Hey guys I bring you a new world video showcasing all known Legendary Hatches in the game. I will mention a lot of these haven't been found yet so a couple within this video we don't know where they are obtained. Also some of the images to these weapons are placeholder images but in terms of the weapons stats etc etc it is all here so let's go. Has it gone guys my name is DPJ and if you enjoyed the video leave a like really helps out and if you like what you see and want to see more be sure to subscribe. So today I bring you a video showcasing all known Legendary Hatches in the game and how they are obtained while the ones we know. Now like I said some of the images are placeholders and some of the weapons haven't been found yet. Those I'm hoping you can help me out with. So let's get into the video guys and first up we have the act of the abyss. So this Legendary has to be crafted, trade skill needs to be engineering, requires a station of a blacksmith tier 5 obviously, requires an engineering level of a 200, trade skill xp is 5,115 and territory standing is to be a 99. Next up guys we have the soul. So this Legendary Hatch is exclusive to enemies within the end game expeditions. So the Lazarus instrumentality to garden the genesis and the depths are where this will be found. Same as this next one, the Edenil. This is an end game award from the end game expeditions, the Lazarus instrumentality, the garden of genesis and the depths is where this will be found guys. Again the same as this next one the Settlers trend. This Legendary Hatch is an exclusive item too, those end game expeditions, again the Lazarus instrumentality, the garden of genesis and the depths. Next up guys we have the remnant of before. So this is a Legendary that is tied to the Outpost Rush, it's a tier 5 Outpost Rush cash chest reward. Obviously need to be a level 60 to take part in the pvp battleground style 20v20 mode but if you're interested in this that's where you have to go and get it. Okay so the next four we actually have no idea where these dropped from right now. We have the violent delight, we have the honors bane, we have the hatch of the corrupted frontier and we have the conquist. Again like I said these four we don't know how they drop as of right now but if you do want to pause the video and check out their stats and what they offer be my guest. Also if you've had any of these dropped so you know where they're specifically dropped or how you can get these please let me know and I'll edit the video description for everybody else to see. But yes guys there we have it all known Legendary hatches in the game so far. If you enjoyed the video leaving a like who helps out, if you're new and here want to see more be sure to subscribe and if you never want to miss a video I upload you can turn notifications on by hitting that bell button guys thanks as always for stopping by and hopefully I will see you on that next one.


Hello. In this lecture, we will define limited liability company. According to fundamental accounting principles, Wild 22nd edition, the definition of limited liability company is organization form that combines select features of a corporation and limited partnership provides limited liability to its members, owners, is free from business tax and allows members to actively participate in management. When we think about a limited liability company, we're thinking about getting the best from both worlds of a traditional C corporation and a pass-through entity such as a partnership, including the idea of having free business tax, meaning that the tax will not be assessed on the business level but will flow through to the individual level, a feature generally of a general partnership and to have members to actively participate in management, a feature often associated with a partnership. But having the limited liability, a feature often associated with the C corporation. So, if we had a limited liability corporation, the idea of a corporation is that we want to keep that corporation separate from the owner. In terms of a corporation, we have a separate legal entity. Because it's a separate legal entity, the corporation itself, its assets and liabilities are subject to any problems on the corporate level, but there is a divide from the personal assets of the owner. So, the owners put money into the corporation as an investment within the corporation. If there's a problem or a lawsuit, then the lawsuit happens to the corporation, it being a separate legal entity, and the assets of the owners that are not within the corporation should be separate, providing more liability protection to the owners. The idea of a limited liability company is to have that similar liability protection in the liability company as would be there from a C corporation. The problem with a C corporation is that because it's a separate legal entity, it also is subject to separate taxation at the corporate level. And that tax also is going to be taxed on the individual level at the point of distribution when it's a C corporation in the form of dividends, resulting in double taxation. That's one of the major problems with a C corporation for a limited liability company looking to eliminate that problem by allowing the flow through of the income tax to the owners flowing through from the limited liability, the business entity to the individual 1040s being taxed then on the individual level, eliminating that double taxation problem. So we have the best of both worlds. We have the more limited more liability protection, as would be the case for a corporation. And we have the pass through entity so that we are avoiding the double taxation, the taxation on both the business level and on the individual level.


I will be presenting my paper on HRCT in diagnosis of smear negative TB patients. Even though increased efforts have been made to contain it, TB remains a major public health concern and in India 2.6 million people were diagnosed. In 2017, 0.49 million people were treated without microbiological diagnosis. Culture can take up to 6 weeks of confirmation and the radiographs cannot distinguish between active and old infection. So HRCT can therefore help in providing a provisional diagnosis so that treatment may be started soon and the true worth lies in the amount of surety delivered to the radiologist clinicians in distinguishing other diseases. My goal was to determine use of HRCT in obtaining a diagnosis in presumptive TB patients before disease becomes widespread and treatment regimens are not used needlessly. The aim was to describe findings of HRCT in sputum negative patients and also to determine efficacy of HRCT in diagnosis in sputum seronegative TB patients. It was conducted over 12 months and an observational cross-sectional study was done for 96 patients and patients having coughed for at least 2 weeks, hemopsis, fever and so on were taken and those are the radiographs showing TB. Those having two samples negative for TB patients with disseminated TB were chosen. Patients of 18 years of age or less and sputum smear positive patients were not taken. So what I did was took the smear negative patients, HRCT was done, a bronchial alveolar lavage was done and sample was sent for CB NAT or sputum smear examination or cyberoptic bronchoscopy sputum smear examination was done to see if they were positive for the same. So those positive were classified into the following headings from highly suspected of TB having three of following findings like main lesion in upper lobes or apical segments to those having other suspected diseases. What I saw was the highest age group in which the patients were present was 41 to 60 years and out of total 96 patients and those having TB were in the age group of 41 to 60 years. The main findings were the lesion being in the upper lobe, Treenbird appearance and lobular consolidation which was seen in the TB patients. The lobular consolidation was the most common finding of the 27 of the patients and cavitation and Treenbird appearance were the most significant HRCT findings. So final position was based on HRCD criteria and criteria 1 was satisfied by 31 patients of the total 46 and therefore I calculated sensitivity and specificity of all the individual ranks and they were 67% sensitivity of rank 1, 84% of rank 2 and 97% when all 1, 2 and 3 were taken as positive. So concluding the study demonstrated that cavity and Treenbird nodules and lesion in upper lobe so the most significantly associated with risk of TB and main use of HRCD for diagnosis is the selection of patients that are highly suspected of having TB among those having pulmonary lesions of undetermined etiology. The limitations were increased sensitivity of newer methods of AFB detection like fluoros and microscopy and many present of TB patients were started on treatment without confirmation due to the COVID pandemic. These are my references. Thank you.


