our flagship program. We go out to the events, extract the ceiling from the noise. We're live in San Francisco, California for the Red Hat Summit, celebrating their 10th year of operation with Red Hat Summit. Certainly Red Hat has been around for more than 10 years, changing the game in the open source world. Certainly the Linux revolution has enabled massive amounts of innovation that's going to a whole nother level. We've been documenting it live here inside theCUBE. I'm John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE and I'm joining my cohost, Stu Miniman, analyst at wikibon.org. And Stu, yesterday, day one, we had a great set of interviews. We had Padra from Cisco. We had the CEO of Red Hat, the EVPs, all the top dogs, the platform guys. This is an operating system play that has taken open source to a tier one viable technology. That is enabling this massive innovation cycle that we're seeing, Stu. So open source has gone from the old days of a cheap alternative to now the backbone, the bedrock, the foundation of innovation across all industries. All companies will be a technology company according to Cisco's CTO. And Red Hat's in the center of it, Stu. And they're humble. They're not the big muscle bound marketing oriented companies. Red Hat has a brand. They have an operating system. They got 10 years. So day two, what's your take on day one and what are you expecting to hear from them? Yeah, John, I think as you stated, open source has moved way beyond the price discussion. Open source can deliver quality. Open source can deliver better security even. We've talked a lot about the community. And with Red Hat at $1.3 billion, big question is, where's that next billion dollars?  If you look at this show, it's about 4,500 people. And John, next month you and I are gonna be partnering up again to go to the OpenStack Summit in Atlanta. And Red Hat is positioning themselves to be the Red Hat of OpenStack. They want to be the distribution of choice. We've got the head of their OpenStack group coming on the program today. And there's still some work to do on OpenStack. And Red Hat needs to kind of build their partnerships and their ecosystem. But there's a huge opportunity in front of them. Of course, the other big bet that Red Hat is pushing on is OpenShift. The CTO of Red Hat this morning talked about the blurring of the line between infrastructure as a service, which they use with OpenStack and platform as a service, which is OpenShift. So I want to dig into that a little bit more. And nice announcement this morning that Dell is endorsing Red Hat's cloud strategy. So Dell's been a little hot and cold on OpenStack. They're partnering with Red Hat and it's a nice big logo on the OpenShift ecosystem. Stu, talk about the horses on the track. Talk about the ecosystem because as you analyze this market, you got to look at kind of the macro trends at the marketplace level. You got to look at the business models, the stock prices that you said, where's the next billion dollars going to come from from Red Hat? Certainly there's the ecosystem behind that. And then you got to look at the technologies and ultimately look at the customer value, right? So if you look at stepping through that, how are you analyzing this cloud, OpenStack, OpenShift, OpenSource game because there is an infrastructure dynamic going on that is profound and quite frankly, something new that is creating an inflection point. That is the convergence of the infrastructure level, the development of cloud, private, public and hybrid with virtualization. Now we've got containers, all that above. How do you analyze the market? Yeah, so John, if you look at OpenStack, it's really like a four year old startup. So there's still a lot of discussion as to what is the place in the ecosystem that OpenStack has. There is huge investment companies like IBM and HP rallying around what's going on in OpenStack. Many companies will look at it as this is an alternative to be able to just put everything in the public environments. Obviously Amazon is the player in the public cloud and the likes of Google and Microsoft are going for the public cloud, but we know there's going to be a big market for private and hybrid clouds and OpenStack still is one of the leading contenders in that space and it is that ecosystem play which gives Red Hat a good seat at the table for that discussion. So Stu, let's go through what we're looking for in day two. Obviously OpenStack is going to be a big part of the conversation today. Yesterday we were teasing it out and everyone was like just kind of like a liberal in their eyes, well all these OpenStack quizzes, hello everyone wants to talk about OpenStack and Cloud Foundry and all the competitiveness of the platform as a service layer and that has really been a key discussion point and the crowd is certainly rabid about that topic. So I'm really interested in the OpenStack adoption and the stack. Is it baked out? What needs to get done? Where are the white spaces? Where are the battlegrounds in the stack? Because at the end of the day developers want speed to market, they want value, right? And then the ecosystem, we have Intel yesterday, Doug Fisher was amazing, I love that conversation, I replayed it again this morning, looked at it twice more. He had some really interesting discussion points around Intel and software and Intel kind of not sneaking into the market, they've been a powerhouse in software. Huge, huge, huge whale in the marketplace. Intel can set the tone big time. Cisco here, okay, for the first time and then IBM for 10 years. This isn't the big tier one players are here. Then you have a slew of startups. We saw Docker yesterday with the container really targeting multi-platform, multi-cloud interoperability for application developers. So the list goes on and on, Stu. And you know, announcements. There's some significant news. Dell announced their private cloud solution, the general availability for their enterprise path. So if anyone running Red Hat Enterprise Linux can go right to the enterprise. Stu, this is significant action. Yeah, John, it was a good series of announcements. Their partners are all stepping to the plate. As you said, we talked to Cisco pretty intensely. We're going to have IBM and Dell on today to talk about how they're partnering for software-defined environments on the IBM side and this cloud positioning on Dell. Still waiting to see how all of the changes inside of Dell, really, as Michael Dell likes to call them, the largest startup in the world right now. So Dell's a bit of a wild card out there and a partnership with Red Hat makes a lot of sense. Dell keynote this morning talked about that they're looking to become the open networking company with partnerships with Cumulus and they're doing things like open daylight. And John, as you said, at this show, I mean, docker, docker, docker. I was just joking with people on Twitter that it seems like every time you say container or docker, there's spontaneous applause and everybody gets excited. This can be, is this a pivotal technology? Is this like vMotion from VMware to allow simplicity and mobility of applications and make it simple for me to manage my applications separate from my infrastructure, which was really one of the foundational things that we're looking