If you send that letter through a courier service that tells you before you give it to them that they will make a photocopy of the letter and send the copy to the US and tell you not to use their service if all of that would violate the law because they don't read the letter to verify whether it is in violation of the law, then continuing to use them is not the burden of having violated the law on you instead of the courier service?
How is it that the EUers seem to want to totally exhonerate individuals and vilify corporations and their employees when the individual lies to the corporation and the corporation believes them without verifying when the only way to verify would be a total invasion of the individuals privacy?
Can everyone agree that there exists information that is legal to export from an EU country and there exists information that is illegal to export from said EU country? If so, then how is Microsoft in violation of the law if it tells its users that anything uploaded may be exported and to, therefore, not upload non-exportable things? Are we now expecting companies to employ the magic fairies to divine which uploads contain exportable data and which do not?
Which is why people have mentioned that Microsoft is pushing to the bitter end. They want it painfully obvious that the same rule applies to their major competitors as well so customers won't leave Microsoft for Amazon or Google.
No, the evidence is not the property of a US company. The evidence is the property of a US citizen and is being held by a foreign subsidiary of a US company and is, therefore, exactly like the hotel example.
The world really would be simpler if we stopped trying to define how information on computer is the same as information on paper in some circumstances and different in others and just say that correspondence is correspondence, personal effects are personal effects, etc.
And somewhere in that chain both customer and merchant "know" the real dollar value they are talking about. For taxing purposes, the customers will need to know.
Stocks don't have this built in either. Broker services have some of this but it is still the responsibility of the investor to track when they purchased what and when they sold what. For instance, I can buy stock through multiple brokerages and transfer the knowledge of my ownership from brokerage to brokerage and the purchase date/purchase price might not always transfer. It is my responsibility to track that and I can't rely on any kind of historical market record other than my own because those usually track closing prices which are (most likely) not what I purchased or sold at. If you treat owning BTC exactly like owning stock, you will have everything necessary to correctly calculate their effect on your tax burden.
Just track when you buy or sell and what the real currency paid or received was and what commission you paid. Very simple. you don't have to know the historical record for that exact BTC just like you don't need to know it for any given share of stock. You need to know what you paid for it and how much you sold it for and any commission you paid.
Evaporative cooling doesn't work very well in really hot, dry areas like Arizona, Nevada, Southern Utah, etc. in the US. What you end up with is instead of 110 F and ~10% rel humidity you get ~100 F and 90% rel humidity. In other words, you end up worse off.
That's because the act of spending a BitCoin is really the act of selling it for "real" money and then spending the real money. Everything I've seen seems to be treating them very much the same way stocks are treated for taxing purposes.
Nice bit of scare tactics there. Repeat items in the list to get a 37% longer list; Probably another third of the list are common FDA approved ingredients for food and soaps.
Seriously, you want to complain that up to half of one-percent of what they pump in could be table salt or pure grain alcohol? Or that they are using very soft water?
You are the reason why the only people who take environmentalists seriously anymore are the environmentalists who are to stupid to realize that the other environmentalists are just making shit up.
" the consensus of literature on the subject was that her technique couldn't possibly work." In other words, the science was settled, discussion was over and then we found out it wasn't.
Based on previous experiences, I would say that actually roaring down the side of a mountain with a glider while in the glider and sober is far more exhilerating.
Says the asshole who pays nothing for the road he drives on and will bitch about his taxes going up to pay for it when he finally does get cars banned from them.
And if the bicyclist doesn't use a hand-signal or is where a glove or has skin color the same as a the building or car in the background, will it still blacklist that area like 99.9999% of the human drivers will?
If you want what was there before 1995, then you are still free to provide that. There is no law nor rule that says you cannot. Just like there is no law nor rule that says you must purchase anything from Amazon.
Slashdot Mirror
And that is a horribly incorrect view but it does seem to help you feel superior.
What the hell kind of system rips your clothes off when the window opens?
Could you please enumerate your 4 spacial dimensions and where you learned them?
But neither should be able to get a warrant because of the inaccuracy but it will be presented as having no incaccuracies at all.
According to the article that would be groups of 5 phonemes (on average) that look identical.
