Me and two of my siblings have had marriages to facilitate work visas, permanent residence and access to health care during a pregnancy. (Also because we liked the other person, but like, we would have kept liking them regardless of whether we got married.)
Most pregnancies take a while, two weeks is plenty of time. Don't even get me started on how long immigration bureaucracy takes -- two weeks is a drop in the bucket.
In Ontario, the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act [1] requires that all owners/lessees of vehicles take out insurance policies. The Insurance Act [2] sets out that the minimum amount should be $200,000.
$200,000 is a much better floor than, for example, Ohio's $25,000. An Ohioan friend was injured by a motorist who had the minimum coverage. Her care cost more than that. The motorist who caused the injuries didn't have a lot of assets and she was unable to recover the excess from the motorist.
Still, there are some perhaps unintended downsides. Canadian rental car companies, as the owners of the vehicles, are obliged to provide $200,000 insurance as part of every contract. As a result, it seems there's not much market for them to sell excess liability insurance, and none do that I'm aware of. I, as someone who has plenty of assets to lose if I injured someone, would happily buy a higher liability insurance. Doubly so when I rent a car to travel to the US, since the terms of the contract are often "the rental car company will provide the minimum insurance required in the jurisdiction where the claim is incurred".
I agree that 200k is a much better minimum. Although I would think a deposit of $200k should be just as good as a policy of $200k... But the Ontario law doesn't allow for a deposit.
I wonder if there's a speciality business available in Ontario for single customer insurance, so individuals or businesses can self-insure without risk pooling.
From what I can figure out this is the longest one that: is on land. In/on a first world country (with a good level of logistical infrastructure) for the next 30-50 years.
There are other ones but the path of totality doesn’t pass completely on land or if it does it passes through Libya or something.
Such a procrastinator's response. Who knows where someone might be in their life in a few years, physically, medically, financially, whatevs. You might put off this to wait for something closer, but then the day of it's cloudy or something. If you have the chance to do it today, go for it. Plus, the more times the merrier.
However, if it's not your thing, then it's not your thing. Nothing anyone says will really change that. But discouraging someone else is kind of an asshat move
By all means, the OP should go. Eclipses are cool!
But they weren't asking if they should go, they were asking how to convince someone else to spend 30 hours travelling for 4 minutes of eclipse. My answer was that they should roll it into a larger trip, to amortize the cost.
I was giving them an opinion on how I'd feel in that person's shoes. And I say this as someone who has travelled for eclipses, and will travel for this one.
Google Sheets has an extensibility system: you write a React app that renders as a sidebar inside the sheets UI. This exposes a few additional API endpoints vs the vanilla sheets API. For example, you can determine the selected range, when a user has edited a value, changed sheets, etc. We use this in our add-on to help people select a range. Sounds like it might help for you, too!
The extensibility system also lets you show a modal dialog, which we use for previewing API calls to third party HTTP servers -- sounds like a similar thing could work well for you, too.
You could also look at supporting named ranges if you don't already, so people can refer to a range as `FinanceData` instead of `Sheet 1!A3:F90`
The SQLite limitations might also be solvable by sharding the databases (so each sees 1/N of the write volume), tiering them (so tiles that are written most recently are in file A, then file B, then file C), or a combination of these approaches.
I'm assuming the requirement is not really to build a single .mbtiles file, but to have some way for a process to serve the correct tile when given a z/x/y tuple.
You often want to build your own tiles for specialized applications. Any map schema is a tradeoff -- if you include every feature in every tile at every zoom level so that the renderer can pick and choose what to show, you bloat the tile file size.
The blog post is very light on details. My intuition is that this is primarily focused on powering the map on osm.org in service of people who edit OSM getting to see faster updates. This would be in keeping with their current raster tiles, which are not meant for use in "real" applications.
There are enough technical challenges in rolling out vector tiles with minutely updates for editors on OSM -- in my opinion, they should solve it for OSM first before thinking about committing to a specific schema for public use by other apps.
Still, anything that incentivizes innovation on vector tiles is pretty exciting. One option that could be interesting: provide "fat" builds of tiles that have every feature, and create tooling to do something akin to treeshaking so people can simplify the resulting tiles to only contain the features they need for their use case.
It seems unlikely to me that the OSMF did something shady in exchange for the promise of 6,000 Euros from Cesium.
The OSM Buildings folks called themselves "OSM Buildings", using the OSM trademark. They offered a commercial service. The OSMF was OK with this. It seems the OSMF is OK with a lot of things -- including permitting Cesium to use the OSM mark in their own commercial project.
Live and let live, may a thousand flowers bloom, etc.
Rather than reflect on the fact that their name was not really theirs, but relied on the goodwill of the OSM mark, the OSM Buildings folks decided to ragequit and shut down their project, dramatically claiming that their name was "seized by a multimillion dollar company"?
I was trying to understand it from both sides and not getting much. Some of your color helps too (like the euro amounts). It all was bizarre and sadly the whole thing blocked some progress.
I had come back to temper my response because for sure this is great work by the tech team.
Some more colour is that the OSM Buildings project didn't even ask permission to use the OSM mark. If they were a community project, this was permissible. If they were a commercial project, they ought to have sought permission from the OSMF.
Given that, it seems pretty reasonable to me that the OSMF's stance was basically: your name is your problem, if you think someone is infringing on it, it's up to you to enforce it.
The OSMF runs on a shoestring budget - something like $400,000/year, vs Wikimedia Foundation, which runs on $170,000,000/year. It would be a real shame if a potential donor thought this particular instance was a reason not to donate to the OSMF.
Came here to say this - looks awfully like OSM data and no attribution.
I'm also not clear on whether Google likes displaying OSM data on their map; it's a strange combination. I can't ever remember seeing "Copyright Google, Copyright OpenStreetMap contributors" in the footer of a page.
I tend to agree with the OP. The potential employer is starting the relationship on a deceitful basis.
There's a reason people absolutely drag recruiters who do this - it's because it's slimy. At least with a recruiter, the company has a degree of insulation.
If the CEO is going to send emails claiming they've pre-screened you, are excited about talking to you and that they will get back to you if you submit an application, then it's reasonable for people to call them out when they don't do this.
Most pregnancies take a while, two weeks is plenty of time. Don't even get me started on how long immigration bureaucracy takes -- two weeks is a drop in the bucket.