PMSL. And so on. This is truly spectacular. Honestly, and here I thought Apple was getting crass... this just outdid Apple.
394 posts • joined 4 Dec 2014
PMSL. And so on. This is truly spectacular. Honestly, and here I thought Apple was getting crass... this just outdid Apple.
I've got you beat by two years... my first iteration hit the WBM on 20 December 1996... :-D
This may not necessarily be a dangerous interface (i.e. two air-gapped networks meeting at the satcom interface), but certainly the whole concept (that Boeing espoused in the 787) of VLANs rather than separately-cabled networks can be. This is why aviation professionals continue to probe and prod the OEMs who are not used to that kind of questioning. It would be useful for everyone if infosec bods and aviation security bods worked together closer to validate the design of such on-board networks and made sure they truly are not a danger to the SLF inside that tube....
Sorry, once you get involved in politics or you *are* the story, you are no longer independent.
It's more than 384 kbps. It's now in the Mbps range (with Inmarsat GlobalXpress anyway). ;-)
Yes, it does. Ask anyone on Emirates, Etihad or Qatar, who have all rolled it out, or those lucky enough to fly on the Virgin Atlantic jets that have it installed already... BA is following suit. Norwegian has it too, but they apparently struggle a little bit with bandwidth. Might be the band they use (Ku vs Ka Band).
Not really. Most (all) modern airliners have ETOPS of more than 3 hours (ETOPS-180). Besides, the airport is not closed per se, just one of the runways (the preferred) is effectively closed.
The Airbus A350 has 6 hours and 10 minutes (370 min) ETOPS, the most any has been awarded upon service entry.
Don't call the 757 a short-haul aircraft... She might be a narrow-body, but she definitely is *not* a short-haul aircraft.
The 737 on the other hand...
@MrBanana, I suggest you read this section in UK legislation (although this does not apply to Apple):
Although, that said, it can be argued that company directors could still ensure a company's success *and* be socially responsible (and thereby making it more successful as its reputation grows as being socially responsible and hence a better company to be purchasing products from).
US law is generally defined (depending on the state in the US), but here's a snippet from Thomson Reuters Practical Law: Duties and liabilities of directors and specifically this set:
Duty of loyalty. This generally requires that a director make decisions based on the corporation’s best interest, and not on any personal interest.
What a corporation's best interest is is another question. But in US case law it's generally seen as what a corporation does... sell product and make money, i.e. anything that's lawful (note: lawful, not 'morally appropriate and lawful').
You make up your own mind...
The problem is that they and other similair megacorps pay millions in lobbying efforts resulting in tax laws beneficial to the megacorps and detrimental to everyone else. "Legal" is very different from "just" or "moral".
Morality and justness is in the eye of the beholder. What is moral for one is not necessarily moral to another, ditto for what is just. Which is why the letter of the law *has* to be precise that there is no ambiguity what is meant. Claiming "surely people will know what is meant when we write this" is not good enough. Mean what you write, write what you mean. Which makes writing laws a very finicky piece of business.
And yeah, the evidence presented in Apple's case is now bordering on the ridiculous (in isolation anyway, if there's a broader context surrounding this, it would be good to know, but short of seeing the full Appleby stash, that's virtually impossible and we'll have to take the ICIJ journalists at their word), although Ireland *has* cashed in on the so-called IP transfer... The taxes due on that (artificial) transaction sit in their bank account.
Thank you! :-)
$130 billion or $103 billion?
Several sources claim the former (FT and Engadget being amongst them), others claim the latter.
Can someone please clarify?
... This refers to the tax 'loophole' (or similar exemptions) that exempts foreign-controlled companies from paying CGT on (amongst others) their real-estate holdings in the United Kingdom. British companies are charged CGT, a limited in, say... Bermuda is not. And if Bermuda does not charge CGT on gains by a company domiciled in its jurisdiction, the gain is effectively not taxed at all.
Apparently one MP tabled a motion on this, and was told that it would be too difficult to implement (really?).
... have a dim view on the usual shrill 'they cheat' rhetoric that gets bandied about for the likes of Google, this time... this time the authorities are right on the money.
The machines are still in HMRC's buckets. Ultimately you'd expect those machines to pump the stuff they get fed directly into HMRC's systems at home base rather than 'store-and-forward-later'...
Once they are destroyed, they *should* be overwritten with junk and reassigned. At least I'd expect *any* cloud provider (AWS, Google, Azure, OpenStack Providers X, Y and Z) to do that properly.
