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.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (648)	11/19/1997 1:01:00 AM
From: Paul Weiss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

I thought it was meant as a joke! I sorta giggled my way through it, enjoying the silliness. Now, I'm scratching my head... are there investor's gullible enough to buy this stuff? I fear that I know the answer. Paul

To: ahhaha who wrote (648)	11/19/1997 4:08:00 PM
From: Bob Zacks	Respond to of 29970

I have heard of similar shorting manipulation but only for a stock not yet on the nasdac (D & H marketing).Once on the nasdac a stock would be to carefully regulated for this kind of nonsense to go on.

To: ahhaha who wrote (648)	11/19/1997 8:38:00 PM
From: ftth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

[OFF TOPIC} ahhaha: Although this isn't really worth arguing about (so I'll keep this short), there are tons of SEC cease and desist orders for persons involved in fraudulent trading of unregistered securities with all sorts of twists. To think that such things can't happen because there's "this regulation" and "that procedure" in place, and by god they're air tight and can't be violated is crazy. All complex regulations are replete with holes, and these holes are constantly being filled by the hundreds of rule changes you can find on the SEC site alone. If you spend a little time on just the SEC site looking at the cases involving unregistered securities and fraudulent trades that circumvent the "checks and balances" I'm sure you'll change your view. Besides, what would Copley Pacific Securities stand to gain in writing such an article? The article doesn't really sucker anyone into doing something that would cause a financial loss (unless I missed something). I said I'd be brief so one last comment: there is a litigation in process which I read about recently which involves undeclared shorting by a Bre-X exec (I believe), although it didn't involve Bre-X directly. If I happen across this, I'll let you know. Anyway, if you're interested in looking into it further, start with the SEC site; if you're not interested, that's fine too. [ON TOPIC] Now for some relevant stuff: You commented: The issue of settop boxes has been an irritation to me. I want the cable to go into my pc and then spurred to the tube,phone, etc. Intl, 3Coms, Bay, are working on what I refer to as a wic---web interface card. I want to program my VCR from my pc. Anybody out there writing software to do this? The settop box is necessary because--like it or not--the first generation products are aimed at people currently without computers or internet access. This makes some sense because the whizzy second generation box will then have a larger potential market once some of the "afraid of computers and the internet" people learn that they aren't so bad after all. These boxes are broadly broken down into so-called digital boxes and analog boxes. Both can allow viewing internet content on your TV set. The analog boxes have a target retail price around 200-$300. When non-computer folks were surveyed as to whether they would pay 200-300 for a box that would allow them to surf using their TV, enough responded YES to view this as a viable market. The trouble is that the surveys are a setup in my view because they don't give the people they're asking all the facts. The TV as a graphics display device doesn't fly because of the low bandwidth display electronics in a TV compared to a graphics-centric computer monitor. There's a lot more to this but I'm running short on time. As for the VCR control via PC--such software does exist for household device control via PC. Software isn't the problem. It's the hardware interface that doesn't exist. The "home entertainment center" would need to be redesigned as an interoperative group in order to do this cleanly. Products do exist which allow you to kludge this type of control by sticking a small infrared transmitter over the infrared receiver lens on your VCR, which is driven by a device that sends the appropriate infrared protocol to your VCR. TV manufacturers are working on integrating some of the set-top box functions into the TV, so some day this will be a reality if you want to buy all new equipment. The first level of integration, though, will be the cable modem and "set-top-box" functions into a single chassis. The basic digital set top box contains NTSC encoders, NTSC decoders, MPEG2 decoders and demultiplexers, Digital audio decoders, a CPU, and a fair amount of memory--thus, it needs a separate box until someone can integrate this onto a single PC plug-in card (possibly by late '98). Oops! gotta go. If this wasn't very clear (it probably wasn't), send me a message. dh