There is an exception under the foreign corrupt practices act (FCPA) that if you do as parent poster described (pay and report as such) then it is legal. Otherwise you are correct, it is highly illegal.
My understanding is that she did not, though this gets way into the weeds of the military trial. I can try to dig this up if you're interested (been a couple years since I read about that particular facet).
She claimed a lot of legally nonsensical things on stand so I'm not sure any of it passed any scrutiny. It certainly didn't with the judge.
This was a grand jury proceeding. While this was about a matter that happened while she was in the military, anyone that is granted immunity but refuses to testify could be held in contempt by the court.
By Order dated May 6, 2019 [Doc. 2], the Court granted Chelsea Manning full use and
derivative use immunity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6002, and ordered Ms. Manning to testify and
provide other information in the above-captioned grand jury proceeding ("Grand Jury").
All she had to do was testify truthfully about the matters she was being asked about. Fifth amendment is irrelevant in this context.
I really recommend "The No Asshole Rule" by Robert Sutton. It's not just that life is too short. Working with assholes will literally make your life shorter. Kudos for calling somebody out in an attempt to stop the madness.
Google, and of course virtually every multi-national corporation based in the US, does make use of many US government capabilities. I don't think it makes any sense to say:
>They don't consume any US government services either
However, I do think the corporate income tax issue is a subtle one.
It'd be interesting to compare what Larry and Sergey will pay in taxes versus government outlays for the things that have made Google possible.
Thanks for the reply but your piece wasn't balanced and well below the quality standards I used to hold for your site (always re-balance expectations!). You didn't talk about power consumption or anything interesting about the platform. We can get press releases from intel.
I'm not sure what it would look like in the video [d]ecoder world, but I don't think that would matter since most the time you'd want to use the 256-bit vector instructions (in practice this would hardly be a high priority until they're nearly ubiquitous...). For use cases where you are addressing large memory regions this hardly seems like that big of a deal. There are times when you can schedule tons of calculations without leaving L1 but for some odd reason people are finding 500GB+ of RAM useful.
While the 8-module chip does share a few things (mainly a vector processing unit, that becomes two when doing the 128-bit SSE operations) they really can run 16 threads on 16 ALUs. But, they'll have sse contention if they schedule more than 8 256-bit vector operations (sadly intel won't bring this instruction set to market for a bit). Bulldozer is pretty cool, but sadly the tech press decides to shit on the underdog in a market that multiple companies have successfully sued the monopolist for anti-competitive behavior. :(
There's quite a verbose spec for all of the major codecs people talk about, but sadly it's 10k(? number I heard tossed around). ffmpeg is a great place to look, but checking out some stuff on fft is a good way to get some background knowledge.