Xref: utzoo comp.arch:12143 comp.sys.intel:978 comp.sys.ibm.pc:37291
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!uceng!dmocsny
From: dmocsny@uceng.UC.EDU (daniel mocsny)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Compaq find problem with chip
Summary: Profiting from mistakes (Warning: frivolous posting)
Message-ID: <2655@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 31 Oct 89 05:19:20 GMT
References: <2719@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> <2725@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> <2591@munnari.oz.au>
Followup-To: scomp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg.
Lines: 47

Warning: purely frivolous post follows. Technically inclined readers with
important work to do please hit 'n' now.

> In article <2725@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>, des@yatton.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd) writes:
> > Brief summary: Compaq announced that it had found problem with fpu on
> > an Intel chip it is using in its new generation PCs. An analyst is
> > quoted as saying "You could just hear an audible gasp in the crowd when
> > they made the announcement". The result of this was a 10% fall in the
> > value of Compaq stocks and 5% fall in Intel stocks.

With a stock movement of this magnitude, the armchair
conspiratorialist in me has to wonder whether anyone connected with
the fpu bug might have been in position to profit. While I am no
expert in stock futures, I do know that by taking the appropriate
market position, a speculator can wager large sums on various
stock price movements.

A very clean conspiracy scenario is where an engineer surreptitiously
plants a crippling, yet subtle bug that is sure to slip through
preliminary testing. When the bug surfaces late enough in the game to
blow holes in a major product introduction, the resulting stock price
perturbation delivers a handsome profit to the speculators who earlier
gambled that the price would drop. With a company with revenues the
size of a Compaq, we could be talking about enough money to provide
someone with a comfortable early retirement. However, some careful
laundering would be necessary, and if the firm knew who was
responsible for the bug, (s)he would have a most difficult time
enjoying the loot anytime soon. Also, if the bug got caught and fixed
too early, the speculators would take a sizable bath, and might do
something very unpleasant to their co-conspirator as a result.

Disclaimer: I have no connection with any of the above firms, except
as a rabidly satisfied customer, and neither do I have the slightest
shred of evidence for any of the above statements. The above is purely
speculation of the most pathetic armchair variety, and no doubt is
riddled through with factual errors and conceptual distortions.
Furthermore, I am vaguely aware of the strict ethical standards that
all the organizations and their personnel doubtless uphold to the
letter, which would prevent even the thought of such a heinous scheme
from ever occurring. (I sleep better thinking that.) And of course
my employer would instantly pretend to not know me if any of this
got back to them... :-)

But it would make a great movie...

Dan Mocsny
dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu