Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: milo_morai who wrote (127675)	11/9/2000 12:50:32 AM
From: milo_morai	Respond to of 1570758

<font color=red>Live Video Webcast! AMD Annual Analyst Meeting amd.com Live Video Webcast! AMD Annual Analyst Meeting Nov. 9, 2000 at 8:30 a.m. PT Presenters will include: CEO W.J. Sanders, III Dr. William Siegle, Senior Vice President, Technology and Manufacturing Operations Walid Maghribi, Vice President, Memory Group Rob Herb, Executive Vice President and Chief Sales & Marketing Officer Dirk Meyer, Vice President, Engineering, Computation Products Group To access the archived meeting, please click the logo above. Important: If you receive an error message while trying to access the replay, please refresh your browser to clear your cache and try the link again. Call Replay: This conference call will be archived and available for replay beginning approximately one and a half hours following the broadcast and continuing for one month. Requirements: You will need to have Window's Media Player installed on your computer. To download the FREE player, please click on the WMP logo above. Cautionary Statement This video file contains forward-looking statements, which are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward- looking statements are generally preceded by words such as "expects," "plans," "believes," "anticipates," or "intends." Investors are cautioned that all forward-looking statements in this release involve risks and uncertainty that could cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations. Forward-looking statements in this release regarding the AMD Athlon™processor involve the risk that the company will not be able to produce the processor in the volume required by customers on a timely basis; that AMD and third parties may not provide timely infrastructure solutions (motherboards and chipsets) to support the processor; that the processor will not achieve customer and market acceptance; and that the company will not be able to maintain average selling prices because of Intel's competitive reaction to this new product. We urge investors to review in detail the risks and uncertainties detailed in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings, including the most recently filed Form-10K. Milo

To: milo_morai who wrote (127675)	11/9/2000 9:42:25 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570758

Milo, RE:"The candidates would NOT even bother going to the small states if it weren't for the E.C. They would just hit all the big Metro's. This insures the Candidates visit every state so the people can see them." When is the last time you attended a campaign rally in person...? Jim

To: milo_morai who wrote (127675)	11/9/2000 12:26:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570758

The candidates would NOT even bother going to the small states if it weren't for the E.C. They would just hit all the big Metro's. This insures the Candidates visit every state so the people can see them. Small state or large, big city or out in the country, most people only see the candidates on TV. STATES should have a least a Minimum vote of 3. Just like each state has 2 Senators to level the playing field in the Senate. Why should 2 very small states get more representation then one state that is also small but has more population then both of them put together? I think constituionally the states are responsible for more then they actually are in practice, I'm all for "states rights", but we are one nation not an aliance of states. Why should smaller states have more representation in congress or in the electoral college then their share of the population? Personally I would prefer a unicameral legislature. That way you would get laws passed by the legislative body as a whole not by some conference committee ironing out differences between the house and senate bills. It would probably have slightly lower costs as well (although not enough to be of great signifigance to the nation). The potential downside is that bad laws could probably pass faster. Having congress in two parts acts as one of our governments "checks and balances". Tim