If the does that it would be the LLC paying him and we would have to pay income taxes on it.
Oh dear. He through his LLC invests in companies who give him expenses and allow him the use of their 'facilities' amongst other dodges, so the whole operation effectively becomes one great big laundering operation. It's also a place to park his wealth for the future out of the gaze of scrutiny. This whole gift culture becomes self-supporting. This was set up by accountants.
This is not something like the Clinton Foundation which is setup as a slush fund for Bill Hillary and Chelsea.
I'm afraid you haven't the slightest idea and are just performing mental gymnastics here.
He gets to 'invest' with it in whatever he chooses, so he will be making more than he will ever lose in some token gesture. Kind of like how Bill Gates has become the richest person in the world again.......somehow. Plus, if he gets the LLC to donate appreciated stocks then there is no capital gains tax. These things are accounting dodges and fraud vehicles, plain and simple.
These foundations are one great big tax avoidance, fraud and wealth parking vehicle. Nothing whatsoever to do with charity or philanthropy at all which is merely a cover. After all, when you say the word charity you get the brainless idiots coming out to do your defending for you. It was amusing to see the bum shuffling from various anonymous cowards on the Gates Foundation article.
I'm afraid selling a book doesn't lessen the seriousness of what's going on. Philanthropy, as in the case of Carnegie, is all about ego, power and influence and nothing to do with helping anyone. It is corrupt, and not just in the case of the Gates Foundation.
You sound like a fucking idiot. There is no possible way you can grunt childishly at the math here and claim that Gates wouldn't have a _lot_ more money if he just invested his wealth instead of running this charity.
The last I looked sunshine Bill Gates became the richest man in the world again - by not doing anything and giving all his money away! Incredible.
You're pretty much a fucking stupid pig, and your outlook on life is risible. Get off the conspiracy theories you fucking dipshit.
I see the Gates Foundation astroturfers are out on day release?
LOL dude you don't have a fucking clue how tax works do you?
You certainly don't, obviously. There's one born every minute.......
She is more than free to create and fund her our foundation and focus on the ills she believes haunts the world instead of bitching about others that are actually trying to help...
That 'foundation' isn't helping, that's the point. It's there to commit fraud under the guise of charity and then clueless fuckwits like you come out and defend it.
Heavily subsidised? LOL - most of the cost of a litre of petrol (and even the hateful diesel) in the UK and Europe is tax that goes straight to the exchequer.
Yes - subsidised. As the oil price goes down, and the price of fuels, it puts far more pressure on the fuel more expensive to produce. Guess who's been squealing recently?
Thankfully there never has been and never will be a 'diesel stage' to our personal transport system.
I'm afraid there already has been and there is. Most of Europe is diesel and a significant proportion of the UK, despite artificial diesel prices.
I'm happy to move from petrol to electric (or hydrogen) powered cars and to leave it to future generations to laugh at the stupidity of burning diesel fuel.
They're going to have to laugh at the last gasp of the petrol burners first. Combustion engines, sadly, are going to be around for some time until a way of producing enough electricity is found with electric vehicles.
Like all these so called 'philanthropic' organisations they are designed primarily as a tax-free haven for their cash pile. Secondly, they are there to promote drugs and get people dependant on aid that makes many companies a significant amount of money. It's amazing what you can get away with under the guise of 'charity', which is why every sportsman and woman, and their dogs seem to have one.
I'm more familiar with pollution in cities in Europe, but we've got a good idea of where the NOx comes from, as it can be measured easily from different vehicles. And those measurements show that diesels don't perform nearly as well on the road as they do in the lab (not just VW ones either), whereas the petrol ones do much better http://www.theicct.org/blogs/s...