Spiritually speaking, it is said that even before you were born, the name of your spiritual half has been determined, so each soul has a perfect match, your soulmate. Although people think that you and your soulmate have to be in an ideal union of bliss, your soulmate is not necessarily your spouse. Your soulmate is anyone who is supposed to help you complete yourself. In this video, I will show you 5 signs you have found your soulmate. If you are new here, consider subscribing to this channel for more awesome videos such as this. 1. You communicate without speaking. One popular fact about soulmates is that they can read each other like an open book. Clinical psychologist and relationship expert Dr. Carmen Herrera in a report to the Huffington Post stated that soulmates connect fervently on every level of being. Even without mentioning a word, you too seem to understand yourself perfectly well. At times, it's just a smile, a wink, a wave or even without any form of body language, yet you convey messages that no one else in the room knows. With soulmates, there is such depth to your relationship that you can fill and hear what the other is thinking even if it's not verbally expressed. Dr. Sue Johnson, a clinical psychologist and author of Love Sense, said that, a soulmate always knows how to respond to your emotional signals. Your soulmate may complete your statements. You might pick up the phone call or text each other simultaneously.  2. You're comfortable around that person since day one.  That feeling is rare, so if you have that thought towards someone, then you probably have found a soulmate. A soulmate makes you begin to believe in previous lives and reincarnation because you feel like this person has been a part of your life before. Soulmates connect with ease right from the first day of their meeting and let their true colors show without fear of judgment. In an interview with Huffington Post Wedding Oficient and Author, Reverend Laurie Sue Brogway said, Soulmates often feel a sense of familiar and a sense of comfort around each other. Many people attest to the fact that it is easier to relax into that person and follow themselves to be vulnerable when they are with that one person. In a beat to gain acceptance from people, it is common to have a range of masks that you wear in different situations. With others, expressing concerns or attempting to make decisions is uncomfortable. However, one of the most delightful things about being with a soulmate is that there is no need for any guys. You can express yourself whichever way you wish because you both respect yourselves and know that even if disagreements arise, you are both able to settle yourselves amicably and swiftly.  Being genuine in this way opens you both to the most profound forms of intimacy and it is often that your very first meeting that you realize this fantastic potential is there. 3. The person challenges you in a way that no one else can. Despite what people might speculate, the soulmate relationship is not always smooth sailing. Author Kailin Rosenberg of Matchmaking firm, The Love Architects explained that a soulmate is not always wrapped in the perfect package physically or in terms of life circumstances, nor does it mean that the relationship will come without challenge. But the difference is that the life situations and the difficult challenges are a strength and empower that becomes a cement that keeps you and that person together through the difficult times and helps each of you become your most true self. Apart from those challenges that come with keeping the relationship healthy, your partner is someone who pushes your buttons in a way that no one else can, although their push may aggravate you at first, but they bring with them some of the more difficult lessons for the soul. The inspiration makes you better.  The unique combination of challenge and support provided by a soulmate is a significant catalyst for personal development and in the future you are sure to be grateful to each other for all the encouragement over the years. Four, you leave through a similar experience with this person. Mutual understanding is not such a magical phenomenon floating somewhere in the sky waiting to be caught. It can be a product of a very substantial set of conditions and one of them is having a similar life. If we think about the soul, we can freely say it is shaped by where we came from and where we are and also where we have been and where we will go all through our lives just as the character is 50% genes and 50% experience. Thus, we can find ourselves in someone who has lived through what we have. For instance, imagine a person experienced in a particular job and one with no experience whatsoever. The inexperienced one, even if exclusively trained and bombarded with proficient knowledge, cannot explain in details what the job entails. Neither will he make professional decisions without consultations. The feeling remains unknown and therefore, it can never be fully understood until it has been experienced. The same can be imagined in terms of understanding between people. We are more likely to understand something we have felt ourselves and much more inclined to understand parts of someone's world if they were part of ours at some point. This, however, does not mean that everyone from the same background is soulmate or people cannot be soulmates if their experience are not exactly the same. On the contrary, what it means is that we have the freedom to react to our surroundings in various ways and the reactions are primary causes of where we will end up and who we will meet there, who will our soulmates meet. 5. You don't feel lonely when apart but you always want to be together. Have you ever been so far away from someone yet it feels like they are right beside you? No matter the distance between you and your soulmate, there is something that makes it feel like they are with you.  Soulmates can strike the right balance between time together and time apart. Even though they miss each other, they trust each other and still feel close when they are doing separate things rather than being consumed with jealousy and anxiety. It does not matter if you hang out just three times a week or you go out separately with your friends. You respect each other's need for independence, knowing that when you get together your time alone is remarkable. Making a new friend or having handsome personal trainers aren't a threat to your relationships. You are secure knowing that the connection is genuine. At the same time, when you are together with your soulmate, there is a sense of happiness that fills your soul. This feeling is not even based on lust or anything sexual, it is just pure joy. Being an honest, sincere and committed soulmate relationship helps you to become a better version of yourself.


