That the conversation never actually gets anywhere or accomplishes anything specific, but just circles 'around' and 'around' a problem that should be analyzed, detailed, and solved (or firmly documented as unsolvable or uneconomic)?

sPh

How about Neurath's boat?

They're not burned out. They have lives now. Wives. Families. Something to do other than be a slave to the corporation.

Herding Cats - Hurd and Catz. LULZ.

That's DOCTOR Who, to you, Sir!
 

Logic is a binary function. Something is in a logical set - or it is not. Being illogical is not a synonym for being mistaken. Degrees of precision are irrelevant for set inclusion. Fuzzy logic is not logic.

BTW: It is illogical to conclude that a Tomato in NOT a vegetable, simply because it belongs to a taxonomical subclass, "fruit". It as if I were to say your testicle is not animal.

> I suspect they just want to know how many customers they have, not specifically who they are.

Nonsense.

I am sure that Netflix is more than willing to BRAG about how many Canadian customers it has, or how many customers it has in ANY country.

Way different kettle of fish than actual subscriber info.

And that's the root of it. The socialist hatred of profit.

Thanks for taking the time to explain that!

...and both of those look like they need to be broken out into a number of distinct questions. Every comma and "or" muddles the resulting data.

Although I've been part of the phone survey racket. So I know all about how these things can be distorted to suit the agenda of the company paying for the study.

No. It's a recurring problem in these discussions because radical feminists will redefine terms. So it's hard to know at any one time whose definition you are dealing with. Are you dealing with something sane or are you dealing with something that's been "trumped up" in order to push an agenda?

You can't trust any random study to be free from such biases.

Then you end up with the basic magnitude problems that occur when dire claims fail to meet basic sanity with respect to numeracy.

If you're actually numerate, some of these claims are just incredible on their face.

I don't think most of the people pushing them fully understand the implications.

Yes. That was Dawkins that rightfully noted that you lot are complaining about 1st world non-problems.

You will take a situation that's not the least bit sinister and distort it until seems to be something entirely else.

That's why no one can trust any stories like these.

Radical feminists have hijacked the debate and the language.