I dont think that's true in canada. IANAL but i was under the impression that if you are fired you are still allowed to stay until your work permit expires. Its only usa that has the problem you describe.
The grace period can vary wildly by country and, often, by the type of visa or work permit you hold. Just in my own sphere of experience, for example:
- Hong Kong GEP holders can stay for the length of their original permit, while people on domestic help visas get only 14 days
- EU Blue Card and Japanese work visa holders get 90 days
- US H-1B holders get 60 days
- Singaporean EP and Chinese Z-visa holders get 30 days
Of course there are ways to extend all of these (and some are much easier than others) but you can't legally work unless and until you find a new sponsor.
In Canada, one can stay until it expires but they aren't allowed to work for anyone else in that time. (some will let you look for work for varying times)
To my reading the house was destroyed in “mysterious” fire, and then demolished for use as a car park by the adjacent hotel. The court ruled that the hotel owner must pay replacement cost for the house.
I was wondering... why does a hotel, on an island, need a carpark?
I checked it on Google and it looks like the house was near the pier so it makes sense that residents might park their cars there to head to the mainland.
I feel that you're really overselling the vulnerability of what is fundamentally a spec on a featureless ocean that can move at 50 km/h in any direction indefinitely. There's a pretty comprehensive summary of anti-carrier strategies in this series https://www.navalgazing.net/Carrier-Doom-Part-1
This is astoundingly cheap. In fact its too cheap, €10/month works out to €360 + €130 over a 3 year hardware cycle which is barely enough for a not-really-capable 4k GPU as it is, without costing all the additional services/hardware. And to put it bluntly, these games are second-rate titles from the last year. From this announcement I guess that this is mostly just another data farming play that will never generate a profit on its own and has a very high chance of being shutdown within 3 years.
I'm astounded at HN's ability to spin anything as a negative.
> these games are second-rate titles from the last year
since when were games like AC: Odyssey or BL3 "second rate"?
Of course they aren't going to have all games (out of the gate, we can assume they are working on licensing) or have exclusive titles (for obvious reasons).
Also not sure if it'd just a licensing issue. I think all the games might very well be modded to run on Stadia servers. May be the renders are optimized to send out compressed video over the wire instead of a video output. Totally speculating but I think it's likely that the games need to be integrated into the Stadia platform somehow.
iirc they support games made with certain engines out-of-the-box. Ironically, I think I heard that it's the Unreal Engine (sorry, Epic Games Store...). AC:O and BL3 seem to support that theory.
>I'm astounded at HN's ability to spin anything as a negative.
Usually I'm right there with you, but Google doesn't exactly have a good public perception around products and services without good profit margins. If they're not making money from it, it could be shut down at any moment (even for paid physical hardware, like the Nexus Q). "Too cheap" is a real fear.
You buy in at $170.
You subscribe for the 4k offering @ $10 / month.
They shutter the service after 1 year after you've paid $120 in monthly fees.
In total, you're out $290. You got a "free" Chromecast Ultra ($60), so you're only out $210.
That's honestly not that bad. Sure, you could have just bought a new XBox One S, but the value of those degrade over time, as well and, as much as MS wants you to believe it, the One S is not a 4K system. It's hard to measure the value of the entertainment you got using it. In my case, I definitely would have achieved $210 in entertainment value out of the system over the course of a year.
Maybe they'll revisit the pricing in a year instead of just cancelling it...
So you've paid $290 (plus the cost of the games) for one year of service, and that's not that bad? I don't know about you, but I have an Xbox One and it's lasted me more than one year for the $300 I paid for it, 4k or not.
I'm not even entirely sure what you're arguing... that it's okay to pay $300/yr for a video game system plus the cost of video games? That if you paid $300 for an Xbox and Microsoft discontinued the system after a year you'd be okay with the price?
Assuming the worst like you have, you paid $300 for a video game system that didn't include any video games and after a year you weren't allowed to play it anymore. That's pretty fucking awful. Even if Microsoft stops making the Xbox One, you still get to keep playing the games you bought.