Hello everyone and welcome. The Committee on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill 2016 has invited comments from the public and its various stakeholders. The bill however does not record the voices of the survivors of domestic violence. Today we have senior advocates Indira Jai Singh and lawyer Suranya Ayer discussing the issue, discussing the implications of India signing the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Suranya Ayer works for the rights of Indian children taken away by Western child protection agencies. Last month she submitted a report to the Ministry of External Affairs regarding children taken away from U.S. protection authorities, especially regarding young IT professionals even though they have proven to be innocent. Do you agree with the term abduction which is used with respect to parents? This is the most objectionable part of this bill. I wonder if you recently heard the former Chief Justice Justice Kehar say at a meeting of lawyers which was held to felicitate him that Indian law doesn't consider a parent as an abductor. Now the reason for this is very obvious and the Law Commission also said the most objectionable part of the whole Hague Convention is the fact that it looks as a parent as an abductor. And the reason of course is very, very obvious. In fact the reason is because the parents are the natural guardians of the child. So a guardian cannot be ever considered an abductor. What is of relevance is the issue. So therefore the bill is flawed right for that reason that it calls itself the civil aspects of international child abduction bill. That would be my very first objection. And that runs through the bill. So there are many other very objectionable parts of the bill. I'd like to add to this point that where the child should be throughout the bill hinges merely on what's called its habitual residence. And this completely ignores that for a child the place of residence is a technicality. And the reason for this is who is the primary caregiver to whom is it attached. I mean so long as it's with a loved parent it doesn't really care where it is. And I think that it's cruelty to the child to have this cold-blooded bureaucratic decision on habitual residence to decide. I mean when the child is with parents abroad it may be habitually resident there. But that is relevant to its best interest or its happiness or security. So I think she's made a very important relevant point. I'd like to add to that that you know Indian law doesn't even have a definition of habitual residence. And for the first time that definition is being smuggled over here. We don't even know what is the difference between habitual residence and ordinary residence. Now just to give you an example if the mother was an Indian citizen she could argue that I have been ordinarily resident in India. For the purpose of marriage and for a brief period I might have gone abroad and that might make me quote-unquote habitually resident overseas. But actually I was born, brought up in India, married in India and very often even a citizen of India. And yet you give habitual residence as she says priority over. So that brings you to the question what should be the critical priority for deciding whether a child should be sent back or not. I would say never send a child back unless the child personally wants to go back. That's a different issue altogether. But it has to be one principle and one principle alone and that is the best interest and the welfare of the child. And you cannot, you know, it's also about taking away all agency from children.  And yet, you know, there will be the court order, there will be the bailiff, there will be the policeman who will be coming and literally tearing the child apart from the mother's breast and saying sorry, there's a court order, you have to go. So the issue is what are you going to? She said, Thuranya said please don't base this whole law on habitual residence and the question of course will be base it on what? So this comes to another very important point which is that under section three of the bill even an institution or other body in the foreign country can apply for the return of the child. So this means that we are not just dealing with interparent claims but we are giving orphanages and child protection agencies in foreign countries higher rights of custody to the Indian child and its own family. And this runs fouls of a host of laws which have a whole history of, you know, agitation and lobbying among the women groups in India. After many years we managed to get laws where the divorce cases and other things could be filed where the wife was residence. You didn't have to go by the habitual residence of the husband or where they lived when they were together as a matrimonial couple and the reason for this habitual residence is an irrelevant technicality in these matters. If I may say so the reason was not just the habitual technicality but the reality of the situation that the habitual residence of the woman and the man can be different. And then how do you decide the habitual residence of the child? And the law she was referring to was the domestic violence act where that brings me to the whole question of why do women in the first place pick up their children and run from a foreign jurisdiction back to the country of their origin. The reasons are they face domestic violence at the hands of their husband. I mean after all a woman who gets married to an so-called NRI with so much pomp and show and having spent so much money she would have a vested interest in living with her husband. The point is very often these women are actually thrown out in situations of domestic violence. At that point they pick up their children and they get back to the country. You must understand that these women don't have a green card, they don't have a visa, they're dependent on their husbands for the right of residence in a foreign country. Now if you expect such a woman to leave a child who may be six months old, maybe one year old, maybe two years old it doesn't matter what age but to leave the child behind and go out of the country because she's kicked out that is expecting the impossible. This is the reason why they pick up their children and come to India. I would just like to add to that that there's also another kind of prejudice and power dynamic imbalance at play over here which is that in general an American court in Americans even till today they probably couldn't point India out on the map and there is a pervasive idea that India is a complete dump and it would be much better for a child to be in America than here under any circumstances. So it's not just a question of husband versus wife but you're facing an attitude that is highly prejudicial against allowing Indian parents access to their own children and this is the reason why courts in America are often completely unsympathetic to the Indian parents claiming custody of the child in India only because they see why would we send any child to India. To give you an example, when Indian children are taken in the US by their US child protection agencies and we say that while the parents are fighting the abuse allegations in court and more often than not they are winning them and proving they're innocent let the child come back to its relatives in India. The US system through international social services does a home study of the relatives in India where the questions are what are the air conditioning facilities in the home what is the physical appearance of the relative this is not the way in which the relative is done I can ask you would you say that the attitude is almost racist the attitude is racist I mean what is this other than racism and you know I'm very sorry to say that we often find that that it's the women in these privileged countries who take up the cause against mothers in third world countries I don't see this as a woman friendly approach at all given the statistic that you pointed out in your article so what is very important to point out is you know this law proposed law gives the appearance that it is gender neutral because it says a bill maybe called civil aspects of international child abduction bill 2016 so an argument could be well you know if a woman picks up her child and comes away so could a man pick up the child and go away and then an Indian woman will have access to this bill to get her child back the fact of the matter is statistics worldwide indicate that more than 60% of all cases of so called child abduction have been brought against women so it's obvious that these laws though facially gender neutral actually have a very disparate impact on women and so you come back again and again and again to the same issue why is there no recognition of the phenomenon of domestic violence in this country I ask that question because our civil procedure code already provides for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements and foreign laws where they are applicable in India so there was really no reason to have this act at all and what this bill does is that it actually allows claimants this is under section 3 of the law of the bill to claim a right of custody by operation of law so you don't even need a court judgement you can just make a claim that under the laws of my domicile I have the right to the custody and at that point when you go to the high court section 19 of the bill says that the high court can rely on this claim of the law by an individual not even a lawyer without records to the procedures for proof of that law so this means that the bill empowers the high court to send the child to a foreign country based nearly on the applicants claim that he has custody and his court has claimed that this is the law in his country of domicile it makes no sense so what this law actually does is it bypasses India's judicial system as if India didn't have a judiciary at all and it hands over the judicial function to a bureaucrat who all he needs to do is to look whether a foreign court has given an order 99% of the time it's an ex-party order where the woman has never been represented the order has been passed after she left the country she's had no access to legal services or money for payment of fees and this bill actually says that if there is a court order you blindly send the child back now in contrast the Indian Supreme Court has as recently as in the month of September 2017 I would say August taken a decision which is a very very I would say proper and correct and legal decision where they said that I quote we hold that the custody of a minor with the appellant that is the mother being her biological mother will have to be presumed to be lawful whereas this bill says that custody is unlawful if there is a court order even though it's ex-party in her favour secondly the Supreme Court has unambiguously said and this was a case of inter-country marriage it was a case where the woman left UK and came to India with the child it was a case where the child had also taken up citizenship of the UK in spite of all that the court came to the conclusion no we are going to look at what is in the best interest of the child and they came to the conclusion that it was in the best interest of the child to remain with the mother in India in the face of a court order granting an ex-party order to the father they disregarded that they said comity between courts is not the deciding principle the deciding principle is the welfare of the child now in the face of a judgement of this kind I really failed to understand well either the drafts person of this law have not read judgments of the Supreme Court or as you say there is some political agenda so the Indian bill on the international parental abduction is broadly in conformity with the Hague Convention so you think the government has already decided to sign the convention and despite the resistance it's clear to me from the fact that they are holding a consultation which is tomorrow and the day after and it's also clear from the fact that if you read it it says whereas India is a party to the Hague Convention and the entire convention is annexed to this annexure the whole idea is to simultaneously sign the convention and to get this law passed now I think it's unfortunate that the Indian women's groups have for reasons which are too difficult to clarify right now being unable to present their case in a very systematic manner before the government I have been receiving email after email from women who are in situations where they've had to flee with their children since the announcement of this meeting was made and I just hope that they organize themselves either to do a Skype conference for the consultation tomorrow and day after or that they come personally to tell their story their point of view what I do think has happened is that the groups of lawyers representing NRI men who are very well funded have succeeded in lobbying with the government for the signing of this convention I don't think that there has been adequate debate and discussion on it I don't think judgments of the supreme court have been looked into I don't think that the drafters of this bill understand that Indian courts have parents patriot jurisdiction over all children found physically within the territory of India even if it's a foreign child that you find abandoned one of the very first cases which ever went to court it wasn't on the case of child abduction but this old jurisprudence of parents patriot was developed by a foreign country that slave will also be given due process of law and justice because it's the courts which then step into the picture and become the parents of the child so to now turn around and say that the parents patriot jurisdiction of the court will be taken away and it will be some bureaucrats sitting in Shastri Bhavan who will decide whether the child is to be returned I think it's a sorry day for the country and for the judiciary yeah and I would just like to add that forcibly deporting a child based on a claim of habitual residence is basically enslaving the child and I mean I think that we have a lot of things that we need to legislate about and to develop policy on and that I cannot understand why so much energy has gone into setting children away from India it makes no sense to me that the United States which I believe is behind this move has itself not signed up to the Convention on Child Rights the United States is very wise to the need to preserve the amount of solidarity over family affairs and I think that they should show the same understanding to us and to children I would just like to give one example of a case to which I was personally witnessed and this is a case of a woman who fought this kind of a battle and she lost it and let me tell you I mean look at this law this is basically a child policing law it's got a provision in it which says you can take the services of the police and it gives powers to the bureaucrats to summon to get documents to arrest the child okay so this was a very tragic case where she fought a similar battle and she lost it in the Supreme Court there Supreme Court has sometimes been very very heartless with women who have brought their children to India and they pass the sorter you know to my knowledge this woman went underground with her child to avoid the writ of the court and she was never found by anybody so we don't know where she went away with her child we don't know what happened to her this is one example and there was another very tragic example of a woman and this woman was working I do not want to give you the name of the organization it will identify her but she was working with an international organization in the United States of America and her husband came here and he asked her husband filed a petition here for the return of the child to the country and the Indian Supreme Court asked her mother's mother to stand surety for the for the child and impounded the passport of her mother for five long years and her mother could not travel because this woman took a decision I am not going to comply with the order of the court now I can't say whether she was right or wrong in doing it but I am pointing to the tragic consequences of passing orders which are completely heartless and which don't have any basis in reality considering all the aspects that the women do not have support in foreign land and they come back and it can be a case of domestic violence or other tragic incidents and they come the child is removed from the so-called habitual residence what do you think is the next way forward like this issue will I should not sign the convention what should India do in the next step? what has been indicated by the Supreme Court of India we have well established courts in this country our courts will continue to have parents factory a jurisdiction over children found within their jurisdiction and the father and the mother can both work out their rights in a civilized manner thank you for tuning into news click I am Shivangi Mishra from Lawyers Collective