Apologies, TrumpSlurp... It irritates me as one of the resident grammar nazis. I only realised *after* the 10-minute edit window that something was off-kilter. The second opening bracket shouldn't be there (you shouldn't use brackets within brackets). It should be replaced with a comma. I hang my head in shame!
He was trying to hit the high notes in falsetto? In falsetto you could be screeching 'without your knowledge'...
You have to give Martha Wash her dues... she has a great vocal range (and yes, that *is* Martha's voice, *not* Zelma Davis' (who was lip synching in the video).
This is what a young man was convicted under in London recently. The court case was a bit controversial, as was the charge and the conviction...
... is not an apology. "I'm sorry, what I did was wrong" is a *start*. This crap has to stop.
It shouldn't be up to women to not tolerate it and to tear your balls off (to coin a phrase from a poster above). It should be the men who should keep their hands to themselves, keep their lecherous tongues in their mouths, and for God's sake, keep their twig and berries in their BLOODY UNDERWEAR unless specifically invited to liberate their libido.
The bro culture is a *BIG* problem in this. This is frathouse behaviour. It's juvenile. Be adults and do what adults do, adulting!
... You mean the bacon they get from the government by way of fat contracts (and the bacon they get handed under the table by various three-letter agencies and slush funds)? Oh, *THAT* profit...
That said, Arianespace has a similar... ummmm... funding stream. But they also launch Soyuz rockets from Kourou (which they own - or does ESA?), so I guess they have the additional value from Roscosmos... :-)
Welcome to the big elephant in rocketry. To go further up costs you more, you need more stages, which weigh more, which in turn needs more thrust which in turn weighs more, which in turn... Ask the Saturn V engineers how much fun they had trying to get things right just to get to the bloody moon with a piece of metal of which half was left there as rubbish...
This is why there is a suggestion that interplanetary ships should be built/assembled in space, where it's possible to get around this pesky problem of getting off the surface of the planet first (fighting against that damn 9.8m/sec2 reduction and the air resistance of the different *spheres) which costs an awful lot in energy.
They've kept things nicely under wraps. Well done to the Blue Origin crews. That was beautiful!
A big thumbs up!
We had the opportunity to listen to listen to Steve's colleague at the HBP, Karlheinz Meier, talking about the HBP and what they are up to. It makes this supercomputer in our heads just absolutely incredible... We're a 1KW battery walking around, powering that 20W computer, and doing other things, but we aren't anywhere near the ability to recreate that same functionality in silicon. Biology is a marvellous thing...
+1. If you want to show you are VAT registered, enter a VAT number. Us individual plebs who aren't just have pay the 20% that's due in the UK...
HMRC = The UK Tax Payers, don'tchaknow!
Seconded. Start looking for something *NOW* before the Christmas closures and the inevitable mess that follows (see Comet and Woolworths administrations plus several others that happened just before Christmas). It's October now, by end of November you might have something.
Because helicopters are licensed aircraft, controlled by licenced operators.
The lessor does make a difference when it comes to the ownership and subsequent payment of the punitive tariff is concerned (i.e. if you import the jet to the US and register it there, then the tariff applies). If the jets remain outside of scope where the tariff is concerned, Delta is golden, but as you point out, Delta has always preferred to *own* their planes, and they'd prefer to keep their jets US-registered, and given the high profile this has, any action Delta takes to avoid having to pay the tariff (or coming up with any shenanigans to avoid the tariff) will immediately be flagged by Boeing as 'you're not playing nice'. Of course, that's just happened with Boeing's PR chief shouting at Airbus that 'this ain't gonna save that jet, buster!' (I paraphrase)
One way around it is to lease the planes, but there is no aircraft lessor based in Canada. They're all either US (GECAS, AerCap, Air Lease, ILFC), or they're European. Delta usually wants to own its jets. It's too late to set up a leasing company in Canada that nominally owns the jets and leases them to Delta given the high profile the 300% tariff has generated.
Boeing has never had a plane for the 85-120 seat market. The 737 NG never really filled that gap. That's what allowed Bombardier into the market with the CRJ models in the first place, and Embraer with their ERJ.