Ah yes, Sotomayor and Obama are experts on all things Orwellian; unfortunately, they think it describes a utopia instead of a dystopia.
And yet people still seem to think that Obama is not actively trying to hurt the US economy.
If you send that letter through a courier service that tells you before you give it to them that they will make a photocopy of the letter and send the copy to the US and tell you not to use their service if all of that would violate the law because they don't read the letter to verify whether it is in violation of the law, then continuing to use them is not the burden of having violated the law on you instead of the courier service?
How is it that the EUers seem to want to totally exhonerate individuals and vilify corporations and their employees when the individual lies to the corporation and the corporation believes them without verifying when the only way to verify would be a total invasion of the individuals privacy?
Can everyone agree that there exists information that is legal to export from an EU country and there exists information that is illegal to export from said EU country? If so, then how is Microsoft in violation of the law if it tells its users that anything uploaded may be exported and to, therefore, not upload non-exportable things? Are we now expecting companies to employ the magic fairies to divine which uploads contain exportable data and which do not?
Which is why people have mentioned that Microsoft is pushing to the bitter end. They want it painfully obvious that the same rule applies to their major competitors as well so customers won't leave Microsoft for Amazon or Google.
No, the evidence is not the property of a US company. The evidence is the property of a US citizen and is being held by a foreign subsidiary of a US company and is, therefore, exactly like the hotel example.
The world really would be simpler if we stopped trying to define how information on computer is the same as information on paper in some circumstances and different in others and just say that correspondence is correspondence, personal effects are personal effects, etc.
And somewhere in that chain both customer and merchant "know" the real dollar value they are talking about. For taxing purposes, the customers will need to know.
Stocks don't have this built in either. Broker services have some of this but it is still the responsibility of the investor to track when they purchased what and when they sold what. For instance, I can buy stock through multiple brokerages and transfer the knowledge of my ownership from brokerage to brokerage and the purchase date/purchase price might not always transfer. It is my responsibility to track that and I can't rely on any kind of historical market record other than my own because those usually track closing prices which are (most likely) not what I purchased or sold at. If you treat owning BTC exactly like owning stock, you will have everything necessary to correctly calculate their effect on your tax burden.
Just track when you buy or sell and what the real currency paid or received was and what commission you paid. Very simple. you don't have to know the historical record for that exact BTC just like you don't need to know it for any given share of stock. You need to know what you paid for it and how much you sold it for and any commission you paid.
Evaporative cooling doesn't work very well in really hot, dry areas like Arizona, Nevada, Southern Utah, etc. in the US. What you end up with is instead of 110 F and ~10% rel humidity you get ~100 F and 90% rel humidity. In other words, you end up worse off.
That's because the act of spending a BitCoin is really the act of selling it for "real" money and then spending the real money. Everything I've seen seems to be treating them very much the same way stocks are treated for taxing purposes.
That sounds just like tracking stock purchases and that is pretty straightforward.
Nice bit of scare tactics there. Repeat items in the list to get a 37% longer list; Probably another third of the list are common FDA approved ingredients for food and soaps.
Seriously, you want to complain that up to half of one-percent of what they pump in could be table salt or pure grain alcohol? Or that they are using very soft water?
You are the reason why the only people who take environmentalists seriously anymore are the environmentalists who are to stupid to realize that the other environmentalists are just making shit up.
" the consensus of literature on the subject was that her technique couldn't possibly work."
In other words, the science was settled, discussion was over and then we found out it wasn't.
Based on previous experiences, I would say that actually roaring down the side of a mountain with a glider while in the glider and sober is far more exhilerating.
And the biggest obstacle to reality are useless, jobless morons who fantasize about a world where they don't look like the leaches they are.
Says the asshole who pays nothing for the road he drives on and will bitch about his taxes going up to pay for it when he finally does get cars banned from them.
And if the bicyclist doesn't use a hand-signal or is where a glove or has skin color the same as a the building or car in the background, will it still blacklist that area like 99.9999% of the human drivers will?
No, the mess in Detroit was created by the corrupt government and they were always Democrats.
If you want what was there before 1995, then you are still free to provide that. There is no law nor rule that says you cannot. Just like there is no law nor rule that says you must purchase anything from Amazon.
How about they refund the purchase prices of the browser?