to get out of platform as a service. You know, and I talked to Jerry Chen over at Greylock all the time about this and this was his first investment, dockers. I always joke, hey, they're going to wear docker pants. I don't want to see that high-tech uniform coming out. But all jokes aside, docker has mind share right now, mainly because they have the container, which is not a new concept, but when you bolt that onto cloud with virtualization, you now have a path for developers to have what they need to get the kinds of applications to the market, Stu, and that's the key. And we heard that yesterday from Intel yesterday around also the business models around these companies. Will the container and business model be something that will be in front of mind? And I was having conversations with the writers from the register last night, Jack Clark, and I was talking about docker and the conversation we had, Stu, was are they going to focus too much on the business model? Will they jump and try to establish revenue versus establish proliferation and adoption? And I'm saying, if they go for the revenue model, they're crazy, they got gray lock behind them and a big slew of VCs, they should not focus on that at all, get the product in the hands of the customers, get some proliferation, get some adoption, and then build from there, because once you get that kind of adoption, Stu, you can have beachhead. The other thing that was, we talked about yesterday that we're going to continue today and I'd like to get your take on it is, can there be a red hat of film in the blank? Peter Levine and Andreessen Horowitz wrote a blog post on TechCrunch saying they'll never be a red hat of anything. And he was the CEO of ZenSource, was an early employee at Veritas, Tech Luminary, a lot of experience. We had guys yesterday saying, that's not going to be true. We got Hortonworks, which is essentially the red hat for Hadoop. And I think with cloud, you can see some of the red hat business model subscription taking hold. But again, it's not a one business model fits all. There are some other approaches, open core, et cetera. So with that, what's your key thing that you're looking for today? John, we asked Jim Whitehurst, why aren't there more billion dollar open source companies? And he said, if selling free software was easy, everyone would be doing it. So I think there's some big potential markets out there, John, that we've been digging into. You're talking to some of the smart people of the show here, Dave Cahill this morning on OpenStack said that every CIO out there is telling his staff, you got to figure out what this OpenStack is and if we need to be there. And especially guys that are already working with red hat are probably having those joint discussions as to where they go forward. So a lot of areas for new innovation and growth out there. This is theCUBE, we're day two live coverage of two days wall-to-wall coverage of the red hat summit. It's all about dev ops, it's all about software, it's all about innovation and open source at a level that we've never seen before. And with Jay Boss and Linux, you have dev and ops. Really the foundation in the enterprise and it's exciting to cover. We'll be right back with continuous coverage day two at the red hat summit. We'll be right back after this short break.


Let's look for a while about resource management within 3R ties. There are few mechanisms for resource management implemented within 3R ties. The most important one is the critical section. It is widely used across operating system functions, as all operations done on task semaphore, skew, smotex, software timers needs to be done within the critical sections. Why? To be sure that there is always single place where we modify state of operating system components, otherwise it could create unstability of the operating system and its crash. We are starting critical section by macro task enter critical and leaving it by task exit critical. It will be described more in details on next slides. Next technique for resource management is the possibility to suspend the scheduler. It allows the embedded system to perform some critical operations without any intervention from the operating system. We can suspend the scheduler by calling vtask suspend all function and unblock it by calling x task resume all function. Important point here is that it is not allowed to call any operating system API function when the scheduler is suspended. We can see more details, more functions which are available to suspend and resume the scheduler within the scheduler section in this training. Last technique is a gatekeeper task implementation. We call it a dedicated task to manage some shared resources like usart or display interface to be sure there is no access conflict nor deadlock which could happen. We will describe it more in details in a while. Last technique we will mention here is usage of motexes. Motex as we will see in dedicated section is a kind of binary semaphore with some more intelligence and memory inside. The price of it is that it increases a memory usage by each of the tasks by extending tcb so task control block size. Critical sections. Critical section mechanism allows us to block all the interrupts during sensitive or atomic operation execution of an operating system in particular. The blocking of the interrupts it is valid only for the interrupts which are using operating system functions. So till the level specified by the configuration config library marks syscall interrupt priority. All interrupts with higher priority than this one would be not blocked. So our hardware which is important for our application will still be fully operational. Its interrupts would be executed, would be not blocked. The blocking point would be only for operating system and its components. And all interrupts which are cooperating with the operating system functions. To enter into the critical section we are using the macro port enter critical to exit from it port exit critical is used. As you can see from the picture below when the port enter critical what we are doing we are configuring base pre system register with the value of config library marks syscall interrupt priority to block all the interrupts related to the operating system. Then we can perform any operation which is touching which is modifying hues tasks semaphores and after the sensitive code execution we can restore the base pre so the masking register to the default value which is zero. So in this case all the interrupts are unlocked and unblocked in this case. Gatekeeper task is a concept which needs to be implemented by the designer. There is no dedicated functions nor structures which would support it in current free air toys implementation. The idea behind this concept is quite simple. Gatekeeper is a task being the only allowed to access certain resources like peripherals or memory buffers. Other tasks can access those resources indirectly by calling a gatekeeper services. This task should spend most of its time in a blocked state waiting for the access requests to the guarded resources and it is up to the designer to set the priority and the name of this task. It is providing clean method to implement mutual exclusion without any risk of priority inversion of deadlock. Thank you for watching this video.