There's another kind of therapy. It's called behavioral therapy. Behavioral therapy says that whatever your obsession is, whatever it is, is it avoiding cracks on the sidewalk? Is it washing your hands every two minutes? Is it checking on the door at night, making sure the door is locked? Whatever it is, behavioral therapy is, behavioral therapy says expose yourself. Expose yourself to that, which you're obsessed to, but without doing anything about it. So for example, if you have to avoid cracks on the sidewalk, begin walking on cracks. Walk on it. If you have to wash your hands every two minutes, stop washing your hands. Stop. Force yourself to stop. Do it once every hour. Once every two hours. If you have to wash the counters every couple of hours, stop. For one day or two days, say I won't. Force yourself. Say I won't. I will leave the counters as they are. I will not vacuum the house today if that's what you obsess over. This is called behavioral therapy. Exposure to what causes the problem while not allowing repetitive behavior to occur. Let something spill on the ground. Let there be a couple of, you know, dots of rights on the ground. It's not a big deal.  You don't have to vacuum it today. Nothing will happen if you don't. Nothing. Expose yourself. Once you do that, once, twice, you'll get adjusted. If you could go on for an entire day without having to wash your hands every two minutes, the next day will be easier. The day after that will be easier. Imam Ali alaihi salam, you know, this is not a, this is psychologists are saying this, psychiatrists are saying this today, but Imam Ali said this a thousand and four hundred years ago. Imam Ali alaihi salam said, if you fear something, expose yourself to it. Whatever it is that you fear, expose yourself to it. Do it immediately and the fear will go away. Are you afraid of snakes?  Are you afraid of heights? Go stand on a tall building. Are you afraid of spiders? Hold a spider in your hand. I'm serious. This is what Imam Ali says. If you're afraid of public speaking, tomorrow you're going to give the lecture and now we'll take a break. Come, speak and stand in front of people and do it immediately. Do it immediately without thinking, without questioning. I remember several years ago, in 2003, my father had a heart attack and he was in Iraq. So doctors told him, you have a heart attack, you had a heart attack and you need a bypass surgery. And here in Iraq, we don't have the means. So it's better that you go back home. So my father, he came back to the United States. He wasn't sure. They hadn't told him you need surgery, but they told him you need better care. He came to the United States. He came to the doctor. This was back in Los Angeles. He came and he saw a doctor. They had all the check-ups and he told him that you need a triple bypass surgery. We need to change three of your arteries. He said, when they told him we're ready, you know, we can go into surgery whenever we'd like. Would you like to come tomorrow? The day after tomorrow? He said, no, right now. Right now. He told him, are you sure? He said, right now. I am ready for surgery right now. Take me. And they took him to the surgery and after a couple of hours he was out. We later asked him, why? Why didn't you wait a day or two days? He said, why should I wait? If I come back at home and I think about it, I'll have anxiety. I'll develop fear of the surgery. I said, why develop anxiety? I'm ready. You know, let them take me. If you're afraid of something, expose yourself to it immediately. And I'll go away. Once, twice, it will go away. You're afraid of heights? You're afraid of planes?  Once, twice, three times. Force yourself. Whatever it is that you're afraid of, force yourself and the fear will go away. The obsession will go away. This is a cure. This is a cure that Imam Ali gave us a thousand and four hundred years ago. Try it. What is it that you're scared of? Whatever it is that you have fear of, sometimes you're scared of something that, you know, it's not a big deal. Everyone else is scared of. And it won't affect your life. You're scared of snakes. It's not a big deal because you don't see snakes every day. But sometimes you're scared of, for example, driving. And you have to drive every day to work.  You have to expose yourself.


Well, we're very excited to have the World Water Congress here in Australia. I think Australia has done a lot of things to lead the world in dealing with a dry and climate and it's wonderful that that's one of the key themes of this conference and I'm very proud that you're all here and I'm looking forward to meeting my water friends from all around the world. Climate change has created a new dimension because to create systems which are climate resilient require a complete change in thinking. To get beyond just engineering solutions, get beyond just ever augmenting supply ever taking from the environment. We have to have a balanced approach when you projects, policy, money and smart ideas look at both the demand side and the supply side and then we can make better use of the water that we've got. This is one of the most important if not the most important resource we have and as we see it across the board globally we have trouble from ranting from too much water to too little water to not enough accessibility. Water has been my area of research and interest for 30 years and you've got to be here. It's my first time at a World Water Congress and I get to see what other people are bringing in not just I'm in the scope of Australia but also throughout the world so it's really got me interesting. The planet is so tiny, so small. You need to work all together. We have to stand together to make this world a beautiful place for our coming generations. Guntapal is understanding of how else we might approach the future of water. I think it's profoundly different from where I think it is now so a fantastic challenge for the sector. If we are not inspiring the next generation then we will never eradicate poverty and we'll never have sustainable growth. We need to take this wonderful slogan that I found in Colombia and a moral painting which says La Madurez en Sistema Reis Arsusuegos. Maturity in life is achieved when you realize your dreams.


Good evening. I know you've been reading, seeing and hearing a lot of stories the past several days attributed to Danish sailors, unnamed observers at Italian ports and Spanish harbors, and especially unnamed government officials of my administration. Well, now you're going to hear the facts from a White House source and you know my name. I wanted this time to talk with you about an extremely sensitive and profoundly important matter of foreign policy. For 18 months now, we have had underway a secret diplomatic initiative to Iran. That initiative was undertaken for the simplest and best of reasons, to renew a relationship with the nation of Iran, to bring an honorable end to the bloody six-year war between Iran and Iraq, to eliminate state-sponsored terrorism and subversion, and to affect the safe return of all hostages. Without Iran's cooperation, we cannot bring an end to the Persian Gulf War. Without Iran's concurrence, there can be no enduring peace in the Middle East. For 10 days now, the American and world press had been full of reports and rumors about this initiative and these objectives. Now, my fellow Americans, there's an old saying that nothing spreads so quickly as a rumor, so I thought it was time to speak with you directly, to tell you firsthand about our dealings with Iran. As Will Rogers once said, rumor travels faster, but it don't stay put as long as truth. So let's get to the facts. The charge has been made that the United States has shipped weapons to Iran as ransom payment for the release of American hostages in Lebanon, that the United States undercut its allies and secretly violated American policy against trafficking with terrorists. Those charges are utterly false. The United States has not made concessions to those who hold our people captive in Lebanon, and we will not. The United States has not swapped boatloads of plainloads of American weapons for the return of American hostages, and we will not. Other reports have surfaced alleging U.S. involvement. Reports of a sea lift to Iran using Danish ships to carry American arms, of vessels in Spanish ports being employed in secret U.S. armed shipments, of Italian ports being used, of the U.S. spending or sending spare parts and weapons for combat aircraft. All these reports are quite exciting, but as far as we're concerned, not one of them is true. During the course of our secret discussions, I authorized the transfer of small amounts of defensive weapons and spare parts for defensive systems to Iran. My purpose was to convince to Iran that our negotiators were acting with my authority to send a signal that the United States was prepared to replace the animosity between us with a new relationship. These modest deliveries taken together could easily fit into a single cargo plane. They could not, taken together, affect the outcome of the six-year war between Iran and Iraq, nor could they affect in any way the military balance between the two countries. Those with whom we were in contact took considerable risks and needed a signal of our serious intent if they were to carry on and broaden the dialogue. At the same time we undertook this initiative, we made clear that Iran must oppose all forms of international terrorism as a condition of progress in our relationship. The most significant step which Iran could take, we indicated, would be to use its influence in Lebanon to secure the release of all hostages held there. Some progress has already been made. Since U.S. government contact began with Iran, there's been no evidence of Iranian government complicity in acts of terrorism against the United States. Iran's have come home, and we welcome the efforts that the government of Iran has taken in the past and is currently undertaking. But why, you might ask, is any relationship with Iran important to the United States? Iran encompasses some of the most critical geography in the world. It lies between the Soviet Union and access to the warm waters of the Indian Ocean. Geography explains why the Soviet Union has sent an army into Afghanistan to dominate that country, and if they could, Iran and Pakistan. Iran's geography gives it a critical position from which adversaries could interfere with oil flows from the Arab states that border the Persian Gulf. Apart from geography, Iran's oil deposits are important to the long-term health of the world economy. For these reasons, it is in our national interest to watch for changes within Iran that might offer hope for an improved relationship. Until last year, there was little to justify that hope. Indeed, we have bitter and enduring disagreements that persist today. At the heart of our quarrel has been Iran's past sponsorship of international terrorism. Iranian policy has been devoted to expelling all Western influence from the Middle East. We cannot abide that, because our interests in the Middle East are vital. At the same time, we seek no territory or special position in Iran. The Iranian Revolution is a fact of history, but between American and Iranian basic national interests, there need be no permanent conflict. Since 1983, various countries have made overtures to stimulate direct contact between the United States and Iran. European, Near East and Far East countries have attempted to serve as intermediaries. Despite a U.S. willingness to proceed, none of these overtures bore fruit. With this history in mind, we were receptive last year when we were alerted to the possibility of establishing a direct dialogue with Iranian officials. Now let me repeat, America's longstanding goals in the region have been to help preserve Iran's independence from Soviet domination, to bring an honorable end to the bloody Iran-Iraq war, to halt the export of subversion and terrorism in the region. A major impediment to those goals has been an absence of dialogue, a cutoff in communication between us. It's because of Iran's strategic importance and its influence in the Islamic world that we chose to probe for a better relationship between our countries. Our discussions continued into the spring of this year. Based upon the progress we felt we had made, we sought to raise the diplomatic level of contacts. A meeting was arranged in Tehran. I then asked my former National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane to undertake a secret mission and gave him explicit instructions. I asked him to go to Iran to open a dialogue making stark and clear our basic objectives and disagreements. The four days of talks were conducted in a civil fashion and American personnel were not mistreated. Since then, the dialogue has continued and step-by-step progress continues to be made. Let me repeat, our interests are clearly served by opening a dialogue with Iran and thereby helping to end the Iran-Iraq war. That war has dragged on for more than six years, with no prospect of a negotiated settlement. A slaughter on both sides has been enormous, and the adverse economic and political consequences for that vital region of the world have been growing. We sought to establish communication with both sides in that senseless struggle so that we could assist in bringing about a ceasefire and eventually a settlement. We have sought to be even-handed by working with both sides and with other interested nations to prevent a widening of the war. This sensitive undertaking has entailed great risk for those involved. There is no question but that we could never have begun or continued this dialogue had the initiative been disclosed earlier. Due to the publicity of the past week, the entire initiative is very much at risk today. There is ample precedent in our history for this kind of secret diplomacy. In 1971, then-President Nixon sent his national security advisor on a secret mission to China. In that case as today, there was a basic requirement for discretion and for a sensitivity to the situation in the nation we were attempting to engage. Since the welcome return of former hostage David Jacobson, there has been unprecedented speculation and countless reports that have not only been wrong but have been potentially dangerous to the hostages and destructive of the opportunity before us. The efforts of courageous people like Terry Wait have been jeopardized, so extensive have been the false rumors and erroneous reports that the risks of remaining silent now exceed the risks of speaking out. And that's why I decided to address you tonight. It's been widely reported, for example, that the Congress, as well as top executive branch officials, were circumvented. Although the efforts we undertook were highly sensitive and involvement of government officials was limited to those with a strict need to know, all appropriate cabinet officers were fully consulted. The actions I authorized were and continue to be in full compliance with federal law and the relevant committees of Congress are being and will be fully informed. Another charge is that we have tilted toward Iran in the Gulf War. This too is unfounded. We have consistently condemned the violence on both sides. We have consistently sought a negotiated settlement that preserves the territorial integrity of both nations. The overtures we've made to the government of Iran have not been a shift to supporting one side over the other. Rather, it has been a diplomatic initiative to gain some degree of access and influence within Iran as well as Iraq and to bring about an honorable end to that bloody conflict. It is in the interest of all parties in the Gulf region to end that war as soon as possible. To summarize, our government has affirmed policy not to capitulate to terrorist demands, that no concessions policy remains in force. In spite of the wildly speculative and false stories about arms for hostages and alleged ransom payments, we did not repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we. Those who think that we have gone soft on terrorism should take up the question with Colonel Gaddafi. We have not nor will we capitulate to terrorists. We will, however, get on with advancing the vital interests of our great nation in spite of terrorists and radicals who seek to sabotage our efforts and immobilize the United States. Our goals have been and remain to restore a relationship with Iran, to bring an honorable end to the war in the Gulf, to bring a halt to state-supported terror in the Middle East, and finally to affect the safe return of all hostages from Lebanon. As president, I've always operated on the belief that given the facts, the American people will make the right decision. I believe that to be true now. I cannot guarantee the outcome. But as in the past, I ask for your support because I believe you share the hope for peace in the Middle East, for freedom for all hostages, and for a world free of terrorism. Certainly there are risks in this pursuit, but there are greater risks if we do not persevere. It will take patience and understanding. It will take continued resistance to those who commit terrorist acts. And it will take cooperation with all who seek to rid the world of this scourge. Thank you, and God bless you.