You are not taking into account for the fact that the hardware will be used constantly by multiple people on and on. I play on average 1 hour of video game a day, multiply that by 24, or 12 or 6 to be more conservative, you are still getting a good margin on hardware cost.
He's right though, 10 is not enough. For fractional gpu use, bandwidth, electricity, and engineering, service support, business dev, and marketing salaries at the google level? Even if we assume that they can run 100 users on each GPU, that wouldn't be enough. (They can't run 100 users on each gpu, but even if they could.)
There's some other play here? Not really sure what google's strategy is, but these prices make it clear they don't need to make money.
I wonder if they will use high-end servers with GPUs that can be used for serving stadia gaming users during peak gaming hours, and then for tasks like number crunching and machine learning during off hours?
For comparison, Hetzner is offering dedicated i7-6700/64GB/1 TB SSD/GTX 1080/"unlimited" bandwidth for €94/month (no installation fee) [1]. Due to their business model, I assume this is a price that also generates them a healthy profit.
The stadia pricing does not sound completely unfeasible when taking into account the 130€, another 70€ from the extra controller, cut from game sales and the fact that casual gamers do not spend their days play the most computationally demanding titles. Some extra €€ would come from family plans and there might be some synergies with their cloud computing business (for example using spare capacity from GCE for Stadia).
I'm genuinely still unsure if this is a parody or not. The first half of the comic just describes Google's business model and the second seems to be trying to outsource the cost of G/TPUs to the end user. Then at the end they go bankrupt and (presumably) sell their control over the data to a vulture fund.
None of this addresses the fundamental problem of advertising companies, once people learn what they're doing they just want them to feck off and leave them alone, without any regard for future promises.
I’m intrigued by their “5k” with 25 hero mention. Are the bots worse because they have less proportional training time or because the extra hero abilities are making it more difficult to rely on their deathball strat? Considering how every public performance of openAI has shown nothing but relentless aggression Id speculate that it’s the latter.
It's unlikely an urban fire department is set up for any significant amount of drafting (pulling water from surface sources), if it's something they can do at all.
You're absolutely right though, if you want big water, that's the way to get it. It's just that "big water" doesn't even begin to approach the scale of the water that would be necessary to directly fight this fire.
It's unlikely an urban fire department is set up for any significant amount of drafting (pulling water from surface sources), if it's something they can do at all.
SFFD trucks have that capability, and it was used in the 1989 earthquake. It's intended for pulling water from the underground cisterns marked by a big ring of bricks in SF intersections.
Terrible for the equipment to run salt water, but they had to.
I thought SFFD was some brand used by the French, but of course it's just USA-centric naming. (Took me forever to understand BART and I still have to look up name-based time zones like MST, which, no, thanks Wikipedia, is not Malaysia Standard Time at +8 but Mountain time at -7.)
For anyone else confused: this earthquake was in San Francisco and this is about their Fire Department. It doesn't mean that French fire trucks have that capability 30 years later.
It's unlikely an urban fire department is set up for any significant amount of drafting (pulling water from surface sources), if it's something they can do at all.
My understanding, which is probably quite out of date, is that it's mostly harbor firefighting boats which had this ability.
A coworker of mine points out that many of the San Francisco manholes are actually covers for cisterns of water, which exist primarily for fighting fires after an earthquake possibly takes out the water mains and starts many fires. I should hope that San Francisco fire trucks can draft water to use these.
Park the truck next to the cistern. Connect a length of hose to the pump supply, drop the hose into the cistern. The pump will move water until it loses suction pressure.
Is the hose to be dropped into the cistern different from the other hoses? I would expect it to be reinforced, such that it wouldn't collapse from air pressure. Hoses downstream from a high pressure pump wouldn't need such reinforcement. However, it's different upstream from such pumps.