Yes, it's been so easy to measure that it took years for anyone to realise what VW were doing. In fact, in London most of it comes from about 400,000 exempt large diesel vehicles like buses and trucks so that's one easy win. However, we're not going to suddenly run those on petrol because it's uneconomic and would produce far more emissions by burning through more petrol per volume. Like diesels, petrols aren't nearly as 'clean' as anyone would like them to be, not to mention being less efficient. They are just simply not an answer and the falling oil price scuppers it totally, no matter the propaganda.
I'm afraid after VW none of these studies are really credible in any way.
The measurements show the opposite, with NOx for petrol engines going down and down. There is one area in which what you say is true - direct injection engines produce much more soot than traditional port injection ones, but still much less than a diesel without a DPF.
The simple arithmetic is when you more throughly burn the fuel you get more emissions. That's the way the engine works, and of course they're going to produce less than a diesel without a DPF, which is a downright bizarre thing to qualify that with. Remove the catalytic converter and filters and see what happens in reverse.
This can probably be worked around by tuning the injection system or, worst case, adding a filter to petrol engines too (I think Mercedes has already done this on at least one model), so I don't expect it to be a problem for long.
Once you need to start putting additives in you're sunk. The falling oil price is the nail in the coffin that has prompted a lot of anti-diesel talk, especially in the UK, prompting all sorts of desperate headlines. You're also not going to get more out of it by 'tuning' or anything else. There just isn't anything more to be had from a combustion engine.
Electric cars make "hideously expensive" hybrids look cheap. Combustion engines are hardly "over" - electrics account for a tiny fraction of sales.
Hybrids are not only hellishly complex but they are incredibly expensive to maintain. They're certainly more expensive than a diesel engine. Electric vehicles have far fewer moving parts and simply don't need the oils and lubricants a modern combustion engine does. It's a question of where the future is if people really care about emissions and want something that is efficient whilst being cheap enough to buy and especially maintain and there really isn't any more efficiency to be hammered out of the internal combustion engine. The best you can ever hope for in terms of efficiency for a combustion engine is 40% (being very optimistic) - and that's with a turbo, energy recovery systems and every piece of expensive technology you can throw at it. It really is over.
A diesel engine is also more expensive than a petrol one - if it wasn't for favourable tax rates and emissions rules in Europe they wouldn't be economic except for high mileage drivers. Efficiency isn't the be all and end all - total running costs and emissions are.
In continental Europe where diesel is the same price or less expensive than petrol, which is what it should be as the fuel is cheaper to produce, the maths are quite easy to work out. Even in the UK with higher diesel prices as diesel engines have got more efficient and discarded a lot of their traditional problems (quick warm up being one) the
I'm afraid it does. There is an awful lot of NOx and soot that has appeared from somewhere, and the uncomfortable truth is that it isn't all down to diesel vehicles. Modern petrol/gasoline engines have essentially had to run hotter and become more like diesels to keep up with efficiency. More thorough burning of the fuel means more emissions.
People and the industry desperately trying to big up gasoline/petrol are backing the horse and cart. Its days are over. The emissions card is all there is left to play, and that is bogus, they can never be as efficient as a diesel and trying to flog more life out of them with hybrids just makes them hideously expensive. Beyond the internal combustion engine and diesels it is electric vehicles. It's over.
Petrol is heavily, heavily subsidised in the UK. It is simply a more expensive fuel to refine and more of it needs to be transported when compared with diesel. More petrol gets used, hence more of it is transported. Simple.
There are many explanations for petrol being less expensive than diesel on the UK. None add up. As the oil price falls that puts ever greater pressure on the fuel that is most costly to produce. No surprise that in the UK a lot of disdain has been thrown diesel's way, along with the notion that the pumps could run dry. Laughable.
As for diesel being a filthy fuel, I'm afraid petrol is as well. More so than many realise. Modern petrol engines pump out a great deal more NOx than before due to trying, vainly, to keep up with diesel's efficiency. Also, less diesel per volume needs to be transported which is a factor most don't even consider. Petrol is dead. The next stage beyond diesel are all electric vehicles. Hybrids are hideously expensive to build and maintain.
