Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday June 14 2017, @03:58AM   Printer-friendly
from the bring-out-your-dead-parrot-jokes dept.

Yahoo Inc, long-standing "other search engine", will be acquired by Verizon for $4.5 billion.

Reports can be found on CNN, CNBC, and Fortune among many other sources.

Yahoo CEO Marissa Meyer will be walking away with $23 million.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by canopic jug on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:04AM (6 children)

    by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:04AM (#525272) Journal

    The article from Fortune is empty, waste of a click, but the CNN and CNBC articles both have content and neither mention the role M$ activist Carl Icahn played in ruining the board [wsj.com] and destroying the company on behalf of M$. Yahoo! Inc. did not just stumble mysteriously into hard times. Their ship was deliberately run onto the rocks so that M$ could get rid of the FOSS stafff Yahoo employed as well as to try to steer traffic over to M$ abortive attempt at a search engine.

    By the time Mayer showed up, there weren't enough pieces left to play the game, let alone win or even just move ahead. Microsoft killed Yahoo [techrights.org] well before her time. The media, whose owners worship and/or are friends with Bill and are dependent on advertising money from M$ and its partners, is never, ever going to bring up that aspect. Instead the focus will remain on blaming Mayer for everything that happened well before her tenure.

    --
    Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:21AM (5 children)

    by kaszz (4211) on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:21AM (#525275) Journal

    Seems awfully similar to the corporate raid on Nokia that Microsoft did. A tip for other corporations is to BAN all people ever involved with Microsoft at the Cxx-level.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Bot on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:36AM (4 children)

      by Bot (3902) on Wednesday June 14 2017, @05:36AM (#525283) Journal

      I agree, the problem is more general though.
      The financial system is the fastest, more accurate, deadliest weapon ever invented.
      You can have the same guy owning banks that finance both the food and the health industry with laundered money. Putting harmful preservatives in food will yield profit in health.

      Eliminating the rights of corporations, eliminating more than 2 levels of ownership (a can't own b that owns c), having each firm's list of owners published on every product, considering credit as usury as sin AGAIN, mandating that any law not understood by people with a diploma in anything but law is null and void, would be good first steps. Of course the system would react with economic WWIV (WWIII is already taken because it is under way)

      --
      Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @07:56AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @07:56AM (#525328)

        "Eliminating the rights of corporations, eliminating more than 2 levels of ownership (a can't own b that owns c), having each firm's list of owners published on every product, considering credit as usury as sin AGAIN, mandating that any law not understood by people with a diploma in anything but law is null and void, would be good first steps."

        And in exactly which parallel universe might this actually happen?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @04:38PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @04:38PM (#525495)

        Eliminating the rights of corporations, eliminating more than 2 levels of ownership (a can't own b that owns c), having each firm's list of owners published on every product, considering credit as usury as sin AGAIN, mandating that any law not understood by people with a diploma in anything but law is null and void, would be good first steps. Of course the system would react with economic WWIV (WWIII is already taken because it is under way)

        They will only cause economic WWIV in retribution the same way that if we cut all the power lines to a house the power companies will turn off all your lights in retribution; it's not a punitive attack so much as you are inherently crippling how the modern economy works. The things you say sound good on the outside and in a populist way (like "let's ban all the Muslims from entering the country" and "build a wall to stop illegal immigration"), but if somebody does some basic research into economics they'll find out it will not work. You are effectively proposing to return to a class system, with wealthy gentry and serfs.

        I'm not informed enough to comment on all of them, but I can say some of them:

        "eliminating more than 2 levels of ownership (a can't own b that owns c)"
        -This would be a logistical nightmare. You are effectively making sure that nobody can buy or sell stocks except those wealthy enough to own personal accountants and lawyers, as you'd need full documentation about everything you own and cross-referencing what they own. Moreover, do you really want anybody (including the government) to have this amount of knowledge about everybody?

        "considering credit as usury as sin AGAIN"
        -So mortgages disappear... only those with wealthy and generous parents can buy a home. Everybody else is a permanent renter.
        -So loans for making businesses disappears. Those with brilliant ideas can't start a business unless they find a wealthy patron, and small companies can never expand faster than cashflow will allow no matter how much demand there is for their product. The large established companies would love this.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @11:28PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 14 2017, @11:28PM (#525720)

          Even the most Christian kings of the Middle Ages couldn't make things work without a source of loans (that's what charging interest creates), so they let the heathen Jews fulfill that function. Somebody had to.

        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday June 18 2017, @07:14AM

          by Bot (3902) on Sunday June 18 2017, @07:14AM (#527386) Journal

          > You are effectively making sure that nobody can buy or sell stocks except those wealthy enough to own personal accountants and lawyers

          Not necessarily, but you just said speculative ownership of stocks would be made difficult, which is not bad.

          > Moreover, do you really want anybody (including the government) to have this amount of knowledge about everybody?
          Yes. What can you do? kidnap me for my wealth? then you'd become the documented owner.
          What can you do? tax the hell of it to get some kickbacks? then you'd become the documented owner of the percentage.
          You see, the idea was totally hypothetical but full disclosure vs. half disclosure (like now, where a handful of corporations and entities can have all the info they want out of anybody) is not clear cut. Of course such a system would devolve into a totalitarian nightmare by day two if imposed by bureaucracy. But what about tech getting so advanced that keeping privacy needs a more totalitarian system? Is it not happening before our very eyes?

          > Those with brilliant ideas can't start a business unless they find a wealthy patron...

          a patron taking the role of a bank, but with actual goodwill? OK indeed it is difficult. Too bad.
          The Medieval commune is another example of completely monopolistic incumbents, the guilds, taking over the market. It was cruel but it did work and yielded pretty art to prove it. Our system is not less cruel, any bank can loan money to start redundant economic activity in the name of free competition, which overloads the sector's offer and in the medium term put the other players, or the same player, in need of loans. Fish in barrel.

          > small companies can never expand faster than cashflow will allow

          Yeah it is crazy huh? it's called the actual free market.

          > So mortgages disappear... only those with wealthy and generous parents can buy a home. Everybody else is a permanent renter.

          What made the home prices balloon, again? who has a portfolio of buildings that should not depreciate no matter the market conditions?

          --
          Account abandoned.