This embargo is what caused the US to seize $26,000 being transferred by a Danish businessman in Denmark to his German suppliers bank in Germany as payment for Cuban cigars, because it violated the US embargo on Cuba.
It also threw into question the power the US has over the SWIFT system and its ability to interfere in transactions between two third parties.
A lot of physics is simply at the "placeholder" stage, as we know next to nothing about it - how does gravity work? How does magnetism work? We can say there are gravity waves and magnetic fields but we don't actually understand the underlying mechanisms of either, yet they form the cornerstones of a lot of our current understanding of the universe around us.
Just a note to clarify that this ruling does not make Bitcoin legal tender in the EU, as the rule simply applies to any currency which is deemed or defacto used as legal tender somewhere.
Its the EU financial law equivalent to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution - someone elses currency is not taxed any more than yours is.
And Facebook has been around for longer than 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015, so its had time to accrue year on year liabilities like this. Facebook hasn't just taken one single liability, its actually done the intelligent thing and spread the liabilities out across the years so it doesnt get hit with one £300Million bill.
You do pay out that £35Million if its been on the books as future liabilities and it matures in the current financial year, so long as your cash flow allows you to.
The problem here is the confusion that deferred bonuses and share options creates in situations such as these - the options and bonuses were earned in previous years, and matured in these accounts financial years, so it generates an "odd" impression of the current years accounts.
If you actually bother to read the accounts, licensing in this regard counts for basically nothing of Facebook UK's accounts during the previous financial period - its very very easy to actually see where the money is going, and the bulk of it was on wages and share options maturing for staff, which have long been booked as future liabilities.
In the UK a corporation takes in revenue - from that revenue, it deducts all necessary outgoings such as operating expenses, wages, investment, acquisitions (asset or otherwise) etc etc. What is left is the profit. Corporation Tax is based on that profit.
According to the full accounts, Facebook made a loss of £28.4Million in the previous financial year off of a turn over of £104Million (the accounts list "administrative expenses" of £131.5Million on that turn over).
The bulk of that administrative expense was staff related costs - a wage bill of £40.8Million, and a deferred share based payments charge of £35.5Million, which along with employers contributions totals £86.3Million.
The figure of £4,327 is based on the loss, as a nominal figure.
The figure of £35Million is based on share options and grants maturing for staff - they aren't straight bonuses, they have been on the books for a long time.
No we couldn't, as there is always a scarcity to overcome - we can't reasonably give everyone on the planet million acre estates for example, and we couldn't ensure everyone has the best weather or a sea view.
Wolfgang Hatz, developer of Porsche’s Formula One and Le Mans racing engines
Thats hardly a glowing CV, as Porsche hasn't had an involvement in F1 in nearly 25 years - and even then, its last involvement was with an engine so poor it failed to score a single point and indeed failed to qualify for half the races...
Just like a restaurant which doesn't give a toss about minimum wage, where its ingredients come from, the cleanliness of the kitchens or the reliability of the refrigeration - but the customers love the public face, service and price, so that restaurant should be given a break when it comes to following the rules other restaurants have to abide by...
Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is (lets face it, Microsofts battle against that particular issue is destined to fail).
The only real way this is going to be solved is to force all EU data to be stored by entities that are not owned or controlled by a non-EU entity. Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to Amazon.com and effectively competing against each other.
We do not have a deep submergence communication system, only a system which requires the patrol subs to be at a given depth to be able to receive a communication at a set time during their patrol.
Without a method to contact the subs at depth, we have no ability to authorise a launch on demand so instead we use a beacon system - if the sub doesnt detect a transmission at the predetermined time, and they also dont detect several other 24/7 transmissions, then the Captain opens a letter the PM has issued the Royal Navy, and follows the instructions in that letter.