Modern diesel engines take a surprisingly short amount of time to warm up. Remember that in order to keep up in efficiency with diesel petrol [gasoline] engines have a lot of the same problems as diesel, and they're running hotter in order to burn the fuel more throughly. More thorough fuel burning, more emissions and modern petrol engines are outputting a lot more NOx than anyone is saying.
Basically, petrol car manufacturers are getting desperate as the oil price continues to fall. How VW gave them this gift I have no idea.
This is fucking insightful? A series of small earthquakes can cause a lot of imperceptible damage over time. Frankly, I hope this lot goes up. Natural selection.
They show absolutely nothing of the kind and this is just desperate bullshit from an anonymous coward. The truth over fracking is beginning to bite and be undeniable. The oil price is just the final nail in the coffin that makes cracking totally unviable.
Devops is one of those meaningless bullshit terms that seeks to create something complicated out of something simple. Basically, if you want shit to work, which is the goal here I'm guessing, you put your developers and sys admins working the same room and get them to run something that will work in production. Simple.
Devops has also been used to give them impression that system administration can be abstracted away as some kind of quasi-cloud-development thingy. That is not the case nor will it ever be so.
And the kernel is way bloatier than necessary because the kind of people who enjoy cleaning that kind of crap up tend to get disparaged or ignored, and just walk away.
Bloat is like Godwin's Law. When someone doesn't have a clue the word bloat gets into the conversation.
Slashdot Mirror
If the does that it would be the LLC paying him and we would have to pay income taxes on it.
Oh dear. He through his LLC invests in companies who give him expenses and allow him the use of their 'facilities' amongst other dodges, so the whole operation effectively becomes one great big laundering operation. It's also a place to park his wealth for the future out of the gaze of scrutiny. This whole gift culture becomes self-supporting. This was set up by accountants.
This is not something like the Clinton Foundation which is setup as a slush fund for Bill Hillary and Chelsea.
I'm afraid you haven't the slightest idea and are just performing mental gymnastics here.
When you grow up and get a job and pay tax you will realise that you don't get taxed on what you own, you get taxed on what you earn....
No fucking idea how that works for the rich, have you you anonymous retard?
He gets to 'invest' with it in whatever he chooses, so he will be making more than he will ever lose in some token gesture. Kind of like how Bill Gates has become the richest person in the world again.......somehow. Plus, if he gets the LLC to donate appreciated stocks then there is no capital gains tax. These things are accounting dodges and fraud vehicles, plain and simple.
These foundations are one great big tax avoidance, fraud and wealth parking vehicle. Nothing whatsoever to do with charity or philanthropy at all which is merely a cover. After all, when you say the word charity you get the brainless idiots coming out to do your defending for you. It was amusing to see the bum shuffling from various anonymous cowards on the Gates Foundation article.
I'm afraid selling a book doesn't lessen the seriousness of what's going on. Philanthropy, as in the case of Carnegie, is all about ego, power and influence and nothing to do with helping anyone. It is corrupt, and not just in the case of the Gates Foundation.
You sound like a fucking idiot. There is no possible way you can grunt childishly at the math here and claim that Gates wouldn't have a _lot_ more money if he just invested his wealth instead of running this charity.
The last I looked sunshine Bill Gates became the richest man in the world again - by not doing anything and giving all his money away! Incredible.
You're pretty much a fucking stupid pig, and your outlook on life is risible. Get off the conspiracy theories you fucking dipshit.
I see the Gates Foundation astroturfers are out on day release?
What makes anyone think they have a right to an accounting?
Because people get removed from their jobs and don't get funding if there is any criticism?
LOL dude you don't have a fucking clue how tax works do you?
You certainly don't, obviously. There's one born every minute.......
She is more than free to create and fund her our foundation and focus on the ills she believes haunts the world instead of bitching about others that are actually trying to help...
That 'foundation' isn't helping, that's the point. It's there to commit fraud under the guise of charity and then clueless fuckwits like you come out and defend it.