QuickBooks Online 2023, transaction list by date report. Get ready to start moving on up with QuickBooks Online. We're gonna be using the free QuickBooks Online test drive searching in our online search engine for QuickBooks Online test drive, selecting the option that has into it.com and the URL into it being the owner of QuickBooks. We're gonna be picking the United States version of the software and verifying that we're not a robot. Zooming in by holding down control up on the scroll wheel currently at the 125% zoom in. Hit the cog dropdown to note that we're in the accountant view as opposed to the business view. We'll try to toggle back and forth between the two views so we can see where stuff's at in both of them. Right-clicking on the tab up top to duplicate the tab as we do every time, right-clicking the duplicated tab to duplicate it again back to the tab to the middle. We're going down to the reports on the left. We wanna be picking up that balance sheet standard report as that's thinking, tab to the right and reports on the left once again, this time the P to the L, the profit to the loss, the income statement, close up the hamburger, otherwise known as the hamburger, and do the range change from a one, a one, two, two, tab 1231, two, two, tab, run it to refresh it, tab it to the middle, close up the boogie, scroll up, range to the change from a one, a one, two, two, tab, 1231, two, two, tab, and run it. That's the setup process we do every time gets us in the mood for accounting stuff. Support accounting instruction by clicking the link below, giving you a free month membership to all of the content on our website, broken out by category, further broken out by course, each course then organized in a logical, reasonable fashion, making it much more easy to find what you need than can be done on a YouTube page. We also include added resources such as Excel practice problems, PDF files, and more like QuickBooks backup files when applicable. So once again, click the link below for a free month membership to our website and all the content on it. So we've got our two major reports, the balance sheet, the income statement, most other reports giving us more information on one or multiple line items within it. We're now gonna go to the tab to the right, right click on it and duplicate again to open up other reports, this time being the transaction list report. So we're gonna go to the reports on the left and close up the hamburger. I'm gonna scroll down a little bit, zoom it down to 150 and we're gonna go back down to those accountant reports and focus some more on some of the specific reports in here. Now we talked about the general ledger report which kind of breaks everything out by account and then date within it. In a prior presentation, that's the traditional detail report, kind of like a transaction detail report. We also have something similar over here, which is the transaction detail by account, breaking out the detail, the activity that has happened by account, but oftentimes or sometimes it could be useful to break out the entire, all the transactions not by account, but rather by date. And for that we have these two reports, the transaction list by date and transaction list with splits by date. So I wanna go into these two in a little bit more detail and we can practice basically sorting around and how we might use these two reports. So I'm gonna open this one up first, right clicking, duplicating this report and then we're gonna then go to the tab to the right, change the range from 010122 tab, 123122 tab, run it, close up the hand boogie. Now this report isn't really giving us more line item on one, isn't giving us more information on one line item of the financial statements, balance sheet income statement, but rather is giving us a detail on the whole construction of the balance sheet and the income statement. So you'll recall that if I look at the balance sheet, so for example, I'm gonna run a comparative balance sheet up top for November and December. So I'm gonna set the date for just the month of December here, which will be 120122. And then I'm gonna compare that to the prior period, which will be November, previous period, and then the change in the dollar change and run it. Now if I look at this, the November, this is where we stood as of the end of November. This is where we stand as of the point in time, December 31st. The difference between the two is the change. That's actually the activity that happened. Now, if I wanna look at more detail in terms of this change item here, I can look at it on an account by account basis, drilling down on the account or looking at, in essence, a general legend, ledger, a transaction detail, or I can try to look at that by transaction, which is basically what we're doing here. So in other words, if I was to run this report just for the month of December from 120122 to 1231, then this is the activity on date and actual form that is showing the change. That is making up this change, getting us from the November 30th point in time to the December 31st point in time. So that could be a useful report for multiple things. It's great for reviewing. So if you're in a teaching situation, this will be helpful for us because we'll be able to work a practice problem. And we could say, okay, if we started at this point and then we have all this data input that hasn't been input the same, then we have to end at the same end point. So if you're trying to review something like in a practice problem, you could check your balance sheet, your income statement or your trial balance. If something is off, then you can look at this detailed report and say, okay, if something is on this detail report and it's not on my side, then the question is, what's the problem? How is that the case? Was it a timing issue? That's often the issue. You wanna change the date range then and see if it's a date range problem and then change the date range. And then if it's on your side, but it's not on this side, then the question is, well, what happened there? Did you duplicate something or has something been input incorrectly? So that's one use for it. In a school setting, similar situation would be in a review type of situation when you're a supervisor and you're trying to review the work that has been done by staff, for example. Then again, you can run this report and get a quick look at the types of data input they have been putting in place. And you can see the number of transactions that they've put in place. And you can also see the types, what are they using to put those transactions in place in a nice quick format. So that's a nice useful tool for it as well. From a billing perspective, this could be a useful way to kind of get away from the billing of just billing hourly. So if you're a bookkeeper and you're saying, hey, I bill hourly on it, maybe you can come up with some other billing structure that's a bit more concrete because sometimes hourly billing can be tedious on our side to figure out the number of hours. And it can also be kind of tedious on the client side because it's somewhat ambiguous in terms it's not really concrete number of hours that how productive you were during those number of hours. Sometimes that's the only way to do it. But if you could set up a system where you have, say, monthly billing based on the number of transactions, that's another method that you can do. You can get more detailed than that. You might say, if you're within this range of transactions, if I did over anywhere from 50 to 100 transactions, I bill you this much. If I go from 100 to 200, I