The system the Royal Navy uses to come to a decision as to whether to launch or not is purely cost based - our nuclear deterrent launch authority is independent to that of the US, so we cant use their infrastructure to issue launch authority as that may be denied to us on occasion. Since replacing that infrastructure is a big and costly venture, unjustifiable for the two submarines that are on armed patrol, we use a simpler system.
As we havent had an issue yet, I'd say its perfectly adequate...
Its interesting that in the US Constitution, the right to bear arms came before the right for black people to not be treated as property. There's something fundamentally wrong with that, and yet the US Constitution is upheld as something the world should admire and strive to work toward...
You keep using that word in a manner which makes me think you don't understand its meaning.
And you seem to have also deliberately misunderstood my post - but then again, going by the use of that word in the way you have, I don't think you really care for reality.
Since when did iFixIt buy this device? It was a pre-release developers kit issued by Apple by application only, iFixIt didn't buy it and typically these units still belong to the issuing entity.
The local licensing authorities handle complaints and vehicle inspections, keeping illegal cars and drivers from carrying passengers in licensed vehicles.
And yet we still don't have a reason why we are seeing Uber cars operating unlicensed in the UK....
They may be the best thing since sliced bread, that doesn't mean they can operate unlicensed - especially as the license costs are no barrier to entry here.
None of that is an excuse for Uber vehicles being unlicensed as taxis in the UK.
The medallion argument is one of a high cost of entry, which doesnt exist in the UK - so why are we seeing more illegal and unlicensed Uber carriers here?
What you are describing is the difference between a taxi that can pick up from ranks and off the street, and a taxi that is pre-booked only (also called a private hire vehicle). Both still need to be licensed in all locales in the UK.
Slashdot Mirror
This embargo is what caused the US to seize $26,000 being transferred by a Danish businessman in Denmark to his German suppliers bank in Germany as payment for Cuban cigars, because it violated the US embargo on Cuba.
It also threw into question the power the US has over the SWIFT system and its ability to interfere in transactions between two third parties.
http://cphpost.dk/news14/inter...
http://www.b.dk/nationalt/dans...
A lot of physics is simply at the "placeholder" stage, as we know next to nothing about it - how does gravity work? How does magnetism work? We can say there are gravity waves and magnetic fields but we don't actually understand the underlying mechanisms of either, yet they form the cornerstones of a lot of our current understanding of the universe around us.
Just a note to clarify that this ruling does not make Bitcoin legal tender in the EU, as the rule simply applies to any currency which is deemed or defacto used as legal tender somewhere.
Its the EU financial law equivalent to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution - someone elses currency is not taxed any more than yours is.
And again, they dont hold a monopoly on the term.
Thats *a* definition, not the only one. opensource.org doesnt have a monopoly on the term.
And Facebook has been around for longer than 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015, so its had time to accrue year on year liabilities like this. Facebook hasn't just taken one single liability, its actually done the intelligent thing and spread the liabilities out across the years so it doesnt get hit with one £300Million bill.
Jealousy isn't a basic human behaviour? I think the world over can demonstrate that it is.
The fact that you can't take part in a discussion without coming off as a immature idiot suggests you perhaps shouldn't be taking part at all.
You do pay out that £35Million if its been on the books as future liabilities and it matures in the current financial year, so long as your cash flow allows you to.
The problem here is the confusion that deferred bonuses and share options creates in situations such as these - the options and bonuses were earned in previous years, and matured in these accounts financial years, so it generates an "odd" impression of the current years accounts.
If you actually bother to read the accounts, licensing in this regard counts for basically nothing of Facebook UK's accounts during the previous financial period - its very very easy to actually see where the money is going, and the bulk of it was on wages and share options maturing for staff, which have long been booked as future liabilities.
Corporation tax and wages are taxed at different rates, so there can be a difference in Treasury revenue between the two.
In the UK a corporation takes in revenue - from that revenue, it deducts all necessary outgoings such as operating expenses, wages, investment, acquisitions (asset or otherwise) etc etc. What is left is the profit. Corporation Tax is based on that profit.