'Insightful' my fucking arse......
Heavily subsidised? LOL - most of the cost of a litre of petrol (and even the hateful diesel) in the UK and Europe is tax that goes straight to the exchequer.
Yes - subsidised. As the oil price goes down, and the price of fuels, it puts far more pressure on the fuel more expensive to produce. Guess who's been squealing recently?
Thankfully there never has been and never will be a 'diesel stage' to our personal transport system.
I'm afraid there already has been and there is. Most of Europe is diesel and a significant proportion of the UK, despite artificial diesel prices.
I'm happy to move from petrol to electric (or hydrogen) powered cars and to leave it to future generations to laugh at the stupidity of burning diesel fuel.
They're going to have to laugh at the last gasp of the petrol burners first. Combustion engines, sadly, are going to be around for some time until a way of producing enough electricity is found with electric vehicles.
Like all these so called 'philanthropic' organisations they are designed primarily as a tax-free haven for their cash pile. Secondly, they are there to promote drugs and get people dependant on aid that makes many companies a significant amount of money. It's amazing what you can get away with under the guise of 'charity', which is why every sportsman and woman, and their dogs seem to have one.
I'm more familiar with pollution in cities in Europe, but we've got a good idea of where the NOx comes from, as it can be measured easily from different vehicles. And those measurements show that diesels don't perform nearly as well on the road as they do in the lab (not just VW ones either), whereas the petrol ones do much better http://www.theicct.org/blogs/s...
Yes, it's been so easy to measure that it took years for anyone to realise what VW were doing. In fact, in London most of it comes from about 400,000 exempt large diesel vehicles like buses and trucks so that's one easy win. However, we're not going to suddenly run those on petrol because it's uneconomic and would produce far more emissions by burning through more petrol per volume. Like diesels, petrols aren't nearly as 'clean' as anyone would like them to be, not to mention being less efficient. They are just simply not an answer and the falling oil price scuppers it totally, no matter the propaganda.
I'm afraid after VW none of these studies are really credible in any way.
The measurements show the opposite, with NOx for petrol engines going down and down. There is one area in which what you say is true - direct injection engines produce much more soot than traditional port injection ones, but still much less than a diesel without a DPF.
The simple arithmetic is when you more throughly burn the fuel you get more emissions. That's the way the engine works, and of course they're going to produce less than a diesel without a DPF, which is a downright bizarre thing to qualify that with. Remove the catalytic converter and filters and see what happens in reverse.
This can probably be worked around by tuning the injection system or, worst case, adding a filter to petrol engines too (I think Mercedes has already done this on at least one model), so I don't expect it to be a problem for long.
Once you need to start putting additives in you're sunk. The falling oil price is the nail in the coffin that has prompted a lot of anti-diesel talk, especially in the UK, prompting all sorts of desperate headlines. You're also not going to get more out of it by 'tuning' or anything else. There just isn't anything more to be had from a combustion engine.
Electric cars make "hideously expensive" hybrids look cheap. Combustion engines are hardly "over" - electrics account for a tiny fraction of sales.
Hybrids are not only hellishly complex but they are incredibly expensive to maintain. They're certainly more expensive than a diesel engine. Electric vehicles have far fewer moving parts and simply don't need the oils and lubricants a modern combustion engine does. It's a question of where the future is if people really care about emissions and want something that is efficient whilst being cheap enough to buy and especially maintain and there really isn't any more efficiency to be hammered out of the internal combustion engine. The best you can ever hope for in terms of efficiency for a combustion engine is 40% (being very optimistic) - and that's with a turbo, energy recovery systems and every piece of expensive technology you can throw at it. It really is over.
A diesel engine is also more expensive than a petrol one - if it wasn't for favourable tax rates and emissions rules in Europe they wouldn't be economic except for high mileage drivers. Efficiency isn't the be all and end all - total running costs and emissions are.
