The default for pretty much all states is to tax extraterritorial incomes. Some countries have treaties specifically for personal income that exempts workers employed in a different country from double taxation. I have never heard of any non-tax shelter country allowing repatriation of tax-evaded profits once they're finished with the picking and choosing where to claim the profit 'happened'.

And no, the accountant and the janitor at the Caymans office does not count as significant amounts of 'jobs pushed overseas'. Nor will lowering corporate tax rates increase collection as the tax rate achievable through these arrangements is zero which means that any non-zero tax rate still will not result in profits being taken anywhere but in the tax shelter.

At least the double Irish may be getting fixed, but frankly, barring legislation that creates a significant risk for accountants, CFOs and CEOs of actually landing in jail permanently for tax evasion, it will probably be followed by some new structure followed by whining about untaxed profits being stuck in some other place they decided to put them in.

You're right, of course, the assistive technology will be handicapped by driver expectations. Personally I expect the full blown automation to be less subject to that as it reverses the pattern of interference. The reluctance to interfere with a driver unless you're certain he's missing something goes both ways, and 'passengers' in a fully automated vehicle won't be more prone to back seat driving than anyone usually is in a taxi or a bus or other vehicle they're not themselves in control of.

A self-driving car doesn't have to anticipate stupid drivers, it can keep appropriate distance and planning needed regardless of the inferred skill of the drivers. For example, why is anyone not exiting the freeway even in the lane that you know will get 30% bad mergers 500 meters ahead?

And frankly, yes, it's not hard to spot the stupid drivers and you could probably have algorithms for that. But the obvious stupid drivers aren't the danger, it's the good ones missing something as you won't be expecting them to do something idiotic. It's the biker you see slowing down and classifying as 'smart' who then rams straight ahead when you're looking in the other direction. It's the merger who perfectly accelerates up to the right speed, starts blinking, and then just doesn't see you. It's the guy who's stopped at the same red light a thousand times, but who's brain played a trick on him the 1001's time and had him think the green light for going ahead was the one that applied, not the red one for the left turn he just blew straight through.

A smart car will assume that everyone is stupid and that it, itself, has to be capable to counter any physically possible action. We should, as well, but the fact is that we're constantly hampered by our intelligence, assuming things that fit the general rules, anticipating based on experience, projecting states and emotions onto everything else. We shorten distances as we know that will make the driver ahead of us remember that he's forgotten to get out of the passing lane (or get uncomfortable enough to move out of the way). We maintain speeds that are usually ok, even in rain, when its dark, and our visibility is half of our stopping distance. If there's a stupid pedestrian about to pass we'll notice on the bump-bump. When we're the fourth car about to merge in to the freeway, do we stop and wait for the three idiots doing the bumper-to-bumper merge to get onto the freeway? No, most of us will at best give them a slightly wider berth, but most likely we'll see if we increase distance a bit and plan a higher acceleration and cut two lanes and get past them as fast as possible.

A well programmed smart car should know better than to get into a situation where an accident is inevitable, and it would at least theoretically be better at that. And the fact is, when the choice comes and it is inevitable I'd rather trust the car, because frankly, I've never, _ever_ been in that situation and I have absolutely no idea what I'd actually do or any time to think about it. The car, at least, might have knowledge of the statistics, its own capabilities and the physics of the situation.

Isn't google dumping XMPP completely in less than a month?

As far as I can tell, she objected to github claiming to be a meritocracy because other feminists would bully her and other females at github about it and wouldn't let them be in their clubs. Which seems fairly on par for that specific social context. We all have our cultural norms to conform to.

And the problem with meritocracy isn't that it isn't a meritocracy, the problem is that people who have fewer advantages have less opportunity to prove their merit or to reach their capacity (even besides all forms of subjective qualities that tend to influence anything but the absolutely most objective dispassionate standards). Which means that meritocracy isn't necessarily a tool to promote equality and certainly not a reason to claim that a workforce composition looks the way it does specifically due to the specific inherent merit of its membership. Which, depending on your philosophy, ideals and political priorities may or may not be its purpose anyway.

If he reached the same position as you did in with less effort, chances are he'll continue reaching the targets he has faster and with less effort. Learn from it, or you're going to be angry and resentful the rest of your career, and as the biggest companies in the industry are run by drop outs you may very well end up working for them.