According to the full accounts, Facebook made a loss of £28.4Million in the previous financial year off of a turn over of £104Million (the accounts list "administrative expenses" of £131.5Million on that turn over).
The bulk of that administrative expense was staff related costs - a wage bill of £40.8Million, and a deferred share based payments charge of £35.5Million, which along with employers contributions totals £86.3Million.
The figure of £4,327 is based on the loss, as a nominal figure.
The figure of £35Million is based on share options and grants maturing for staff - they aren't straight bonuses, they have been on the books for a long time.
There would have to be some fairly fundamental and significant changes made before we rid ourselves of basic human behaviours...
No we couldn't, as there is always a scarcity to overcome - we can't reasonably give everyone on the planet million acre estates for example, and we couldn't ensure everyone has the best weather or a sea view.
Wolfgang Hatz, developer of Porsche’s Formula One and Le Mans racing engines
Thats hardly a glowing CV, as Porsche hasn't had an involvement in F1 in nearly 25 years - and even then, its last involvement was with an engine so poor it failed to score a single point and indeed failed to qualify for half the races...
Just like a restaurant which doesn't give a toss about minimum wage, where its ingredients come from, the cleanliness of the kitchens or the reliability of the refrigeration - but the customers love the public face, service and price, so that restaurant should be given a break when it comes to following the rules other restaurants have to abide by...
Simply keeping the data in the EU won't fix anything so long as that data is still being held by US controlled entities, as those entities will still be forced to hand over the data regardless of where it is (lets face it, Microsofts battle against that particular issue is destined to fail).
The only real way this is going to be solved is to force all EU data to be stored by entities that are not owned or controlled by a non-EU entity. Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to Amazon.com and effectively competing against each other.
We do not have a deep submergence communication system, only a system which requires the patrol subs to be at a given depth to be able to receive a communication at a set time during their patrol.
Without a method to contact the subs at depth, we have no ability to authorise a launch on demand so instead we use a beacon system - if the sub doesnt detect a transmission at the predetermined time, and they also dont detect several other 24/7 transmissions, then the Captain opens a letter the PM has issued the Royal Navy, and follows the instructions in that letter.
The system the Royal Navy uses to come to a decision as to whether to launch or not is purely cost based - our nuclear deterrent launch authority is independent to that of the US, so we cant use their infrastructure to issue launch authority as that may be denied to us on occasion. Since replacing that infrastructure is a big and costly venture, unjustifiable for the two submarines that are on armed patrol, we use a simpler system.
As we havent had an issue yet, I'd say its perfectly adequate...
Its interesting that in the US Constitution, the right to bear arms came before the right for black people to not be treated as property. There's something fundamentally wrong with that, and yet the US Constitution is upheld as something the world should admire and strive to work toward...
You keep using that word in a manner which makes me think you don't understand its meaning.
And you seem to have also deliberately misunderstood my post - but then again, going by the use of that word in the way you have, I don't think you really care for reality.
Since when did iFixIt buy this device? It was a pre-release developers kit issued by Apple by application only, iFixIt didn't buy it and typically these units still belong to the issuing entity.
The local licensing authorities handle complaints and vehicle inspections, keeping illegal cars and drivers from carrying passengers in licensed vehicles.
And yet we still don't have a reason why we are seeing Uber cars operating unlicensed in the UK....
They may be the best thing since sliced bread, that doesn't mean they can operate unlicensed - especially as the license costs are no barrier to entry here.
None of that is an excuse for Uber vehicles being unlicensed as taxis in the UK.
The medallion argument is one of a high cost of entry, which doesnt exist in the UK - so why are we seeing more illegal and unlicensed Uber carriers here?
What you are describing is the difference between a taxi that can pick up from ranks and off the street, and a taxi that is pre-booked only (also called a private hire vehicle). Both still need to be licensed in all locales in the UK.