bill you this much. And so on and so forth. That could be a little bit more concrete and you can actually provide the client with this information as verification, concrete evidence of the information that you've put into the system. You can actually count these transactions quite easily as well because you can export this to Excel and just run account formula to count the number of lines that are in the transactions. So that can help you to verify the number of transactions that have taken place pretty easily. You might say, well, then I've gotta go in here and count everything. Well, you can export it to Excel. Let's just to show that I can say, let's go and export it to Excel and we'll just count it up. So I'm gonna open up this item here and then once it's in Excel, I can enable the editing and then I'm gonna make this a little larger. And so then you could do some kind of count. I count formula and say this equals count and you could get a little bit more detail on the count ifs, if there's something in it or something, but if you just said count the number of items, I could go up here and count the number of items and then there's 75 on the items and or you can obviously look at the line items here, 86, you're at line 86 and then it starts at line six. Now, again, that's not perfect because you got some split items here. So you could try to think about how you would deal with these kind of split items and whatnot and you can use different count if formulas to do that, but you wouldn't have to go in here and physically count one at a time if you could export them to Excel is the general idea. Now, also, this is a great report to kind of filter on so you can go into here and try to filter by all of your transactions. This is kind of similar if I go to the first tab and I go to the expenses tab and I go to my expenses tab up top where you have this filtering by all of the account types, but these are only in the vendor, kind of the vendor side of things cycle and then you can do the same thing on the sales side of things and you could sort by all the types of transactions that are on the sales cycle. So you could do a similar thing over here except you've got all of your transactions and you could sort by the transaction types, which is a quite common filtering technique. So if I wanted to go over here and say customize, it would be quite common to go to the filtering on this report and search by the transaction type. So possibly you want the bills, for example, we can say the bill items and then maybe the bill payments. Maybe we want those items for whatever reason. Now you've got your filtering options that can break that down. So this is a really nice report to practice with those filtering items. You might want to be focusing in on a certain transaction for whatever reason and use that type of report. Okay, let's open up the other one. I'm gonna go back to the, I'm gonna leave that one there, go back to the tab to the left and open the transaction list with splits. So this is a neat report too, giving you more detail. Now you see, I'm gonna go back to the tab to the right, the problem with this report. I'm gonna customize and get rid of the filter that I put on there. So I'm gonna unfilter it. And so there we go, let's just unclick this. What am I doing? Run it. Okay, so just a quick look. Notice we've got the date on the left-hand side. We've got the transaction type. We've got the number. We've got the posting name, if applicable. Another area, typically these are employees, vendors and customers. Memo, if we have a memo and then the other account or the account impacted and then the split. These two are showing the double entry accounting system, meaning this bill, for example, had an impact on accounts payable and the other side is in miscellaneous. So if I went to the balance sheet and I drilled down to the transaction detail in accounts payable, I would find this. If I went to miscellaneous expense on the income statement, I would find it. However, you've got these split items down here where it's not giving you the transaction because multiple transactions are being impacted instead of just two and therefore you end up with a split. So it doesn't give you all the data that you would like. You'd have to drill down on the form itself to get the further data.  So now I'm gonna go from 010122 to 123122 and run it. So now it's a bit longer of a report. It's not in journal entry format. You're not talking debits and credits, but you no longer have that split where it's kind of hiding data. So if you get to a more complex transaction like this one, you can see all the activity within the transaction. So like these invoices are more complex transactions. So this gives you kind of like that journal report, all the detail within it, but it's a little bit more compact than the journal report and you're not using the debits and credits so you can see the impact on all the accounts. This is also a good one that you might construct your billing on because now you might say, hey look, I'm not gonna make my billing structure based on just how many transactions maybe. Maybe I'm gonna say if you're within these many accounts that were impacted because it's more complex if you're in a construction company to make an invoice that has all this stuff going on as opposed to an invoice that you make for a service company that just sells one thing or one line item. And it's more complex to do a payroll transaction, for example, that has a bunch of stuff going on. So maybe you create your billing structure and say, I'm not gonna say bill you with, if you're within 100 transactions, but if you're within 100 accounts that are impacted, within that range, I'd bill you so much. And if you're within whatever other range, I'd bill you so much. It's another way that you might be able to construct a concrete, verifiable kind of structure for your billing to make it a little bit easier on you instead of having the ambiguous kind of hour thing and possibly still be able to provide something concrete. You can, of course, still export this to Excel and count the number of lines. You might have to use a count if kind of formula if there's something in the line or something like that. But that's another option. So those are nice reports. And then you also have the transaction or the journal report will go into a little bit later, which is a similar kind of report as well. All right, so I'm gonna open up the hamburger. I'm gonna go to the left, open up the hamburger, go to the cog dropdown, switch to the business view, just to see where stuff's located in it. And we know that the homepage is now called the get things done page. No slacking off at home for us. We're at the home basis, get things done place. And then we've got the reports are located here. And then we also went into the get paid and paid area. That's where the customer and vendor information is. But I touched on those transaction items which are actually in the bookkeeping area. And that's a little bit different than the other view. This is where the sales transactions and expenses are side by side instead of in like their respective vendor cycles there. So there are those items.


And she was mad that she left. She did this Saturday night. She went walking up to Heritage. The little girl she's with us also missing. They went and met a guy. And they came back though, it was just an hour. And this time they left and she didn't come back. It's not the same, I just want my sister home. It's like I told the cops, you know, you don't gotta come home, just let me know you're okay.


