It's not about the format of the data, but the content. Personal Information (PI) can only be shared with consent, and only for clearly specified purposes. That's the Bad Thing they're reporting on, albeit somewhat poorly.
And there's strong(er) privacy laws is California USA, the EU, Switzerland, and the UK. That's just off the top of my head. So not just EU law being broken here.
London could just require they be left in designated bike parking. The plus side being that London would have to build far more bike parking, which is sorely needed in any case.
Go one step further and require the companies to ensure their bikes/scooters are returned to the corretc spots.
Fine the owner (the scooter company) and/or impound it and have them reclaim it (or auction it off if they don't reclaim it). Let the company deal with passing fines through to customers if they improperly abandon it.
But that's easily exploitable: if I see that dickhead neighbour of mine parking up a scooter legally, I can go out there, drag it out a few meters to where it's illegal, and guess who gets the fine? The last user? Wahey!
Or if I have a particular hatred of these scooters, what's stopping me from moving them to be illegally parked and raking up fines? I suppose they'd need constant surveillance (e.g. onboard cameras), but hey, why not, don't we all love our Ring doorbells? /s
Or they'd need to have designated closed off areas to park them, and maybe attendants. Maybe they could get away with something like bike locks using public bike parking spaces. In any case, how to avoid fines for abandoning property all over the city should be their problem.
Yes, I agree. And I think the obvious outcome is that the fines would be unavoidable, in that the solutions would be financially prohibitive. Thus, scooters would be effectively banned from the city.
The scooter vendor here, Bird, requires that the rider snaps a photo of the scooter as it is parked after any given ride. This assures the company that the scooter was parked properly, and it tends to indemnify the rider against later claims that it was not.
I can't speak for Paris specifically but we have infrastructure for e-scooters; It's bike lanes. If you have a bike lane available, you must use it. If not, the city has decided that mixing bikes/scooters/et. al. with cars is reasonable to do so at that location.
Failing, inadequate bike infrastructure is the real problem in most cases.
It is forbidden to ride eScooters here on the sidewalk. While my area has copious amounts of bicycle lanes, I would never, ever ride an eScooter in one. The scooters top out at around 17mph and are definitely not human-powered bicycles. I always ride in a traffic lane, because that is my right under the law. I am, of course, courteous to faster traffic as much as possible, but the main lanes are still my right, and I will not be intimidated or shamed out of using them appropriately. (Believe me, they try!)
Scooters are a lot less stable and faster, and I'd argue not all bike infrastructure that's "good enough" for bikes is also "good enough" for these scooters. I'd feel uncomfortable using them in half the places where I'm comfterable cycling (so I'd use the footpath).
I know that many smaller therapists use Zoom for exactly the reasons you mentioned above - ease of use. They often don't have the technical know-how to assess the technology they're using.
The UK, for example, has hundreds of private mental health practitioners (therapists, psychologists, etc.) that provice their services directly to clients. They almost universally use off-the-shelf technology for video calling, messaging, and reporting.
I've had similar experiences with UK recruiters, and heard the same from colleagues and friends in the industry. Recruiters there seem to gather a lot of applicants for a role, promise the world, then drop most of them.
I have had good recruiters in the UK but they're few and far between.
Best to treat them like company contacts. Let them apply for a role or two for you, and contact somebody else for another role. I used a dozen recruiters at any one time when I was last applying in the UK.
It would be terrible loss to convert those business spaces into residential. One or two could be changed, as retail needs change over time, but removing possible retail and third space from near people's homes means less walkable neighborhoods.
Where I live, we have short term reuse laws that allow retail spaces to be used for residential, social, or other uses on a fixed basis. Typically a few years. The idea being to review the reassignment when the local needs change.
We get a lot of kindergartens that use these spaces, but also pharmacies, social clubs, and offices. Easy to move in and out.
Why do the ground floors have to be designated by the government as retail or residential? Is it impossible to say it can be either, as long as the requirements for whichever one (e.g. ventilation, fire safety) are met?
Out of all five you've shared here (the three built in and these two), Trip is my favorite. The visualization seems fuller, maybe because it uses the whole width/height. It grabs my attention more than the others.
There's no issue with a non-free API, the issue is the pricing they've decided on and the timescale they've given to adopt it. 30 days notice isn't long enough to adopt a new pricing strategy, especially one so unreasonably priced.
