The problem is there is a huge increase in accidents and as a consequence deaths and serious injury in the days after the time change.

This isn't a theoretical thing, it is something that happens now, every year. Not changing times would largely eliminate these issues as people wouldn't be struggling with the interruption to their sleep schedules. (Both the kids walking and people driving)

Keeping kids safe walking to school is a problem that has already been solved - better road infrastructure that prioritises pedestrians rather than cars, enforced (lower) speed limits, etc.

Legacy G-Suite admins get to opt-out of AdSense so Google has likely not been tracking or showing ads in gmail for those users on the free tier.

I've been (for personal use) using Legacy G-Suite almost since the start. I would say keeping the users they promised free forever even if they are businesses is fair. All those users effectively beta-tested Google Workspace in a way that Google wasn't likely to be able to recreate on their own.

The Google of 2022 is a very different company to the Google of 2007/2008 that created this situation though. Back then Google was keen on doing cool stuff for free. These days the company seems to have grown up and realised that they, like pretty much all other businesses, need to actually return a profit on pretty much everything they do.

In Toronto (and the rest of N. America) Pedestrians have right of way over turning traffic in a controlled intersection only when they have a Walk shown. In this instance, the cyclist was proceeding through a junction having been shown a green ball when a pedestrian crossed his path. Stepping out like that is illegal in Toronto, so called jay-walking. If the pedestrian were still on the cross walk and the light just turned green, then the cyclist should be yielding to the pedestrian, but this wasn't the case.

I doubt the pedestrian's legal costs will be assigned to the cyclist, with shared responsibility they will have to carry their own legal costs. There are no punitive damage awards in the UK either. If the pedestrian missed work due to the head injury then that lost earning potential would likely be the compensation, so am sure the cyclist will be out of pocket less than £1000.

One of the key factors in Elop's choice has to be the €200 million to be paid every quarter so called "platform support payments". If your device sales are falling (which Symbian devices were) you are going to grab that lifeline. This more than offset the cost of each operating system license for each Lumia device sold. The N950 and N9 were already majorly delayed, although, that was more about the software rather than the device. The Hardware was ready for market at least a year before the software was, which is why it launched with mid-tier specifications rather than the high-end device it was originally expected to be.

Whilst I dislike what happened to Nokia and in the end caused me to lose my job there, it isn't all Elop's fault. A lot of the blame has to be laid at the feet of the board of directors. They wanted a new direction and found someone who had the balls or perhaps arrogance to take Nokia there. No Finn would have taken the Microsoft option. No Finn would have likely put Symbian to bed, even though it was beyond saving. The seeds of this also fall on the the head of Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo. An accountant put in charge, sure, he made Nokia incredibly profitable for a bit, but lacked vision and leadership when brave choices needed to be made.

No, that is not good enough. You do not know whether the data was sorted prior to the random numbers being applied. The flaw in their algorithm of assigning numbers could be discriminatory towards names (if it is sorted by name) that start with a certain letter.

Given that the number of people with names that start with a certain letter are pretty much on consistent bell curve, it is not hard to envision that if you have a certain name, and the list is sorted such that name is in an area of cells that the Random number gives higher numbers to, you are statistically disadvantaged relative to someone's whom's name is in a more advantageous position on that bell curve.

The lottery invites applications over the course of a month (like Feb 5th to Mar 5th). If the applications are inserted in the order they are received then there is a distinct advantage to applying early, late or in the middle. The previous method of application selection was done on a first come first served basis and this was considered to be "unfair".

The point is that you should have an equal chance of winning no matter when in that period you apply, what your name is, or any other field that you supply. The data in their list has an implied order, otherwise they wouldn't have needed to use some half-baked implementation of a lottery. Really, they should have just thrown dice.

I should point out after 3 draws of this lottery, I have failed to have my name chosen. To find out that the algorithm for selecting names is flawed is deeply disturbing and an issue I will be raising with my representative in parliament.