The magnificent men in their flying machines, they go up to the up-up, they go down to the up-down. They enchant all the ladies and steal the scenes with their up-to-the up-up and their down-to-the up-down. Lying around, looking on the planet by the ground, they're all rightfully keen. Those magnificent men in their flying machines think of danger, they really don't care. Kristen would think he had made a mistake as the chances they take the ground. Hello, I'm Brigadier General James Abramson. I have the good fortune to be the program director on the development and the acquisition of this airplane, the F-16. We're very proud of this airplane, and we think that it's going to be an important system for the United States, for our air forces, for NATO, and in fact for the free world. There are some very striking aspects of this airplane and this program. And the first one that I think you should look at are these five flags that are painted on the front side of the fuselage. They represent a unique endeavor on the part of the United States and five of our NATO allies to develop this airplane in a consortium. It's something that's really never been done by the United States before. And it's, I think, a new step in the usefulness of the NATO alliance and a way to bind that alliance together even more closely than it has been in the past. This program, I said, was unique. It started out in a unique way as a prototype. And what we here at Wright-Patterson attempted to do was to define for contractors what it was that we wanted this airplane to do. And we gave them a very tough challenge and then we said, now we're going to give you a lot of freedom and a little bit of money and we want you to go out and to build us just the best possible system that can do that. And there were two contractors that started out initially in competition. One of them, the winner, General Dynamics, the other one was Northrop out in the West Coast. They both built very fine fighter systems for us. We then flew those in a test program and all of this was done at very low cost. And because we gave them the freedom in the design to put together some of the advanced features that I'll talk about later, you'll see that they really came up with what has to be, I think, a bit of art and a good bit of engineering. As I said, General Dynamics won and they won with this lightweight version of a fighter which can be used to counter fighters in the air and we in the Air Force call that an air-to-air mission. Or it can also be used to drop weapons on the ground and to support the U.S. Army in the field or the NATO armies in the field and we in the Air Force call that an air-to-ground mission. And this one can really do both of these things and do both missions quite well. Some of the features that perhaps aren't obvious but which really make the system work very well. The air intake is placed very, very carefully and in such a way that it feeds and supports a very powerful engine inside. This engine made by Pratt and Whitney aircraft is one that really is the key to the power, the maneuverability and the heart of this fighting machine. That air intake is designed in such a way that you can flexibly fly at high altitude, at low altitude and at very slow speeds and at very high speeds above Mach 2 or twice the speed of sound without a lot of complexity and a lot of cost. And that's a tough job for any designer to at low cost get this kind of flexibility in a weapon system. Some other that are a little bit more obvious perhaps are this system right in here, this strake it's called. And what this does, it's a special aerodynamic feature and it causes greater lift to come across the wings of the aircraft we can develop lift even when we're maneuvering at terribly high G-loadings. In this case high G-loadings above 9. When we say high G-loadings above 9 we mean that the pilot when he's pulling the stick and when he's pulling that airplane in and making a very, very tight turn the centrifugal force in the turn is forcing him down with 9 times the pull of gravity. Now we don't do that just to make it tough on the pilot. We do that so we can out maneuver an enemy fighter. And this airplane is so maneuverable that it can in fact turn inside the constraints of the Pentagon building. The wing itself and the way it's blended into the body gives us additional lift for such a system. Right here you can see the air to air missiles which are always flown and which are always in place here on the wings and this particular location on the wings gives you again additional lift a more efficient kind of an airframe. Instead of having a stick that we have in most fighter planes that the pilot uses and that controls the way the airplane flies. When he pulls it back the airplane goes up. This is his most important control mechanism. And on normal airplanes those sticks are connected to a whole series of hydraulic lines and a very complex way of going all the way back and moving the control surfaces like this tail or here this flapper on or and this tail here and what that's a heavy weight and it's a complicated piece of machinery. And what we borrowed from the space program is what we call a fly by wire system. And that means that the stick is just a little teeny stick that he has over here that goes through a computer and that computer is always helping the pilot fly at the most efficient possible position. And by doing that with this fly by wire system once again we can do some very special things some that are very subtle but the important result is that we can outmaneuver enemy or any enemy aircraft that they've got now or that we see in the foreseeable future. Now those are some of the technical features that I've talked about. Let me tell you let me go back to those five flags and tell you something about the way in which we're going to build this system. We've combined this these technical features in a nice simple way so that we can make a low cost aircraft. And of course this was one of our most important objectives because when we can keep the cost down that allows us within a fixed budget to have a system that we can buy more and therefore ensure superiority in numbers in order to win a battle as well as superiority in terms of a qualitative sense with the one aircraft. I mean by this we've got to be able to have a large number of aircraft available in a real fight. The low cost clearly is a benefit to the U.S. taxpayer. It's also going to be a benefit to NATO and the other taxpayers. Let's call out these five flags. Obviously we start off with ours. The second flag and it represents the Kingdom of Belgium. The third one Denmark. Here we have the Netherlands and here we have Norway. We have as part of my system program office which has the international management responsibility for this weapon system. We have 20 officers from those four nations who are just part of our organization. They add a great understanding. They also add a great amount of talent and a lot of excitement to the program. Some time ago when this consortium to build this aircraft was announced it was announced as the arms deal of the century. I think that there's a better way to describe it. Instead of the arms deal of the century I think what it really is is a new attempt and the most complex attempt that we've ever undertaken