You can recognize the cisterns because there are big (like 20 ft in diameter) brick circles inlaid into the street in SF to mark the cisterns. Neat once you know what to look for
> It's unlikely an urban fire department is set up for any significant amount of drafting (pulling water from surface sources), if it's something they can do at all.
London Fire Brigade for example has nine special pumps that can draw 2000 gallons a minute each from river or lake supplies. So that's 18,000 gallons a minute just from them.
Yeah, but that's not "a significant amount". It's certainly less than half of what you would need to fight this fire head on. That's also assuming all those engines are in-service, staffed, and can get there and get set up within a reasonable amount of time.
I would expect the fire department of a large city with navigable waterways to have fireboats, though, which by their very nature draft water. Even if the boat's own nozzles don't reach. they can generally be used as pumps for hoses on shore.
The devil is in the details. A "short" distance on a "small" island might well amount to a huge amount of hose. Then there's the logistics of getting all of that in place and hooked up. The trucks on site would need to pump to increase the pressure to usable levels, and all of that would have to be compatible. Getting enough trucks onsite might be a logistical challenge just in itself.
The real world is complex. It's not all like software or taking multiple choice exams. Again the devil is in the details. Pay really close attention to the map legend. It looks like there's nearly 200 feet of distance from the closest water shown on that map and the nearest side of the cathedral. I really doubt that all fire trucks carry 200 feet of hard suction hose, or have pumps designed to draft through 200 feet of hard hose.
"The NFPA 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus – Requires pumpers to carry:
15 feet of large soft sleeve hose or 20 feet of hard suction hose"
You would never try to draft through 200 feet of hard suction. In fact, I'm relatively sure it would be impossible, since no matter how well you tighten the connections, there's pretty much always going to be a minute amount of vacuum loss at each coupling. In practice, few fire departments ever draft though more than 20 feet (2 sections) of hard suction, and even then it can be a challenge getting the pump primed, depending on any elevation difference between the water surface and the engine location, etc.
In real life, if you were going to draft in an environment like this, (leaving aside any reference to fire boats for a moment), you'd drive an engine to within 20' or so of the water, have it draft, and then relay water to the fire scene using (usually) 5" LDH. But sometimes even getting an engine to within 20' of the water can be a challenge, based on the geography and circumstances.
If the body of water you're drafting from is (strongly) subject to tides, that adds another complicating factor as your water source is now moving around, which could require constant re-positioning of the apparatus.
Lay people always see fires near large bodies of water and think "Why is water supply a problem, they're surrounded by water?!?" But it's often more complicated than that.
Source: was a firefighter and firefighting instructor for about a decade in a former life.
Also, even if you had a pump by the river, hand-jacking that length of LDH requires a huge amount of physical effort, and would tie up a lot of manpower during a critical phase of the operation.
I don't have to pay close attention to the map. I've been there. It is absolutely close enough to the river to have hoses running directly from it. The fact that they didn't use it suggests it probably wasn't such a good idea, we are only dudes writing on the internet, they are firefighters with experience doing their job.
I wasn't able to find any hard sources, but I don't see any evidence that the Paris Fire Brigade has any boats with any significant pumping capacity. Most of their boats seem to be rescue/dive focused, with small master stream deck guns.
Yeah, I've seen at least two draft lines running. But at best that's going to be 3-4k GPM. Enough for a couple of those big water streams. You'd need >10x that to fight a fire like this head on (which they clearly didn't have, since they immediately went to salvage and exposure protection measures)
The Seine is not directly beside Notre Dame. It’s a steep drop and 200-300ft away depending on angles. A standard fire hose is 50ft. A supply/relay hose is typically 100ft. They can’t just hook up a few hoses, dunk them in the Seine, and then instantly put the fire out.
There were notable logistical issues to get enough firefighters on-site given it’s an island, and there were a ton of people around when the fire broke out. They wound up having 400 firefighters on-site until midnight to get it under control and save the structure. I’m pretty confident they did all they could, and HN’s armchair firefighters aren’t likely to have done any better.