In continental Europe where diesel is the same price or less expensive than petrol, which is what it should be as the fuel is cheaper to produce, the maths are quite easy to work out. Even in the UK with higher diesel prices as diesel engines have got more efficient and discarded a lot of their traditional problems (quick warm up being one) the
I'm afraid it does. There is an awful lot of NOx and soot that has appeared from somewhere, and the uncomfortable truth is that it isn't all down to diesel vehicles. Modern petrol/gasoline engines have essentially had to run hotter and become more like diesels to keep up with efficiency. More thorough burning of the fuel means more emissions.
People and the industry desperately trying to big up gasoline/petrol are backing the horse and cart. Its days are over. The emissions card is all there is left to play, and that is bogus, they can never be as efficient as a diesel and trying to flog more life out of them with hybrids just makes them hideously expensive. Beyond the internal combustion engine and diesels it is electric vehicles. It's over.
Petrol is heavily, heavily subsidised in the UK. It is simply a more expensive fuel to refine and more of it needs to be transported when compared with diesel. More petrol gets used, hence more of it is transported. Simple.
There are many explanations for petrol being less expensive than diesel on the UK. None add up. As the oil price falls that puts ever greater pressure on the fuel that is most costly to produce. No surprise that in the UK a lot of disdain has been thrown diesel's way, along with the notion that the pumps could run dry. Laughable.
As for diesel being a filthy fuel, I'm afraid petrol is as well. More so than many realise. Modern petrol engines pump out a great deal more NOx than before due to trying, vainly, to keep up with diesel's efficiency. Also, less diesel per volume needs to be transported which is a factor most don't even consider. Petrol is dead. The next stage beyond diesel are all electric vehicles. Hybrids are hideously expensive to build and maintain.
Modern diesel engines take a surprisingly short amount of time to warm up. Remember that in order to keep up in efficiency with diesel petrol [gasoline] engines have a lot of the same problems as diesel, and they're running hotter in order to burn the fuel more throughly. More thorough fuel burning, more emissions and modern petrol engines are outputting a lot more NOx than anyone is saying.
Basically, petrol car manufacturers are getting desperate as the oil price continues to fall. How VW gave them this gift I have no idea.
Ahhhh, desperately trying to denigrate diesel in favour of petrol in the face of a rapidly falling oil price. Good luck with that.
Too expensive.
Bret Arsenault, CISO, Microsoft
"My internal operations team can swivel with the DCU [Digital Crimes Unit]" there, for example, Arsenault says.
WTF is this?
I find it highly amusing that people who worry about security tend to be those who want to shoehorn shit like kdbus into the kernel.
This is fucking insightful? A series of small earthquakes can cause a lot of imperceptible damage over time. Frankly, I hope this lot goes up. Natural selection.
Tell us about these "oil disasters" and we'll see if you're an idiot or not.
Fucking hell. You're an idiot before we need to discuss anything.
We have yet to get to a "main problem" in the first place.
Large amounts of oil are stored there specifically because there are few earthquakes. Oooops.
The links show fracking is safe.
They show absolutely nothing of the kind and this is just desperate bullshit from an anonymous coward. The truth over fracking is beginning to bite and be undeniable. The oil price is just the final nail in the coffin that makes cracking totally unviable.
Devops is one of those meaningless bullshit terms that seeks to create something complicated out of something simple. Basically, if you want shit to work, which is the goal here I'm guessing, you put your developers and sys admins working the same room and get them to run something that will work in production. Simple.
Devops has also been used to give them impression that system administration can be abstracted away as some kind of quasi-cloud-development thingy. That is not the case nor will it ever be so.
The auto industry paid most of the money back.
Yes, they dug another tunnel and put the money in there.
And the kernel is way bloatier than necessary because the kind of people who enjoy cleaning that kind of crap up tend to get disparaged or ignored, and just walk away.
Bloat is like Godwin's Law. When someone doesn't have a clue the word bloat gets into the conversation.