Most advertising is fraudulent
Lol. Citation needed.
Most advertising is fraudulent
Lol. Citation needed.
The Tesla P85+ has the same performance 0-60 as the Carrera GT: 3.9s (the speed range where normal humans would use the power), is the safest car you can buy, and costs 1/4 of the Porsche!
Read the link you provide - startCollectors is not required when the browser supports the proper crypto RNG, Chrome does, and they only support Chrome. So there is no bug.
If they hadn't locked it down, Windows RT could have just been another target to which developers could recompiled their software and that would have kick-started the application ecosystem somewhat. It would have been with desktop applications, though, which Microsoft considers deprecated. Desktop applications also don't work with touch control very well and more importantly don't make Microsoft any money.
It seems as well that Microsoft wanted the locked-down environment to prevent Windows RT from having viruses, an inevitable side effect of open development. Many more people bought the virus-laden Surface Pro than the Surface RT, so maybe people like their viruses =)
Was it because of the OS that the Surface did not have cell data support???
They should have just left it unlocked, rather than make us jailbreak it by force. By forcing us to jailbreak, they guarantee that commercial applications never get ported to it.
I guess Microsoft didn't care, because they consider the desktop to be deprecated, something they will remove in a future version.
The guy who owned that transaction was already located. His name is Dustin and he is not Satoshi. What's more, these transactions had aroused interest before, been researched, the guy who owned them was not really trying to hide his identity and publicly confirmed they were his. And all this was available just by doing a google search on the address in question.
This is the second time Shamir has associated his name with research which contains elementary mistakes, makes wild claims and is funded by the Citi Foundation (as in, Citibank). What is going on?
Yeah, great. So the idiots who want free movies will get DPI implemented across the board, thus dramatically lowering the bar for all other kinds of censorship in future. This whole thing reminds me of the drug war. These tele-addicts simply don't have any lines they won't cross in order to get their fix, and attempts to stop them thus spiral downards into ever harsher and more aggressive monitoring and control.
BITTORRENT USERS - JUST BUY THE DAMN MOVIES ALREADY.
A lot of banks outside the EU already are pretty secure, using hardware second factors to authorize logins and wire transfers to unknown/new destinations.
If you see bank details being sold that only have a username/password, it's probably an American bank. The 2-factor auth system used outside the USA is based on EMV (it's a variant called CAP). In the US they never deployed EMV aka chip and PIN so the banks don't have any pre-existing secure hardware issued to end users they can auth themselves with.
Hmmm. Yeah, you're right. The stuff I had seen is for an obsolete manufacturing process and doesn't apply to the bio-engineered solution which is used in the USA.
Do you have a link describing this process? Or are you making this up?
The ethanol used for fuel is made from industrial grade corn syrup. Because the corn syrup used is not food-grade, it is usually made using a process which uses mercury. So, the combustion of fuel with ethanol is actually putting mercury into the environment.. Mercury is considered a worse toxin than lead but it's arguably at much smaller quantities.
It's about 10^80, not 2^80.
I think we'll find that the amount of energy required to hold X entangled particles in coherence will be exponential in X. This would make quantum computing essentially worthless.
If not, wake me when we get to 2048 qubits, for the original Xbox's public key and I have some unfinished business from last decade...
Yes, they were doing pretty great, so great that the name "Celtic Tiger" was invented specifically to describe the Irish economy.
Like most economies that have inflationary currencies, this led to exuberance and dumping of money into a housing bubble, on the theory that whilst money inflates away houses don't. Being in the Euro had nothing to do with this, it's a disease that affected the USA and the UK as well, even though they have their own currencies and central banks. In fact these governments (but especially the UK) were all desperately trying to push people into the housing bubble due a massive and misguided social engineering program rooted in the belief that home-ownership is an end rather than a means.
But this is not specific to Ireland. It's actually a problem fundamental to an environment with compound inflation (recall that at 2% per year, prices go up every year by more than the previous year because inflation is expressed as a percentage rise on the previous year, not a fixed reference point).
Quoting the wikipedia article I linked:
During that time, Ireland experienced a boom, which transformed it from one of Europe's poorer countries into one of its wealthiest. The causes of Ireland's growth are the subject of some debate, but credit has been primarily given to state-driven economic development; social partnership among employers, government and unions; increased participation by women in the labour force; decades of investment in domestic higher education; targeting of foreign direct investment; a low corporation tax rate; an English-speaking workforce; and membership of the European Union which provided transfer payments and export access to the Single Market.