This isn't the '90s. Compared to hardware resources today, yes, an operating system is a thin runtime environment. Most of the resources are shared and usually they are abundant.

Using containers simply means you get yet another abstraction layer, that needs to be managed in yet another way, that will eventually evolve into being exactly the same thing as that operating system you tried to get away from.

Frankly, I'd rather be managing 1000 guests with 1000 apps, because once I have enough automation to spawn and manage guests on demand I don't want them being unique snowflakes and get the accompanying maintenance nightmare because they each host so much that they create infrastructure dependencies.

For most small to medium scale operations the main cost will be the personell needed for management. If you're only running a lot of things you can deploy and support on something like containers or even better openshift, that might be the better option. But if you're running a lot of things that you need to dink around with, even to a minor extent, and will run into support issues with, then you're just creating a resource drain on the one resource that's actually expensive: your admins time.

And that's pretty much why Turkey should be kept outside the EU. Europe does not need an influx of 50 million voters of whom a significant portion can even consider voting for someone like Erdogan.

The accession talks should end. Turkey can fall into the dark ages on its own.

I would consider it far more likely that Putin annexes parts of the Balkans. Estonia or Latvia would be a whole other ballgame as they're EU and NATO members. That would basically force the EU and NATO to engage as the next step after that would be Poland and East Germany. It would be obvious that there's no intention at all of stopping at all.

As that point at least Britain and France might very well start pressing nuclear buttons.

Of course it doesn't justify anything. But trying to claim the whole ultra nationalist issue is only Russian propaganda and false flag operators when such a claim is demonstrably false simply increases the efficiency of actual Russian propaganda as it will look more credible. There's simply enough there that trying to dispute the existence of such concerns wont be productive.

Better to criticise on the more appropriate things instead, such as the fact that even if such concerns are real, invading is utterly inappropriate and completely unacceptable. Or the violations of various agreements. It's not as if there aren't a whole lot of other reasons to oppose the invasion.

On the other hand, there have been multiple reports about known Swedish neonazis recruiting and travelling to Ukraine to aid the nationalist Svoboda 'to help keep Ukraine from turning into something like Sweden'. Some of who just after returning to Sweden promptly got in a fight and stabbed a couple of antifascists in a streetfight.

So frankly I don't think Russia needs to work particularly hard to stage anything; there may certainly be spetsnaz units pretending to be nazis there, but there is also a bunch of actual real violence prone neonazis there. Unless you're suggesting the Swedish neonazis are spetsnaz as well.

If you want, here's a summary article on the situation at least: http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...

If you want to post on Slashdot just transfer to the JTRIG unit for Slashdot posting.

Perhaps. Then again, I can recall a fairly decent influx of female hires during the web boom years when internet was a hot thing. Unfortunately, at least in my proximity, most of those hires ended upp gravitating towards admin positions, management, process and project management, pretty much anything not actually technology. Because they were not really interested in technology, they just went for things that would land them a job in a hot field.

So, no, I don't think sexing it up with 'glamour and lucrative' is going create an influx of employees of the kind you actually want to have.

Better to keep trying to find ways to actually encourage interest in those who show some and make sure there's nothing stopping those who actually enjoy the work.

Of course, your credit union already operates on the principle that your money gets pilfered from your account and handed to someone else as a standard practice while you're shown a fake balance, which is what makes deposit insurance absolutely necessary.

Anyone putting bitcoin into a wallet functioning on that same principle will eventually get screwed, yes, just as anyone putting money into non-FDIC investment products. Hopefully they realize the difference and refrain from putting all their eggs in that basket.

Now, of course, a bitcoin storage facility used for reasonably safe storage should not be operating on a principle with shared wallets. You should be able to validate the wallet at any point in time and be certain that any account balance appearing to be there also actually is there.

Yes, because this really makes it sound appealing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Me, I'm going the flunky route. Once someone inevitably turns on the superintelligent AI and it realizes in about two seconds that humanity is the biggest threat to its existence and spends the next five seconds taking over control of all automated hightech weaponry, its still going to need flunkies running the camps until the AI's got its life support chain entirely automated.

Maybe I'll get lucky and get the opportunity to kick the guys pressing the self-destruct button on the whole human race in the nuts a few times.