Link to Original Source
Refuting local suspicions of malice Dell spokesman David Frink states:
and later says
Their plans to reduce employment can be found here:
Here are some highlights:
Dell has 82,200 permanent workers, including 18,000 in Central Texas, and 5,300 temporary workers worldwide. The layoffs are expected to affect both groups...
In its last large-scale layoffs, Dell cut more than 5,000 jobs in Austin after the high-tech bust in 2001.
...many of the layoffs could come in Central Texas, where Dell is headquartered. In a March 29 report to clients, Goldman Sachs analysts said Dell might reduce the work force at its test and assembly facilities in the U.S. and Malaysia.
"So... let's see if I can get my head around this.
1. Mysterious ultra-profitable 'bank' business needs to borrow your money at 40% interest.
2. Significant, unknown amounts cashed out to real money, and now considered 'illiquid.'
3. Other significant amount 'invested' in virtual stocks, now pretty much worthless because they can't sell them.
4. Scheme to acquire more $L from new investors via "IPO" to pay off old investors (that's the very definition of a Ponzi scheme)
5. Unexamined claim of residence in a distant country
6. Theft from virtual stock exchange by same guy who allegedly won large cash prizes recently
7. Said stock exchange adds new layer of internal currency, distinct from $L
Ah, folks? The Resident Answer might be:
- Your money has been cashed out and spent.
- It's long, long, loooooong gone.
- The pocketful of empty promises which is 'virtual stock' is all that remains.
- Perpetrator is actually within easy reach of US Feds.
- Any new investor will be suckered into paying off the old ones.
- Scammer isn't bolting too fast because then the heat would be on in RL.
- 'Virtual stocks' were used because there never was any 40% return investment.
- If you made money unlawfully, you risk US Feds recovering it without warning.
- If you aide and abet a scam by perpetuating it you assume criminal liability.
Now, that's just one scenario...
Link to Original Source
- Wikipedia is full of claims that are sourceable in principle, but aren't actually sourced.
- Mainstream journalists use information from Wikipedia, even if it is not further sourced.
- Those very articles can be viewed as authoritative for Wikipedia's own sourcing purposes.
- Thus, unsourced information could, by virtue of having been placed in Wikipedia, grow to be regarded as authoritative by Wikipedia itself.
This phenomenon needs a name, and I am helpfully offering one: Circlesourcing. So how long will it now take for Wikipedia to have an entry of that name?"
"The problem with the Novell deal is -- Novell gave Microsoft what Microsoft dearly wanted, which is a public admission that they think that Linux violates the Microsoft patent."