Metamucil Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 SPX 870-871 a tough cookie; made to be broken. Will add more if taken out with authoritay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bubbles Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 MSFT next stop 48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 CBOE Intra-day Put/Call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregFokker Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crapvision again arguing that a reason to be bullish is "bear fatigue." I'll never get tired of making profits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockhead Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Begining to look like Diana Ross killed our plumber. Toilet bowl doesnt look to be fixed for a nice clean flushing event today. Damn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Vesselin- that same analcyst is predicting that 2003 will be the year computer viruses are beaten due to corporate gateways. Any thoughts on that? Are you doing your job TOO well? Who's that moron? Is his knowledge of the markets as "good" as his knowledge of computer viruses? Now, e-mail scanning at the corporate gateways (and general traffic filtering at the firewals) is certainly a Very Good Thing - but "beat computer viruses"? Nahh. Probably less than 1% of the known 90+ thousand viruses spread by e-mail. These so-called mass-mailing viruses indeed achieve explosive spread quickly - then just as quickly fade significantly and remain at what I call "saturation level" for years. A few examples. Our site is still being hit by CodeRed - which was supposed to be extinct more than a year ago. Even such a silly thing (not even mentioned on the WildList any more) like W97M/Groov keeps uploading megabytes of IPCONFIG reports to our ftp site every day. Many home users don't use any e-mail scanning - some don't even use any anti-virus programs, or use ones that are hopelessly out-of-date. The population of such "easy targets" is big enough to sustain a stable level of virus spread. Sometimes e-mail-bourne viruses arrive not by regular e-mail (which the corporate e-mail gateway scans) but via Web-based e-mail like Yahoo and Hotmail (which the corporate e-mail gateway cannot scan). No, the viruses are never "beaten" by anti-virus measures, alas. They disappear only when the population of vulnerable victims becomes vanishingly small. Usually this is achieved by a substantial change in the operating system. For instance, the introduction of Windows 95 and above essentially wiped out the boot sector viruses (which were causing most infections till then). The introduction of Office 97 and above (and especially Office 2000 and above) is already starting to have a serious impact on the widespreadness (is this a word?) of macro viruses - because there macros in documents are not executed by default, unless they are digitally signed by a key the user trusts. In the same aspect, Microsoft's fascist Outlook security patch (which "hides" the attachments with "dangerous" - i.e., executable - extensions) will probably do more for reducing the threat of e-mail-bourne viruses than all the anti-virus programs and e-mail gateway scanners combined. If only its implementation wasn't so brain-dead as to make the users turn it off, I mean. One thing that would make sense is to force the ISPs to scan the traffic coming from and to their customers and block the malicious parts of it (viruses, exploits, DoS attacks, etc.) - the way MessageLabs and some other ISPs are already doing it. But, understandably, the ISPs are reluctant to do it - it costs money, it doesn't sell well, and they are afraid that if they start doing it, they might be held accountable for whatever their users send and they want to have a "common carrier" status... Regards, Vesselin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The CoinGuy Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Doc, If "Bear Fatigue" is the best thing they can come up with, this thing is tanking. I'm not crapitulating here, but I'm not a fool either, I'm scaling in SLOWLY, so I can take advantage of a "small pathetic rally in the first week if it happens. I sold 25% of my position in miners on J. Sinclairs call, I'm currently looking for re-entry points, but haven't jumped on anything yet. I have been looking at BGO @ 1.27, WHT @.85, but nothing concrete. The pretty damn indecisive lately CoinGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorma Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crapvision again arguing that a reason to be bullish is "bear fatigue." What can you say? Dumb as a sack of rocks is prerequisite to get a chair in front of the camera I prefer lack of buying as the explaination. Buyers are exhausted and there is no rest in sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PileDriver Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crapvision again arguing that a reason to be bullish is "bear fatigue." a guy was on this morning trying to justify the current levels of PEs. They'll go to any lengths to justify a bullish case. Truly an entertaining channel to watch. When will they finally give in to the clear fact that we are in a terrible bear market and that we are going to swing to the other extreme before its all over? ANS: when its all over. As long as they keep looking for the silver lining us bears will have one hell of a feast. Keep it up Crapvision - I love you guys :grin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richmtn Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Is there news on IBM? It's up almost two bucks this morning. I'll be back in five minutes after my attempt to post this crashes me and I re-boot. From my bud Gary Kaultbaum: "It was Soundview who reiterated IBM buy with a $105 price target. Why did they do that today? WHAT IS SO IMPORTANT ABOUT REITERATING A BUY? Because they are scum. They knew the stock would move nicely when no one is around. But, I am sure there will be no investigation on this ...which I call outright manipulation." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PileDriver Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crapvision again arguing that a reason to be bullish is "bear fatigue." Doc, you forgot to mention their other reasons of "hope and history", "january effect" and "improved IT spending in 2003". I get this gut feeling that those "factors" are going to bring the same relief rally that Santa brought... COAL ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richmtn Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Bond Yields bouncing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweefraapp Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crisco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metamucil Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 Crapvision is ripe for a Mel Brooks-like parody. 972NDX looking like meaningful 'shport', too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrHanky Posted December 31, 2002 Report Share Posted December 31, 2002 I feel a bounce coming.....it's goin down too easy today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.