I think the journalists who wrote the article think that they can prove that not everyone who applies has an equal chance of winning.

I'm not 100% sure about N.America, but in Europe at least, the vast majority of cyclists you see have driving licenses and even own a car, but are just choosing not to use it. Yes, there is a subset of cyclists who flaunt traffic laws, although, I've yet to see any statistics to say what sort of percentage actually do this. (It is probably far lower than people think)
On a daily basis driving (or cycling) around Toronto I see many cars passing through traffic lights at red, especially in the case of a left turn.

in London, UK, there was a study performed to work out why (as a percentage) female cyclists were involved in more accidents than male cyclists. One of the conclusions was the fact that a male cyclist was more likely to move off before the traffic signal turned green, jumping the red light. Although, I suspect that is not what you are referring too. An unnerving number of cyclists do just blow through a red light without any hesitation, which is not a smart thing to be doing.

I sympathise with your pedestrian anecdote, cyclists if they are riding on the footpath (legally or not) should always be courteous to pedestrians. Although, you should really not take offence at a cyclist ringing their bell at you. When riding my bike I am more than aware of the fact I am almost silent so ringing a bell from a sufficient distance does warn pedestrians you are approaching, it certainly should not be interpreted as an aggressive act on the part of the cyclists. Shouting and being aggressive though, if you don't appear to notice, is totally out of order. (for all the cyclists knows, you may be deaf)
(And yes, whilst my bike technically is legal to ride on the side walk in Toronto, I do not do it)

Merging into a lane is a co-operative event, it is up to the road user wishing to move over to signal their intention and wait for a suitable space to move into. It matters nothing that the speeds are different, it is your responsibility as a following road user to be alert for other road users merging and adjust your speed accordingly, or move over to an adjacent lane (if one exists). Yes, if there isn't a safe space between you and the person in front and the person merging dives in (with or without signalling intent) then it is likely if an accident occurs they are at fault. This is no different no matter which type of road user is merging into traffic.

What happens a lot of the time is that people see a cyclist, bus, garbage truck, old person in a car signalling a merge and they speed up to close the gap. If there is a resultant collision it would at least partially be the fault of the road user who sped up in response to the signalling, as they have done the opposite to what is reasonable. If you are a Garbage Truck or a Bus, you pull over anyway (most of the time) as they are not intimidated, but others?

When I am riding in Toronto, I signal my intent to move to the left lane, to make a turn and I wait for a suitable gap in the traffic. You learn to judge the speed of the traffic and how far from the Intersection you need to make your lane change to do it safely and avoid annoying other road users unnecessarily. Yes, sometimes a vehicle will need to slow, but never in an abrupt fashion.

If we're going for the separate cycle lane approach, then the only way it can work safely is if cyclists heading straight on (in the cycle lane) have right of way over motorists making a turn. This is the case anyway, both with cyclists in the near side lane and pedestrians on a side walk. (Unless, in the case of the pedestrians, the cross walk is flashing before they step into road).

To solve the left turn is simple too, you show green to cyclists ahead of the regular traffic signal. They can then perform their left turn, whilst the traffic is held at red. This does mean the cyclists would have to wait for the appropriate phase in the cycle at the Intersection to make their left turn.

Cycling around cities in Denmark and Holland show that this infrastructure can be made to work (and retro-fitted to cities). Sadly, giving road space over to cyclists (at least in Toronto and I suspect a lot of other cities in the world) is politically unpalatable, even if it ultimately is the best for everyone.

Feature Phones are devices that were designed around a specific purpose or feature. Examples of the Feature Phone are: The Nokia 6800, its feature being fold out qwerty keyboard and email. The Nokia 5310, with music controls. Nokia 8800, style and quality over function. Realistically the original iPhone was a "Feature Phone" with its feature being touch-screen input.

