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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (50929)	8/21/2001 6:56:38 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Yes, yes, I am (as usual) exaggerating and simplifying in order to make a point. (And maybe I am just speaking my position too). Let's say that, instead of spending an hour a day posting on SI, I change my behavior, so I spend two hours a day typing my wit and nonsense. If that is the only thing that changes, more data will move through core networks (that was what the study measured). But nothing much else has changed. I don't need a new PC, my local service provider doesn't upgrade the network, the long-haul network reduces it's overcapacity by a very tiny amount, SI probably doesn't need more servers (maybe they need more storage, though). AMAT doesn't make much more profits. OTOH, if I decide my posts have to include streaming video and high-quality graphics and audio (so I can add Beethoven or Shania Twain as background music to my posts, depending on my mood), then my PC, and the network, and the servers, probably do have to be upgraded. If I decide that, next time I'm kayacking in Prince William Sound, I need to be able to post to you, using my (waterproof) Palm Pilot (the one with perfect Voice-to-Text translation, and a 3G wireless, no, better be satellite, modem), then the infrastructure needs to be upgraded a lot to accomodate that "need". The thing is, I don't see the above as "needs" I am ever likely to have. So, growth in data traffic does not automatically translate into higher AMAT stock price. And, even if there is a connection (yes, you're right, there probably is one), I think it's a connection impossible to quantify. A doubling of data traffic (every 6 months in core networks) translates into what % increase in AMAT profits and stock price? You'd be lucky to guess the correct order of magnitude. And what's the time lag on that relationship? Could be years.

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (50929)	8/21/2001 9:27:29 PM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

Brian, you'll love this. Implanting chips in tuna... >Last week, a team led by Stanford biologist Barbara Block reported the results of the first study to follow these fish for years at a time, using a type of electronic tag that is revolutionizing wildlife biology. It's essentially a miniature computer with two megabytes of memory. Surgically implanted in the fish's belly cavity, it takes note of the bluefin's position once a day and records water temperature, depth and other items every two minutes.< [snip] www0.mercurycenter.com From now on let's refuse to buy any other kind of tuna.<vbG> Gottfried

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (50929)	8/22/2001 7:41:39 AM
From: John Trader	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

OT: FWIW, bullish article on Corning. I find this interesting, but I am not sure if his arguments make sense - just read it quickly. individualinvestor.com Bid & Ask: Sands of Time Favor Corning By Tom Byrne (8/21/01) The telecom boom is over. We over-built. We have more supply than we have demand. We have too much bandwidth. Two years ago, these statements were unthinkable. But I am not so sure they are true. Granted, we have more bandwidth than we need on a national scale, but the lack of spending over the last 18 months is going to force the pendulum to swing in the other direction. In short, we are going to need more fiber optics and fiber-optic components in the next few years. There are two main reasons. First, spending shut down in June 2000, and according to Cisco Systems (Nasdaq: CSCO - Quotes, News, Boards) , spending will not resume until "at least" the second half of 2002. That represents a span of two years for anemic spending on fiber-optic infrastructure. That is a long time in the technology world because new technologies are introduced about every six months. Which brings me to the second reason. After a 2-year hiatus, in the second half of 2002, there will be dozens of new fiber-optic strands, components, switches and routers, traffic enhancers, and light-bending equipment that will make fiber-optic networks more efficient. This will force a spending boom on the new equipment. ... (click on link to read entire 2-part article)