I'm not sure about that. It seems the government in this case are the only ones in the world who have the interests of the kids in their heart. God know parents are fucking useless raising TikTok zombies.
No free speech in Australia.
Children don't have absolute rights anywhere, not even in the US of fucking Eyh!
... COP30 would have been a virtual event and participants would not have spent all the jet fuel going to Brazil.
It's borderline worthless trying to get any people to agree anything over a Teams meeting let alone hold an international debate. That's not to say COP30 achieved anything, it didn't.
Windows 365 Subs were just raised at the beginning of the year, from $99 MSRP for a family plan, up to $139. It's still possible to buy the $99 plan but you have to very carefully navigate to find the option that doesn't include Copilot AI bullshit.
Is this really unique to India though? There's certainly an analogue in British politeness.
The two are nothing alike. British politeness is sometimes unbearable but in India the "yes" culture isn't even stopped by agreeing to two incompatible things. The answer there is to lie to your face by agreeing and then apologising afterwards.
It is an insane culture where you can't be sure that what you agreed on will actually happen in the slightest.
Not comparable in the slightest. The Japanese may not say no, but they don't do it while lying, as evident by your example. The Indians will outright say yes to your face and then apologise afterwards when they don't do the thing they said yes to.
This isn't just project management, this is as straight forward as "Pick me up from the hotel at 1pm." "Yes Sir" and after catching an Uber to my destination I got a "Sorry Sir" the day after when the guy who said yes flat out admitted that he knew he wasn't rostered on that day. Or the other time a few days later when a colleague of mine agreed to go to two meetings at the same time knowing full well the second was a clash and despite the second being trivially movable an hour later.
I suspect that is because Microsoft is withholding software libraries and techniques from the open Office team which would very much be in antitrust violation
That is not how antitrust laws work in any place on the planet. And the rest of the places definitely do enforce their laws.
The Pentagon pays for 2 million Microsoft 365 licenses
wut? I don't know how this can even be possible. What is going on
Indeed. Given the number of employees I would have figured it would be an order of magnitude higher than that at least. The Pentagon got an awesome deal.
You misspelled "flood a road away" The height of moving water is quite insignificant to the speed at which it moves. An 18" tsunami may get your feet wet, or may take you and your car across the suburb destroying quite a lot in its path.
The question is one of momentum. Very shallow water can be insanely destructive depending on how it moves. Just a few inches of expected moving water is required to have engineering considerations for foundations to prevent them being undermined.
1) Depreciation is unrelated to market value. Real estate is depreciated over 30 years, whether or not the value is increased or decreased.
Providing you don't double dip there's nothing wrong with that. The concepts are different for an asset disposed of at end of life vs an asset that is kept for its value. You'll find that in the accounting world no one (who isn't committing fraud) is depreciating real-estate. They are depreciating the value of the buildings (39 years, not 30 years), while the realestate itself is kept as an asset on the books. The IRS would have some very interesting things to say for you if you attempted to depreciate the property as opposed to the things built on it which do in fact wear out over time and require renovation.
2) Annual depreciation _could_ be taken (but usually isn't) as "book value - salvage value" / useful life. Using the numbers in article, if 2.5 years in, value of asset is 45% of purchase price, annual depreciation is ~55%/2.5 = 22%
You've missed the point. They are pushing out the depreciation time beyond the usable life of the product. That is fine as long as they take an impairment charge, but the whole point being made is that it artificially inflates their profits *today*.
If you don't understand why this is a problem in a time of an AI bubble where tech stocks are trading at ludicrous values then I can't help you.
Just because an asset is fully depreciated on the books does not mean a business has to throw it away.
What you're talking about is the opposite of the problem at hand. What is being discussed here is pushing out depreciation cycles despite replacing hardware with new cutting edge stuff to spread out the tax benefits. I think businesses should be forced to use equipment at full capacity for the duration of their depreciation period.
If they want to give it up early, fuck them let them take an impairment charge.
Bonus points if for every piece of hardware that doesn't meet the estimated timeframe an accountant's pubic hair is plugged out with tweezers.
Why throw away hardware that is still working and performant?
Working and performant is relative to the task at hand. You may not need cutting edge, but when cutting edge is the difference between making money in a new market and not making money in a new market then the hardware ceases to be usable long before it is end of life.
By all means keep your server from 2012 if it works for you. As long as my painfully slow laptop is replaced next year when it's 3 year cycle is up.
"The Computer made me do it."