Just wanted to share this little Easter egg with you. If you use Chrome or Chromium browser either or, and you lose your internet connection, your internet's down and your board, you're gonna get this screen when you try to go to a page. But luckily, there's a little game built in here. You may have noticed this dinosaur here. And if you use either your space bar or your up and down arrow keys, you can start a game to where you just jump over cacti and stuff. So I thought I'd share this little Easter egg with you. And as I said, here I am. I'm running in Chromium here or Chrome and the same thing works in Chromium.  And if you're on a mobile device such as Android, just click the dinosaur with your finger and you can start playing the same game. So that's just a quick little overview of this Easter egg that you may have not known existed. And I hope that you find it useful when your internet is out. Thanks for watching. As always, please visit filmsbychrist.com. That's Chris with a K. There should be a link in the description. As always, I hope that you have a great day and that your internet starts working again soon.


Sound shirt, cute circuit. When a conductor throws his arms in the air, an orchestra begins to play. Imagine a world without music. For deaf people, this is reality. My name is Cassandra. A signing woman sits in the front row. I can't hear music because I'm deaf. Young Symphonic or Hamburg presents Light's Flash on a long-sleeved shirt. Music should be for everyone. Introducing this sound shirt, a wearable device that enables the deaf to experience a concert through touch sensations. After six months of development, we put it to the test. Cassandra wears the blue-on-black sound shirt. When the conductor raises his baton, lights pulse up and down the garment. Other patrons test it too. Cassandra flinches and beels. A nodding man turns to his partner and says, Good.  This is how it works. Microphones all over the stage cover the different types of instruments. A software converts the sound into data and sends it to the shirt, where 16 vibration motors pulsate with the intensity of the music. For example, the bass on the stomach and the violins along the arms. Cassandra chuckles. Cassandra still tested the shirt and their reactions speak for themselves. The man's eyes widen and the woman tells her companion, What you can hear, I can feel. I can feel the violins so delicately, the man tells his partner. I could feel the music all over my body, Cassandra reports. Let's try ACDC, she says, with a laugh. A sound shirt, now available at every concert of the Young Symphonic Orchestra of Hamburg. Cassandra joins a standing ovation, waving her hands in the air.