at multinational NATO co-production. Remember I said that General Dynamics was the prime contractor and that Pratt and Whitney was the prime engine contractor. Those contractors are really leading a multinational effort to build this. Instead of building this in one production line in the United States as we have in many systems we're building it in three production lines in five countries with two engine production lines. We now have placed in Europe about 1.5 billion dollars worth of contracts on this program. They'll be making parts of the fuselage and assembling this aircraft in Belgium. They'll be making other parts of the aircraft and assembling it in the Netherlands. They'll be making electronics parts, engine parts in Denmark and Norway as well as in the United States. This is the real challenge of this program is to try to take this multinational industrial consortium and put it together in such a way that it's a benefit to the United States. It's a benefit to each one of our NATO allies that are participating. And in fact then becomes a financially viable thing to do. The United States will be buying over 1,300 aircraft. The Europeans will be buying some 348 and then in addition to that we've already announced that Iran will be buying a significant number. And what that adds up to at this point in time is a 22 billion dollar program. An important piece of the action will be in Europe. We call this a swing fighter and by that we mean that it will complement our principal air superiority or air-to-air aircraft, the F-15. It can do very well in that role and it'll complement that with lower cost airplanes. It'll also complement our specialized aircraft that are supporting the Army. The A-10 supports our Army and it's an aircraft that's built especially for that job. But our airplane with its flexibility can do both missions. For one of the first times on a very large scale the United States and the NATO Air Forces will all be flying a standardized weapon system. That means that American squadrons can land at a base in Norway or a base in Denmark or in any of the consortium countries. They can be supported by their air forces. They can work together in joint exercises with their air forces as they can work with ours. And this web of having a standardized system will greatly strengthen the NATO alliance. So we've got to be able to produce this at low cost and not exceed our portion of the budget. So low cost means two things. First of all we have to produce the airplane. That's why the emphasis on simplicity and low cost in the design so that we can buy it initially, cheaply. But more than that we're also designing it in such a way as to minimize the life cycle costs. And what we mean by life cycle costs are the costs involved with spares, the numbers of people to maintain it over the full lifetime of the weapon system. So we're trying not to take just the short-sighted view. We're trying to say the total cost is important to us. It gives us this low cost aircraft which can give us the numbers then, which can offset the tremendous numbers that the Soviet Air Force has in their inventory right now. We have to be very careful because the Soviets are making a major investment in all parts of their military machine. They have very large numbers of aircraft. The best way to counter that threat is to produce an airplane like this one. One that's economical, one that has advanced technology at low cost, the kind of technology that will carry us well out into the future. This is an airplane that I think the United States can be proud of and one that is going to be an important step for NATO as well as ourselves. Those magnificent men in their flying machines They go up to the up-up, they go down to the up-down They enchant all the ladies and steal the scenes They're up to the up-up, and they're down to the up-down Up, down, flying around Looking on the planet by the ground Air Force, rightfully in those magnificent men in their flying machines Go up, down, flying around


Oh, and welcome to this session. This is Professor Farhad. In this session, we will discuss when unmodified opinion is not justified. And specifically, we're gonna be looking at gas issues, not gap issue. In the prior session, we looked at gap issue. Now we would look at gas. This topic is typically covered in the auditing and attestation course, the CPA exam, the auditing section. As always, I would like to remind you to 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 a list of all the courses that I covered, including a lot of CPA questions. If you like my lectures, please like them. Click on the like button. It doesn't cost you anything. Share them, subscribe. If they benefit you, it means they might benefit other people. And especially these days, the coronaviruses out there, students are going online, so they might benefit other people. And please connect with me on Instagram. If you are looking for supplemental material for your education, especially for your CPA exam, please check out my website, farhatlectures.com. So we're gonna look first at condition for unmodified opinion or unqualified clean opinion. And we talked about those opinion in the prior session, but it's good to remember what we did. We include all the financial statements. We obtain sufficient appropriate evidence. The financial statements are presented fairly with gap and no circumstances requiring the addition of an emphasis of a matter or modification. So under those circumstances, we give an unmodified or unqualified or clean opinion, whatever you want to call it, which is everything is good. Also, if we needed explanatory paragraph, we would still report an unqualified or clean opinion. Now we're gonna look at circumstances where unmodified is not justified. Simply put, we cannot give a clean opinion. And in the prior session, I told you, we could have two issues, two main issues. One could be a gap and one could be a gas issue. Gap, it means the financial statements are not prepared in accordance with gap and the auditor disagree. We already covered this issue in the prior topic. We looked at detailed example about when we are not in compliance with gap. Now we're gonna look at gas. So we have a scope limitation. The scope of the audit has been restricted, which is called the scope limitation, or the auditor is not independent. So now we need to talk about gas. Remember under gap, kind of it's good to review what we do if there is any issue, we could give a qualified depending on the materiality and the severity of the problem, or we can give adverse. So those were the two opinion we would give if we don't give an unmodified opinion in the issue as gap.  It's good to see them side by side. So qualified, we could have a gas or a gap issue. However, gap, we use the term adverse for a bad opinion. For gas, we use the term disclaimer and we're gonna see the details of it. So gas, it's either qualified or disclaimer.  