So they went from one of the poorest countries in Europe to being equal to some of the best in only a couple of decades, and a big chunk of that was due to low corporation tax (but not necessarily low taxes in general, mind you) combined with access to the single market.
The Irish people love their low corporation taxes and did not really raise them even during the global recession, because they have attracted tons of very high-skilled jobs from well known, rich corporations - companies like Apple, Google, Intel and others. The latter two alone created tens of thousands of jobs, which in a small country is a Big Deal, and they're far from the only ones. So not surprisingly, a policy that has created a spigot of good local jobs is popular - a government with higher tax revenues but that spends it all on welfare is not obviously a better state to be in.
This isn't necessarily a strategy that can be replicated everywhere: Ireland was catching up from behind during its boom years, not accelerating ahead of all the other countries. And some of its appeal to international companies was the fact that it wasn't very rich, so wages weren't extremely high. But there are other parts of Europe that are now also behind (think: Spain, Portugal, northern England), so perhaps they can consider whether the same strategy would help.
Some will say this leads to a race to the bottom, and there's some truth to that, but the question is does it matter? It's not like taxing corporations is the only way to raise revenue. Indeed, if you trace a money flow, you'll see that when someone buys something, there's sales tax/VAT paid on that. Then (ignoring the case where the money is sent back to HQ abroad for a moment), it's booked as profit and tax is paid on that too, and then the company pays its wages and possibly pays employment taxes as part of that, and of course property taxes for the place where the employees work, the employee pays income taxes on their wages as well, and in some places also pays a wealth tax at the end. So by the time the money has flowed from one person to another (which is what we really care about, given that economies are ultimately made of and in service of people), it's been taxed many times repeatedly. Rebalancing that does not imply a lower overall tax take, but it may imply a simpler tax system, less paperwork and lower deadweight costs!
All of that is the sort of argument you might find in an academic discussion of tax incidence. What really happens is that corporation taxes are used as a way to try and address social inequality because corporate profits are perceived as making a handful of people extraordinarily wealthy (whether this is the best way to address that, is a matter I leave on the table for further debate).
They do business in Italy. They get money in Italy.
They do business in Ireland and they sell to customers in Italy. The whole point of the EU is it's a single market, that means, you can establish your company once and sell to everyone within that market. If you set up in Ireland and sell to Italians, not only is that not tax evasion, that is the point of the EU in the first place!
These companies have all had exactly the same tax arrangements for years and as Apple point's out in the article, have been repeatedly audited and passed. In fact Italy appears to have audited Apple three years in a row, which seems only explainable as harassment - tax audits are supposed to be semi-random spot checks to ensure compliance. If you pass an audit, getting audited the next year is just a waste of time and money for all concerned.
What's happening now is that a lot of governments around the world, having spent many decades promoting trade and economic integration when times were good and they had excessively cheap credit, now decided that maybe free trade isn't such a hot idea after all. After all, it might mean that other countries who you trade with end up more appealing to do business in. Ireland has had a long-standing policy of aggressively attracting international businesses with low tax rates, it's a very popular policy amongst the people in Ireland, and in fact until their government foolishly panicked and committed to a full bailout of their banks their economy was doing great. If the Italians are now mad about it, they have two choices:
1) Start rolling back the EU single market, then they can pass rules that say "if you want to sell stuff to Italians, you must run your business out of Italy and pay whatever taxes we want to do that" (of course this means some companies won't bother)
2) Deal with it and find other sources of revenue, whilst enjoying the fact that when Italian companies sell to the Irish, the Italians get to keep the corporate tax from that.
Right now governments are trying to do both simultaneously, which is why they grind to a halt in an internal deadlock of contradictions and you get bizarre setups like companies buying things from themselves.
Apple specifically will "solve itself" after a while because probably, Ireland will start making them corporation tax in Ireland safe in the knowledge that it's still more appealing than the alternatives. However this will not satisfy other members of the EU who dislike tax competition.
By the way, your post is very emotional. Tax should not be an emotional topic. Tax is (or rather should be) a technical matter in which people analyze the most efficient ways to raise the revenues governments need to function. Whether corporation tax is even a good idea at all is a matter of some debate in academic circles - the fact that you're trying to tax an entity that doesn't actually have any specific physical location is one reason why everyone ends up feeling like it's "not fair".
A conference is a gathering of important people who singly can do nothing but together can decide that nothing can be done. -- Fred Allen