under the session, this is Professor Farhad. In this session, we would look at an actual CPA simulation that's released by the AI CPA. Specifically, it covered the auditing concept. However, what's special about the simulation, this simulation, it's gonna illustrate why you need to take FAR before audit or before any other section. And I will show you why later on. As always, please connect with me on LinkedIn if you haven't done so. YouTube is where you would need to subscribe. I have 1,600 plus accounting, auditing, finance and tax lectures. This is all the courses that I cover. If you like my lectures, please like them, share them, put them in the playlist, let the world know about them. If they're benefiting you, they might benefit other people as well. On my website, you'll have access to additional material such as notes, PowerPoint slides, true, false, multiple choice if you're studying for your CPA, 2000 plus CPA questions. I strongly suggest you visit my website. So let's take a look at this simulation. It's an auditing simulation. Again, I'm gonna mention that you're gonna see why I strongly suggest you sit for FAR before you sit for auditing. So first, let's read the instruction. So this is what the simulation would look like. So an engagement team is performing the audit of the financial statements of Griffin as of the year end December 31st, year seven. Task one, the senior accountant had identified three misstatements that have been carried forward into the summary of proposed adjustments. So they have three misstatement. Determine the impact of the identified misstatement on the financial ratios noted below. For each of the identified misstatement below indicate the impact on the financial ratio identified. In column D and E, select the impact if any on the misstatement on the financial ratio from the option list. Selection may be used once more than once or not at all. Consider each statements independently. This the information in the analytics definitions exhibit must be used for all financial ratios. So here the impact on current ratio. Hopefully we all know how to compute current ratio, current assets divided by current liabilities. But if you're not sure, which you should be sure when you go into the exam, you could look at analytics definitions and you could see that current ratio here is equal to current assets divided by current liabilities. They're giving us the profit margin ratio, which is net income divided by sales. So the gross profit margin, net income divided by sales or net sales. And you should know those ratios without even looking. So if you don't know what current assets and current liabilities are, you're gonna be in trouble on the exam day. Now frankly, I can answer these questions. I can finish task one, by not even looking at the debt restructuring email and by not looking at the audit work papers. All what they're asking you in task one, which is pretty simple and straightforward in my opinion, is we made those adjustments. We debited payroll expense, credited accrual payroll. What is the impact on the current ratio? Is it an increase, decrease or no impact? What is the impact on the profit margin? Increase, decrease or no impact. That's all what they're asking you. That's all what they are asking you. So I can answer these questions without looking at anything else and you should be able to do so as well. So notice, the simulation is pretty straightforward and easy. It may look a little bit intimidating, but task one is pretty straightforward. So let's take a look at the first adjustment. We debited payroll expense, we credited accrual payroll. What is the impact on the current ratio? So again, what's the current ratio? The current ratio is current assets divided by current liabilities. What happened is this? If you credited accrual payroll, you're gonna increase current liabilities. So simply put, here's what we're saying. Let me just show you the math real quick. I mean, you should be able to do this immediately, but I'll show you the math. You would say, if you have current assets of 10, current assets of 10, current liabilities of five, your ratio is two. And what's gonna happen when you credit accrued payroll, you're gonna add to the liabilities, let's assume one. As you add more to the liabilities, current ratio goes down. The current ratio goes down. So simply put, what's gonna happen is this. The current ratio will decrease. Why? Because you're increasing the liabilities. What's gonna happen to the profit margin? Well, the profit margin is net income divided by sales. What's gonna happen to net income? If you have more expenses, your net income will go down. Therefore, your profit margin will go down as well. So you have less profit per dollar because you have more expenses. They both decrease. So notice, it's, I mean, knowing the concepts, it should not take you that long, but I'm just explaining the concept because it's very important that you understand the concept because expenses going up, your debting expenses, your profit should go down, your profit margin should go down, okay? Let's take a look at the second entry. You debit the depreciation expense 125, credited accumulated depreciation 125. What is the impact on the current ratio? Well, what's the current ratio? Current ratio is current assets divided by current liabilities. So what did this adjustment do to the current ratio? Nada, nothing. You increased an expense, which is not a current asset or a current liability. You increased accumulated depreciation, not a current asset, not a current liability. The impact on current ratio, no impact. What about the impact on the profit margin? Notice, it should be the same thing as the previous answer. Notice in the previous question, you debited payroll expense and your profit margin went down. In this problem, you debited depreciation expense, your profit margin is gonna go down as well. Why?  When your expenses goes up, your net income goes down. When your net income goes down, your profit margin decreases. Okay, let's take a look at the third adjustment. Debit, you should be happy if you get a simulation like this.  So what happened when you debit prepaid expense? When you debit prepaid expense, prepaid expense is a current asset. So if you increase current assets, it's gonna increase your current ratio because you're increasing the numerator. Therefore, this will increase and you are crediting insurance expense. When you credit expenses, you reduce expenses.  So your profit margin goes up. Now notice, this simulation is given to you in an auditing exam. How do I know this? That's what the AI CPA released. They released the simulation. So notice, it's an auditing exam but it's practically financial accounting. All these concepts are from adjustments and ratios you would learn in financial accounting. You would learn also in BEC. But the point is if you don't know how the adjustments affect the financial statements which in turn affect the ratios, you're gonna be so confused in these simulation. But if you went through the FAR section and you know how these adjustments in which how did they affect the financial statements? Literally, this should take you this first simulation task one, two minutes, no more than two minutes. That's it, all right? So we're done with the first task simulation. Let's look at task two. And notice, I didn't even look at the exhibits. So I was in sort of, I mean, I looked at the analytics definition but I didn't have to and you shouldn't have to. If you don't know what current assets is before going into the exam, I'm sorry, if you don't know what current ratio and profit margin, well, you're gonna be in trouble, okay? Task two, task two reads, the engagement manager had requested that the summary of proposed audit adjustment, adjustments started by the senior accountant be updated for any additional misstatement identified. Use the information in the exhibits above. So that's what they ask you to do now to determine the adjustment journal entries required. Each adjusting entry can be entered in any of the three responses table below. So there are three adjustment entries that we need to do to prepare each required journal entry, click the cell in the account name column and select the appropriate account maybe used once or not at all for a journal entry. So we have, you have a bunch of accounts so you don't have to type it. Enter the corresponding debit and the amount associated column, all amount will automatically run at the nearest dollar. Not all rows in the table might be needed to complete each journal entry. So some journal entries might need two, some might need three. So that's what they're telling you that's what they're giving you three. So they, you know, not to confuse you but to, you know, you might need three, three adjusting entries but there's nothing given to us. I have to look, I have to look into the exhibits now. So I have this exhibit here about the debt restructuring and it's basically an email from the audit manager firm to the senior auditor firm, to the senior auditor. So from the manager to the person that's working on the audit. February 3rd, year eight, which is this is after the year end because we're auditing year seven. Debt restructuring with Compass Bank. So there's a debt restructuring thing. The debt senior auditor. And this is basically, this is how it happens in the real world. This is like a real world example. Griffin has refinanced its credit facility. I reviewed the executed loan agreement dated December 28th, year seven. So they, they, they finished the agreement by the end of the year. The maturity of the loan was extended from September 30th, year eight to December 31st, year 14. The entire 3.4 million balance of the loan was classified as current assets as December 31st, year seven. The loan principle is payable with quarterly installment of 225. The first quarterly payment is due March 8th. Please determine the impact on the December 31st, year seven financial statement. Again, this is a proof. This is a proof of my claim, what I said