What is surprising is to see Embraer siding with Boeing on this one... Mostly because Bombardier will be able to snatch more of Embraer's market from the larger ERJ 195. Given the crappy passenger experience in the existing ERJs and the E2 jets still being a bit further out of service, Bombardier has two odd years to sew up some good orders once the CS proves itself with Delta (it already has with SWISS and Baltic, who both absolutely love the series from an economics and passenger satisfaction standpoint).
... Like ESET are great in the first place...
This pushes boundaries further. Biology tends to have better manufacturing processes to a degree... We only tend to borrow and improve.
I'm in luuuurve! This is exciting!
@collinsl, and that is same tape that causes articles like this one:
Correction. We stole it. From the Normans. And then adulterated it into something entirely else...
Just what we accuse our former colonialists of doing with English (to American). ;-)
Lars, actually no. She is trying to retroactively apply a penalty on the basis that Amazon 'got a sweetheart deal from Luxembourg'. Ditto for Apple's massive 'back tax penalty'.
The EC has always known about Apple's deal with Ireland (and Ireland when they joined the EC made it clear that those deals couldn't change upon accession), and while Amazon's deal was confidential and only became public during the leaks in the new millennium, it is up to LUXEMBOURG to decide that the deal is no longer appropriate, NOT the EC.
What the EC *should* do is declare such sweetheart deals illegal and declare that any profits forthwith would be chargeable at the publicly available rate or whatever. Ditto for Apple. And if the EC does have a problem with Luxembourg and Ireland on that basis, fine the country, tell the country to change things.
Tax avoidance is what everyone does. Examples:
Bought from Play.com before the VAT loophole was closed? You were a tax avoider.
Bought from outside the EU and were pleased when duties and VAT on value wasn't charged (or you asked that the value be under-declared)? You were a tax avoider.
Bought from another country inside the EU and got it for cheaper than in the UK? Tax avoider!
Contractor and using service company, paying yourself your salary in dividends with minimum salary? TAX AVOIDER!
What goes for the goose goes for the gander, my friend. Amazon et al scale up with the same taxes, loopholes, concessions etc that you as an individual have access to. Just because you don't have an accountant who can read through the reams of British tax laws to pretty much squeeze your tax bill until the pips squeak does not mean you're less of a tax avoider than any large business doing same.
Of course, if you personally pay every penny you are told to pay by HMRC and don't question it, good for you. You're clearly more ethical than anyone I know (myself included).
The profit is low because they reinvest in R&D. It's irked the AMZN shareholders for the last two decades (I should know, I've tracked and interacted with Amazon since '97). Bezos only started paying a nominal positive dividend because Wall Street complained bitterly.
When the EC pulled that stunt with Apple and Ireland, I knew it would just be a question of time for Amazon et al.
At the same time, it would be worth the EC's time to pull in (and fine) the man who signed off on this deal. Oh. Wait. He's the head of the EC...
Same with the UK NI number...
You still do in the UK. You might be able to provide it electronically (by PDF), but that is as good as paper and being checked... and only in the US will your mortgage be resold to some other investor (in the UK this only happens when the original vendor goes pop)... :-)
... no. The DLR has *always* been automated. The 'human in charge' can't stop or control the train either... they contact control who deal with the train. They can override the doors at most. The rest is *all* run from the DLR control centre.
... that most trains already have been run in automatic mode, I don't see any problem with this, provided that there are sufficient failsafes to deal with eventualities...
but instead of investing the money, the vast majority was simply given to shareholders, [...]
The vast majority of which reinvested it into other businesses within the US (since many of those shareholders were resident or tax-resident in the US). 9.9% of 2.5 trillion dollars is not something to simply dismiss...
Although, I completely agree that it would be lovely if these corporations all simply did pay their 35% on their overseas profits. ;-)
Personally, I believe that compelling companies to be responsible for their content, and to pay tax on profits made in the EU is a good thing.
Companies (including the web giants) are already taxed on *profits* (leaving aside the issue of where those profits are taxed). What the EU proposes is a general tax on *turnover*, which is a magnitude larger than profit. And given the usual tit-for-tat antics, this will eventually turn around to the US wanting to do the same with any EU-based organisations doing business in the US.
For some items, IKEA does offer assembly. I believe couches etc are part of that. 16 years ago, IKEA offered same for a bed frame.
Or you just can't be arsed and prefer to blame your chromosomal disposition for your lack of... what exactly. ;-)
APUs only run on the ground. Once the turbofans get going, the generators and air flow come from there.
Unducted fans have been proven to be very efficient... when it comes to blades-off events though... hmmmm... ;-)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017