The idea is that users buy a device based around the feature(s) they are most interested in. In the days before carrying touch-screen computers, it is a reasonable idea to target devices in this way. Compromise the general purpose of the device a little to accentuate other features. With a large touch-screen and more powerful processors such compromises aren't needed to be made as the UI is not limited to the standard 4x3 keypad with a small screen.

An $85 + Tax (at 14%) plan in Ontario will get you pretty much unlimited nation wide calling and 1GB of Data (on an LTE Network) you will also get Voice Mail and Caller Id. That costs near enough $100. Plus, if you want to have a recent phone you will have to pony up at least $100 or more up front. In the UK (where I lived until last year) you were looking at perhaps $55 (including tax at 20%) for a similar contract.

You can go cheaper in Canada, the almost cartel-like companies that control the mobile industry in Canada have lower tier "Networks" that offer cheaper contracts (the $85 plan above can be found for $60) but you have to sacrifice not being able to have access to the latest handsets. Finally there are the third tier "Networks" that have next to no coverage, outside of city centres, where you can find a similar plan for about $40, without a device and no LTE.

None of these plans are generous in their allowances. Wind (a seller of the $40 plans) claims to provide "unlimited data" but realistically that is subject to a Fair Use Agreement which means anything over 6GB you are asked to pay more, or have your bandwidth reduced)

Canada is probably one of the most expensive places to own a mobile phone

I doubt Smartphones will make serious in-roads to the African market soon. Do not forget that most of the phones used in Africa are not new devices and have had several owners. Given most modern smartphones are rather fragile items and sensitive to moisture & dust, I doubt they will have that much longevity. (Think of how indestructible feature phones were a decade ago and mostly are today) Having a non-replaceable battery would rule out a lot of current smart phone devices too.

Also, the top "features" for a phone in Africa are Torch and Radio, neither of which are top on the list of smartphone features.

You are correct, power is a big problem with smartphones. "Power" comes from people who ride a bike (or walk) into a city and purchase a car battery that is charged. Or connect to the village's car battery connected to wind/solar electricity sources. The people peddling around with car batteries is also where top-up credit is purchased from.

Nokia's moniker for this market was "Internet for the Next Billion", trying to raise the level of device in use beyond basic GSM handsets. Nokia were well aware that the relationship with this market was one that was at arm's length. Perhaps a village could pool resources to purchase a phone (Nokia sell kits for longer range external antennas, solar/car battery charging points, etc) but that was about as direct a relationship Nokia had.

One of the key factors that tipped the decision to go with Microsoft is that is was popular with the Network Operators. They, like Nokia, feared the increasing influence Google was having over the mobile phone market. Android was becoming a household name. They were excited by the idea that Nokia would bring out Windows Phone devices. I suspect the deals to supply the North American Operators would have been impossible if Nokia had gone with Android.

I am sure Nokia probably could have made Meego work, especially considering they were pushing their massive feature phone market towards a binary compatible Eco-system with Qt. The sad fact is that it was taking too long. Meego and the Linux feature phone was bogged down with the same bureaucracy that effectively killed Symbian. Also the strategy would have provided probably strong sales in China, Europe (apart from the UK & Germany), India and Africa. It would have struggled like everything before it in the North American market which Nokia coveted so strongly. I am sure the sales of WIndows Phone in the N.American market is being trumpeted as a huge success internally given that they are selling better than any previous offering there.

One myth that probably should die is that this was brought about by Elop. The decisions were almost certainly made by the board of directors and they found the CEO that could deliver on the strategy. Which is why there is a Canadian (and former Microsoft man) at the top now rather than a Finnish or even a European. It is why it couldn't be someone from within Nokia either. (until Elop's appointment the company's ethos was very much that Microsoft was the enemy, ie the attitude that lead to the creation of Symbian in the 1990s.) There is no way in the time from his appointment to the burning plaform memo could he have forced such a change in direction, he just isn't that good a leader.

Turning off support for syncing Symbian/S60 devices will also cripple the non-Symbian devices that support Mail For Exchange; the N9, N900 and N950.