earlier, taken far before taken audit is very important. Why? Because this topic, what do you need to understand here? I mean, I can see this, I can see this same simulation on a far section exam. What is it testing? It's testing your knowledge about refinancing current maturities, like current maturities of debt. So you have a debt on the books, but the company refinanced the debt. What do you have to do when you refinance the debt? Well, when you refinance the debt, you have to determine the long-term and the short-term component. So let me show you on a picture or on a graph, what am I looking at here? So here's what happened. They had a loan that was due. So the company had a loan. So this is year seven. And on year seven, they have a loan on their balance sheet, 3.4 million, which was a current liability. Now, what happened is few days, few days, few days before the year end, which is December 28th. What they did, they refinanced and they extended this loan. They basically refinanced it. They turned it into, they went from year eight to year 14. So it's no longer current liabilities. It's a long-term liability. That's one thing. That's one thing. And it happened right before year end. So it's definitely the 3.4 should be reclassified. But how do we reclassify it? Now, remember, the loan is 3.4 million, 3.4 million. Now, remember, every long-term debt, this is listed as current liability now. Every long-term debt, if it's long-term, remember the long-term debt will have to be broken into a current and long-term portion. What does that mean? It means this 3.4 million, some of it, it's gonna be current and some of it, it's gonna be long-term because it was refinanced. And what we are told, the agreement is we're gonna pay principle of 225 every quarter. So simply put, we're gonna pay 225, 225, 225, and another 225 in year eight. This is for each quarter. What does that mean? It means we're gonna be making four payments of 225,000. Simply put, that's a total of 900,000. Simply put, of the 3.4 million, 900,000 would be still current liability, which is the whole thing is current liability. And the remainder of 900,000 is current, the remainder of 2.5 million will have to be long-term. What does that mean? It means take out of the current section, okay? Debit current liabilities, 2.5 million and turn it into long-term debt, 2.5 million. This is what we are doing. So we had a loan of 3.4 million, we had a loan of 3.4 million, but it was refinanced because it was refinanced. Now it turned into long-term debt. Remember, every long-term debt has a current portion in the long-term portion, okay? So we go back here and what we need to do, we need to debit current portion of long-term debt, which is we need to reduce current portion of long-term debt, 2.5 million. Why 2.5 million? Because that's gonna be long-term and we are gonna turn it into long-term debt, long-term debt. Sometime it's called long-term debt net of current portion, not net of current portion. That was the AICPL put it long-term debt net of the current portion, but that's fine. And that's gonna be 2.5 million. Once again, this exact simulation, I don't see why not it can be given on the FAR section of the exam. I don't see why not, there's no reason not to. That's why you wanna take FAR before you take audit, okay? So I'm done with this first exhibit. I have audit working paper, so I have other information. Be careful about the date, be careful about everything when you're looking at these exhibits. We have Gryffing, prepared by staff accountant year eight, which is right after year end. Service revenue reviewed by senior auditor two to year eight. And this is as of December 31st, year seven, the information. The ascertain whether service revenue recognized during December year seven is complete and accurate and all material respected in relation to the financial statement taken is also, this is the purpose of this exhibit or of this test. 12th to year seven, we have the customer name, we have the amount, we have a tick mark A, we have the date 12, 4, we have the customer name, we have the amount, we have the tick mark. And notice all these transactions happen in December because there might be some concern with them. So you need to know what the tick mark is, what did they mean by A, what did they mean by C. So let's take a look at the tick mark. Per review of contract invoice and service record, we recalculated the amount of the revenue earned and verify that the revenue was recognized in the correct period. This is what A is. When we have a C tick mark, per review of the contract and service record, service was finalized and invoice as December 31st, year seven, per review of general ledger detail, the receivable balance where it was recorded in the unbuilt receivable at year end, hold on. So here, this $50,000, so after we looked at the contract and service record and the invoice, the receivable was recorded in the unbuilt receivable at year end. Well, hold on a second. If it's a legitimate sale, legitimate receivable, why is it built in the unbuilt receivable? It should be built in the receivable if everything is good. So notice the first thing we notice is tick mark C. We have a problem here. I'm sorry, tick mark, yes, C. No, I'm sorry, tick mark B. I apologize, this was tick mark. Yeah, tick mark B, where's tick mark B? Tick mark B is right here, chestnut. Chestnut. Chestnut, what we're saying about chestnuts, I should have just went through the record first because let's go back to globe. I'm sorry, let's go back to globe. This way we'll go through the customer's globe. Tick mark C, per review of the $50,000 contract and invoice, service was for the period December 15th, year seven, through January 14th, year eight, and should be recognized equally between year seven and year eight based on the contract of the terms. Okay, this is this customer globe. What does that mean? For globe, we have $50,000 of revenue. When we looked at the details of it, based on the tick mark, they're saying, we'll hold on a second. This $50,000, half of it should be counted in 2007 and the other half should be counted in 2008. What does that mean? It means we need an adjusting entry. What does that adjust the entry for? Is to take out out of this revenue, 25,000, take it out out of revenue, okay? Take it out of revenue because we received the money, we have the contract, but we're gonna complete the work, some of it in year seven, some of it in year two, year eight, not year two, the following year. What does that mean? It means debit revenue. We have to reduce revenue. We have to reduce revenue by 25,000 because we have to split the $50,000 revenue between the two and credit some liability. Let's see what liability are we given here. Contract liability, just some sort of unearned revenue of 25,000. What did we do? We backed out of revenue. So this C, this tick mark C, it tells us, look, this $50,000, some of it is earned in year seven, some of it is earned in year eight, okay? Tick mark A, we don't have to worry about tick mark A because they said everything is recognized in the current period. Tick mark B, let's look at tick mark B. Per review of our contract and service record, service was finalized and invoiced as of December 31st, year seven. Per review of the ledger detail, the receivable balance was recorded in the unbuilt receivable at year end. So here's what we did. The 75,000 was properly recorded in the proper period. All the evidence supported a sale. However, it was not recorded in the account receivable. It was recorded in an account called unbuilt service revenue. It should be in the receivable. What does that mean? It means I have to put it in the receivable. Therefore, I have to debit my receivable, I have to debit my receivable, 75,000, and I have to credit it was put in unbuilt revenue, unbuilt receivable, 75,000. So I fixed that error. And I believe those are the three errors. I don't have to keep on going because I only have three journal entries. I identified them and look what the tick mark is. Tick mark means agreed amount to general ledger balance and F means amount foot without exception. Now, why is this simulation? The why would this simulation be challenging for some students? If you work in the real world, if you're an auditor, this would be like a piece of cake. It should not be easy if you are a staff auditor. If you work in tax or if you were never a staff auditor or if you never work in public accounting, this looks a little bit intimidating. Why? Because you don't see those exhibits when you take your college courses. Maybe I go over one or two examples for the whole semester, but students don't look at this. Actually, I do give actually a complete project in my auditing course. So you get familiar with this, but most colleges and universities don't give project that you have to deal with exhibits and audit work papers. So that's why it's challenging. That's one thing. Because it's from the real world, stuff that you will see from the real world, but it's easy concept. Now, the other thing that's challenging about this CPA simulation is most of the questions are from far topics. Do you know how to prepare adjusting entries? That's what they're doing, really. You prepared one, two, those are really adjusting entries.  So that's why far is important to complete before you complete auditing. So hopefully, if this simulation did anything, if you have not set for your exam, complete far before you complete any other section. That's always, that's always my advice. And how can I help you with all this process? How can I help you? Well, I would like to remind you that I have my website. And on my website, I have additional resources for FAR, for audit, for intermediate accounting, auditing courses, so on and so forth, auditing, attestation, intermediate accounting, finance, tax, you name it, all the CPA exam. Go ahead, subscribe, join, solve additional questions. I'm here to help you, use all your resources. You're gonna study for your exam once, do it good. And I'm always here to help. Good luck.