When do we give the disclaimer? Well, simply put, the issue is deals with evidence. If we are unable to obtain appropriate evidence, but the auditor conclude that the possible effect of the material misstatement is material, but not severe or pervasive. So we could not collect enough evidence that's material, but it's not severe and pervasive. So material, but not severe and pervasive. We still had a scope limitation, but if it's not severe and pervasive, we could give a qualified opinion. So what could be some examples of scope limitation? Just kind of, so what are we talking about here? We're talking about time constraint, okay? For example, we did not have enough time to finish the audit. Well, that's a problem. That's a problem, that's an issue. But how severe is it? Is it severe or not severe? It's an important, it's material, but depending on the severity of it. We were not able to obtain inventory. Well, that's material, but is that severe? Is inventory a large amount? Were we able to observe some of the inventory and not others, so on and so forth? We are unable to confirm a count receivable. That's the material, but is it severe? We were unable to obtain an attorney letter. Those are examples of it. Maybe the accounting record is not adequate, but how bad is it? How bad is it? Is it everywhere or to a specific division, specific account? What are we talking about here? What's the severity of it? So if it's material, all of these are material. And what are these? These are auditing procedures. And they are all material, but the question is, are they severe or not severe? So simply put, we are confined or restricted somehow. The restriction could be done by circumstances. We are constrained by circumstances. For example, when they counted the inventory, we were not there at the beginning of the year. So we just had to accept the beginning inventory or we could be restricted by management. And this is a problem. If management is restricted than us, basically management is saying, you can do it. Then the auditor just don't sit around and accept. They're gonna have to ask somebody higher than management, usually the board of directors or more specific, the audit committee to comply, the ask management to comply. And usually they would comply if they don't want a disclaimer because disclaimer is bad. Now let's switch gears. If these examples that we just discussed, the scope limitations are severe and pervasive. They are material, but they are also severe and pervasive.  Disclaimer is not good. We don't give an adverse. Remember, adverse is gap issue. We're not dealing with gap. Here we are dealing with gas. So remember, this is a gap issue. So basically what does it mean? It means we cannot collect enough evidence and we cannot make a decision as a result of wheel. We cannot collect enough evidence and we don't have alternative method. We're not comfortable with making a decision. We just disclaim. We don't say it's adverse. We just say we could not collect enough evidence. Remember, disclaimer is for gas, adverse is for gap and they're both no good. But you need to know which is which because on the exam, on the CPA exam, they will always try to trick you in telling you it's a gas issue and do you do an adverse? No, a gas issue is a disclaimer. For gap issue, you'll give an adverse. They're both no good. Now let's look at an example with a disclaimer. Remember, disclaimer is not good like the equivalent of, not the equivalent. Yeah, basically the equivalent of an adverse for gap. And basically what we said is we do not express an opinion on the financial statements of this company because the significance of the matter described in the basis for the disclaimer of the opinion section of our report. We have not been able to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to provide the basis. Now, if we go back here, if we kind of think about the sufficient appropriate evidence, remember the four conditions for the clean opinion. Let's look at the four conditions. One of them is sufficient appropriate evidence. So if we could not comply with this, that's it, we cannot give an unmodified opinion. Now we disclaim. Hopefully this makes sense, kind of tying it back to the clean opinion because the clean opinion require sufficient appropriate evidence. And here you're saying, I could not collect those appropriate sufficient evidence. So basically, we would still say we are independent and this is the remaining of the report. This is one we disclaim. Also remember we could give a qualified opinion. Basically a qualified opinion would read something like this in the report. And our opinion, except for, just like with the qualified opinion for gap, except for this issue, we are comfortable except with this issue, except for the effect of such adjustment, if any, as might have been determined to be necessary, had we been able to examine evidence regarding the foreign affiliates and earning. It seems this company have a foreign affiliate and we could not examine the foreign affiliates and their earning. Otherwise the financial statements present fairly. Here we are giving a qualified opinion. So here we explain it a little bit further. We are unable to obtain audited financial statements in supporting the company investment and a foreign affiliates stated at 12.5 million and 11.7 for 2018, 2017, so on and so forth. So we explain the issue. So notice except as discussed above, we conclude that the audit in accordance with the standard of the PCAOB. So this is a public company. So this is basically a example of a qualified opinion. Now remember we also sometime we may not be independent. If we were not independent, we disclaim. So let's take a look at the conditions. If the auditor is not independent as specified by the AI CPA code of professional conduct, which we talked about, we'll talk about this later on. Simply put, if we are not independent, we have some type of vested interest direct or indirect with the client, but we are required by law to issue a report. A disclaimer of opinion is required under those circumstances. So once you are not independent, you simply disclaim, you simply disclaim. You may not, you might have performed all the auditing procedures and you're comfortable with them.  The lack of independent also override any scope limitation. Any scope limitation, it doesn't matter. You would still, it's a disclaimer. Therefore no other reason for discriminant opinion should be cited. Just say, I'm not independent, that's it. That's good enough. You just say, I'm not independent and you move out. There should be no mention in the report on the performance of any audit procedures. You might have went through the audit, but you find out later that you are not independent. You don't say anything. You don't say, I went, you know, I did the audit and it looks good, but I'm not independent. You don't just don't say anything. Basically you would say, here we go. We are not independent with respect to this company and we do not express an opinion on them. So you don't say anything more than that. So it's easy. It's a short report. I'm not independent. I can't say anything. Although I might have did some auditing procedure. I'm comfortable with them, but I don't say anything. So this is basically disclaimer. Also this is a gas issue. Now in the next session, what I will do is I will try to summarize the various audit opinion and this way I can have put all the picture together. As always, I would like to remind you if you like the recording, please click on the like button, subscribe. Visit my website for additional resources. Studying for your CPA exam is a 20 to 30 year if not 40 year investment in your career.  Good luck.