SCP-761 is a steel trampoline frame, 2 meters in diameter and 3.5 meters tall. It shows no manufacturer's mark, apart from a tag on the bottom of the original net, which reads PROTO 5. Any solid object impacting SCP-761's surface, with a momentum exceeding 250 kilograms times meters per second, will vanish upon impact. Everything is determined that the object is instantaneously transported to a random location up to 15 meters away, while retaining its momentum. This effect has resulted in a number of users being entombed and asphyxiating. The object transported by SCP-761 does not appear to displace any material upon relocation, suggesting matter replacement based on volume. The location to which SCP-761 displaces the material is not known at this time.


I welcome members to the 22nd meeting in 2014 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, and I've always asked members to switch off mobile phones. Gender item 1 is instrument subject to affirmative procedure. No points have been raised by legal advisers on the provision of early learning and childcare specified children's Scotland order 2014 draft, nor on the Lanarkshire College's order 2014 draft. Members will note that the first of these two orders supersedes the draft order, which was laid before Parliament on 19 May, and which was reported upon in acceptable terms by the committee on 27 May. The earlier order has been withdrawn and relayed to Cata for certain policy changes. Is the committee content with these instruments, please? Right to information, suspects and accused persons, Scotland regulations 2014, SSI 2014-159. The requirement of section 282 of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform Scotland Act 2014 has not been complied with. However, the committee may wish to accept the reasons provided by the Scottish Government for the breach of the 28-day rule in this instance. Scottish Government has explained that regulations have been prepared and are proposed to be brought into force as quickly as possible to transpose urgently into Scots law certain provisions of directive 2012-13 EU on the right to information and criminal proceedings. This follows the rescheduling of stage 2 of the Criminal Justice Scotland Bill into 2015 as originally certain provisions of that directive were to be transposed by the bill. Does the committee agree to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on reporting ground to J as the requirements of section 282 of the Interpretation and Legislative Reform Scotland Act 2010 have not been complied with? Does the committee agree, however, to accept the reasons provided by the Scottish Government for this breach of requirements? A further matter in relation to the instrument has been raised by our legal advisers. Regulation 3.2 provides that a person in police custody must be provided as soon as reasonably practical with such information as is necessary to satisfy the requirements of articles 3 and 4 of the directive. The Government has acknowledged in its response to the committee that the terms of the directive envisage an element of discretion in the timing of providing the information through the use of a backstop provision. Regulation 7.2 refers to, at the latest before the first official interview of the suspect or accused persons by the police or any other competent authority. Articles 3.1 and 4.1 of the directive provide that the information should be provided promptly. The committee may wish to draw to the attention of the lead committee that Regulation 3 does not make provision for the latest timing, which is referred to within the preamble to the directive. The Scottish Government has explained in its response that the regulations do not specify a time limit for the provision of the information because, as a matter of practice, a suspect will not be interviewed before a letter of rights under article 4 of the directive is provided to the person. Does the committee therefore agree to draw the terms of Regulation 3.2 and has Scottish Government's response to the committee, which explains the effect of that paragraph, to the attention of the lead committee? Local Government pension scheme Scotland Regulations 2014, SSI 2014.164, drafting of Regulation 9.3b, appears to be defective. Regulation 9.2 provides for the pension contributions rates under reference to be a table showing bans, earning range figures and contribution rates. Regulation 9.3b provides that the earnings figures set out in that table are to be applied to pensions beginning on 1 April 2014, but the intention is that they are to be applied from 1 April 2015, bringing the date on which the regulations come into force. Does the committee therefore agree to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament under reporting ground i on the basis that drafting of Regulation 9.3b appears to be defective? Committee may wish to note, however, that Scottish Government is undertaken to bring forward an amending instrument to correct this error, as the error is significant. The committee may wish to suggest that an amendment should be brought forward promptly. Are we agreed to do this? No points have been raised by our legal advisers on the seed fees Scotland Regulations 2014-SSI 2014-167, nor on the road traffic permittive parking area on a special parking area in the Clyde council designation order 2014-SSI 2014-169, nor on the parking attendants wearing of uniforms in the Clyde council parking area regulations 2014-SSI 2014-170, nor on the road traffic parking adjudicators in the Clyde council regulations 2014-SSI 2014-171, nor on the aquaculture and fisheries Scotland Act 2013, specification of commercially damaging species order 2014-SSI 2014-176, is the committee content with these instruments please. Agenda item 3 is instruments not subject to any parliamentary procedure and no points have been raised by our legal advisers on the bankruptcy and diligence etc. Scotland Act 2007 commencement number 9 and saving amendment order 2014-SSI 2014-173, is the committee content with that instrument please. Agenda item 4 is the Housing Scotland Bill. The committee agreed its reports on the Housing Scotland Bill as amended at stage 2 at last week's meeting. Since that meeting, a non-government amendment amendment 61 has been lodged, which confers a new power on the Scottish ministers to make subordinate legislation. Members will recall the Scottish Government officials wrote to the clock on 11 June in order to advise the committee of the intention to lodge this amendment and to inform us of the Government's intention to support it. In order to allow the committee to scrutinise the amendment, the letter also explained the purpose of the provision and the reasons why it was proposed that the power is taken. Members have seen that letter and a briefing paper from our legal advisers. Does the committee agree to note the letter from the Scottish Government? Agenda item 5 is the committee content with amendment 61, so far as it relates to the committee's remit. John Swinney said that that is a further example of something that perhaps Mr Stevenson's committee of examination needs to look into, again, the late submissions of amendments and indeed in discussion. I think that earlier we talked about the need for explanation of amendments. Of course, as it turns out, we are content with this amendment, but had we not been, then it might have raised difficulties. I think that that is something that you might wish to investigate convener with Mr Stevenson's committee of examination. I am afraid that I cannot remember the name of that committee, but it is for help, but it is the standards committee. I would like to pursue that, please. With that comment, is the committee content with amendment 61, so far as it relates to the committee's remit? Agenda item 5, welfare funds Scotland bill. The purpose of this item is for the committee to consider the delegated powers in the welfare funds Scotland bill at stage 1. In considering the bill, the committee is invited to agree the questions that it wishes to raise with the Scottish Government on the delegated powers in the bill. It suggested that those questions are raised in written correspondence, and the committee will have the opportunity to consider the responses at a future meeting before the draft report is then considered. Section 4.1 and 4.2 provide that regulations may be made to require local authorities to review the decisions made by them under section 2 as to the use of welfare funds. Regulations may make all decisions subject to review, or they can set out particular types of decisions that would be subject to review. Delegated powers memorandum explains that section 4 is considered necessary by the Scottish Government to allow requirements to be placed on local authorities to carry out reviews of decisions in relation to the applications for assistance through welfare funds. Does the committee agree to ask the Scottish Government to explain why it has been considered appropriate that section 4.1 is framed as permissive, allowing the Scottish ministers to regulate to require local authority reviews, rather than requiring regulations that will put the review process in place? Section 4.2A provides for a choice that may be implemented by ministers in the regulations that all decisions under section 2 may be subject to review, or certain types of decision will be subject to review. Does the committee agree to ask that question? We do. Thank you. Does the committee also agree to ask the Scottish Government why the section 4.2 is framed as permissive to allow the Scottish ministers to regulate to implement one of those two options, rather than requiring the regulations to provide for one option? How are some visions of these powers should be used? What examples could be given of the types of decisions that could be made subject to review, or otherwise, and the types of circumstances that might be specified in which reviewable types of decisions are to be reviewed? Why could those not be stated initially in the bill, though subject to adjustment in future by regulation? Section 7 enables sections 1-6 to be commenced by order. In the order under section 7, may include incidental supplementary consequential, transitionary, transitory and saving provisions. In regard to section 7-3, the committee may consider that it is unusual in a bill of the scope for the commencement powers to include power to make incidental supplementary consequential provision, whether power is exercisable by an order that is laid before Parliament but is not subject to the negative procedure. Does the committee therefore agree to ask the Scottish Government to explain why the parliamentary scrutiny by a negative procedure is not considered appropriate for the exercise of these ancillary powers, or whether the Scottish Government could agree to lodge an amendment at stage 2 of the bill so that the negative procedure would apply in these circumstances? Section 6 is the Food Scotland Bill, the item of business consideration of the Scottish Government's response to the committee's stage 1 report on the Food Scotland Bill. Members have seen the briefing paper and the response from the Scottish Government. They have also seen a letter from the Lord Advocate, which he penned yesterday concerning the publication of the Lord Advocate's guidelines. Do members have any comments, please? I think that we should welcome the letter from the Lord Advocate. I have his willingness to work with us or with the Government in terms of bringing forward amendments and guidelines. I think that the Government's explanation has outlined that paragraph 11 is entirely a reasonable one. The fact that the regulations have not been used in recent times is a matter to rejoice over, but nonetheless, having lived through BSE and E. coli incidents in the food industry, I think that the ability to make regulations at short notice can and, indeed, in the past has been required. Therefore, the Government's explanation of its desire to retain that type of power for such emergencies is an entirely reasonable one. That would be my only comment. Thank you, John. Any other comments from members? Are we content to note the response and, if necessary, reconsider the bill after stage 3? Sorry, stage 2 might be considering it after stage 3. Thank you. I think that completes our agenda unless there is anything else. Our next meeting will be held not next Tuesday, Tuesday 5 August. I look forward to recess and I close this meeting.


Critical defects that compromise the nucleus during cell division could be the basis for the age-accelerating effects of people living with progeria. Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome is a genetic disorder that causes premature aging, affecting one in eight million newborns worldwide. The disorder is extremely rare and fatal. The rapid aging of the cardiovascular system causes death due to heart attack or stroke in patients by their mid-teens. Progeria is caused by a tiny point mutation in the laminate gene. This gene is responsible for producing structural proteins called lamins, which form the scaffolding that holds the cell nucleus together. The mutated form of pre-lamin A, called progerin, destabilizes the cell nucleus, the genetic control center of cells. The result is the fast aging effects observed in progeria. But the link from gene mutation to physical disorder has remained a mystery. Previous studies have looked only at models of progeria, not at actual patient cells, or they've tracked progerin only through the stages leading up to cell division. Now researchers have followed progerin as it wreaks its disruptive effects on the cells of patients with progeria throughout the entire cell division process. Compared with normal cells, cells containing progerin trapped structural components of the nuclear membrane from reaching their required post during cell division. Normally, those proteins lie throughout the cell during division before being called back to the nuclear membrane at the end of mitosis. Trapping in progeria cells delayed the reformation of the nuclear envelope, greatly deforming the boundaries of cell nuclei. Perhaps the most disruptive defect caused by progerin was the displacement of the protein CENPF. This protein enables cellular machinery to pull chromosomes apart during cell division. But in the presence of progerin, the protein is dislodged, causing vital chromosome material to lag behind. This interference could tie progerin directly to the genetic instability observed in patients with progeria, as the intrusive effects and amount of progerin in the cell accumulate with each rounded division. Because of sequence similarities between progerin and CENPF at their terminal end, protecting CENPF could be one way of preserving genome integrity in patients with progeria. More work is needed before the implications for possible treatment can be sorted out. But the researchers hope these findings invite further studies to unravel the direct effects of progerin and to develop therapeutic strategies for fighting progeria.


Just like with any scam, they're getting more and more clever each year. Always around tax season, this time of every year, we start getting any increase of these type of complaints where they want you to put money on some type of prepaid card, a dock card. You just need to know that IRS is never going to contact you in that kind of way. They're going to send you information, or if they need something further from you, it's going to be official documents. It's not going to be someone over the phone having you put money on one of these cards. So that's a good indicator that that's going to be a scam every time.


Before I had a severe case of COVID-19, I was extremely active and physically fit for a 73-year-old. After I recovered, I was still struggling with breathing and I wasn't going to settle for a lower quality of light. I got care at Hackensack Meridian Outpatient Physical Therapy. I felt very comfortable because they were serious about safety. My lung function has improved significantly in just a few months. Don't delay care. Staying healthy is part of staying safe.