e harm versus flourishing it's one piece of the puzzle it's not the entire argument alrighty any thoughts on that Trey any thoughts on that that's based off Nido alright cool alright it's mainly towards David so John $5 let's try to be quick here and then I'll put on the old tune that I had on the beginning there I've been trying to put on all our new tunes that me and my good friend Josh had played before he left it's a live take I don't know if it's even that great because I just found the beginning found the end volume tapered it and off we go so I don't know the voice cracks maybe my guitar is out of tune I don't know we'll find out John $5 Trey when Mary was impregnated by God did it happen with her volition what is the moral value of that versus rape she said I like for the YouTubes but yes it's already come out well did Mary consider herself to be violated we don't know well obviously she wasn't she was delighted to be able to have that look at her magnificent did Mary write that down or are you believing what a man wrote about a woman's account I'm reading about what her account was accurately recorded how do you know it was accurately recorded it was recorded by a man we just we went through this that the book of Luke is considered to be he's considered to be the greatest historian of antiquity doesn't mean he was right about everything well it does mean that he's a it doesn't mean he's right about reliable witnesses can be wrong about certain things and I think you taking a man's account of a woman being violated is about no it's her prayer is he with a live that's what we're told according to what a man wrote down whatever whatever next question yeah whatever a man wrote this stuff down and you're believing it as fact you don't know he could have been lying and what's the difference do you believe Pliny's work do you believe Heratis do you believe anything in antiquity it's all false we can't trust anything from antiquity it's a strong man Luke is the best, well no it's just silly you're just making excuse when you talk about history the things in actual history are things that are not that are still based on earth and within the physical world and then you want to pretend as though that a virgin being impregnated by a god and then giving birth is totally fine it's the exact same that claim is so much further far-fetched than anything else in history that you would it would require so much so many more mountains of evidence to prove it so historian wrote it down and he was also whatever he wrote down is fine can you give Luke the benefit of the same of any other historian if he has been verified through archaeology to be a very faithful and honest witness no because he says things that are physically impossible how do you know that because of the testable observable world and physics Luke makes claims that we know are impossible for science that's why they're called miracles it's impossible special pleading that's a special pleading fallacy and you know it no it's not that's exactly what it means alright well excuse me there I had a hardcore sneeze and I had to take a second there Sunfire $5 David nihilists aren't kind to poor people I'm sorry to break it to you I don't know that's true I don't know again that's a very broad claim nihilists don't exist because if they really believe what they believe they wouldn't eat okay I mean okay consistent nihilists people may call themselves that I would say to sunflower it seems as though you have a misunderstanding of various aspects of my world view and I really would love for you to go to my website and click be a guest davidseesmally.com come on my podcast ask me all the questions you want I'll be happy to explain my world view and accept your challenges I'll be in the hot seat you ask the questions I'll explain my world view and I'll have more time to do so that's where I'm coming from all ready well let's have one minute here to have closing statements and let everybody know what they'll find when they click on your link in the description so starting with you David Davidseesmally.com is my website I'm a comedian I wasn't very funny today but I am a touring stand up comedian I'm an actor I've been in a Nickelodeon TV show I've just filmed a movie it should be out in the next few months I'm hoping and the biggest thing you can do is text me it's actually a sign up for my text then I can respond to you and update you on what's going on and that phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER><PHONE_NUMBER> and you can always sign up for my podcast on my Patreon it's patreon.com Davidseesmally thanks for having me alrighty and Trey it was a pleasure to have you by the way David but over to you Trey yeah well thank you it was nice to meet you Ryan and David thank you for inviting me and hosting this conversation it was very enjoyable I think that in my case I was made a case for the Christian God beginning with existence and necessary being necessary for contingent being which we are and also for moral code I received no rebuttals whatsoever lots of obtuse cation and did not feel like there was even a challenge to my argument was this our closing statement or are we supposed to talk about our socials it was a closing statement I thought he said let people know what to find out in your links I didn't know this was our closing sorry if you wanted a moment to do some closing as well I'm sorry David that's okay so Trey you can wrap up so I don't have any I've got my YouTube channel down there I make teeth for a living so there's nothing special about me I don't have a podcast or anything like that I'm just a regular Jill but thank you for this opportunity it was very nice to meet both of you and I'm grateful for the audience here to give us your attention so thank you very much awesome it was a pleasure having you as well we did have two other super chats came in one from debunking ignorance I would classify that as just kind of attacking a speaker so I mean if you see that in the live chat that's up to you you paid for it but I warned you I wouldn't read any chats that were just coming at our speakers we want to promote the speakers that came on the channel here of their own time of volition we respect that so you should respect them as well so John $5 David can you talk more about why miracles require a different standard of proof than everyday events extraordinary claims extraordinary evidence yeah that's exactly what I was going to say extraordinary evidence I mean if you if you say that you bought a car yesterday I don't care if it's true or not it doesn't affect me in any way if you say I bought a car yesterday and I'd like to sell it to you now it matters now I need proof that you have the car right if you then say I need $3 million for the car because it was built by invisible fairies well that's an incredible claim that you should have incredible evidence to prove meaning I should be able to come in and see proof of the fairies or see the fairies meet the fairy princess and we go on and you know add absurd so I think it's as simple as extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence I recently talked in a podcast I just released actually about something I did years ago that I haven't really brought back but I should think about faith as a thermometer and the less evidence you have the more faith you need to believe that thing and when you get more evidence you need less faith to believe it this is often true with many inductive arguments things that have happened over and over and you can feel it's probably going to happen again things like that you need less faith to believe it and when you have all the evidence necessary your your faithometer is full of evidence requiring zero faith so if something that's not true there's no such thing as no faith all of us have faith so I'm going to keep talking about my analogy I didn't mean to interrupt you called a faithometer theory if you have very little evidence if you have very little evidence then you have to fill the rest of that with faith so it's a sliding scale of faith that's the idea and was that part of your closing statement or did you want to you know what I don't need a closing statement for this one everyone saw what happened so I'm good well I think we all had fun so that's the main thing alright I will close her down for now everybody and pop you over into a live take that I did a little while back so let's see how that turns out thanks to our speakers for being here thank you everybody in our chat see you next time the sun is in my brain it's as simple this communication but it's one so good to was it all too like a spill you forever sitting here in bold this communication but it's thanks all for coming out I hope you enjoyed the music we're going to be coming back with more juicy content here either tomorrow or Sunday I know I got something going on Sunday so stay tuned for that and cheers everybody have a good night my audio is still live how about that I mean yeah just listen to me breathe that's not weird so I'm trying to respond to people and you're like your mic's on alright