A San Francisco-based startup just raised $15 million to solve the complicated problem of transit infrastructure in urban environments. Remix was founded by Tiffany Chu, Dan Getelman, Danny Whalen, and Sam Hashemi in 2014 following a project they built during their Code For America fellowships.
The $15 million Series B round was led by Energy Impact Partners, bringing total funding to $27 million.
Remix allows cities to plan public transit infrastructure, quickly computing how a change in a certain bus or train route or the addition of a bike lane might affect the city overall, all through a drag and drop menu. The platform also looks at how to manage private transportation options like ridesharing, dockless bikes and scooters, etc.
“This is an industry that has changed faster in the last five years than it did in the last 50,” said Chu, cofounder and COO. “One of our challenges is explaining to people, the community, what are the impacts of certain decisions around the way things have always been?”
One of the ways Remix measures its own success and allows its users to do the same is through a metric called Jane. Jane is an icon that you can drop anywhere on the map and see how far that fictional person can travel in 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes, and how many jobs they might have access to based on changes in the public transit.
More than 300 cities are using the Remix platform, and the company says that 100 million+ people will be impacted by plans that are either completed or in progress.
Alongside helping cities make better decisions for the community, it also helps those governments better express their decision-making process. This is especially important as governments and citizens weigh the impacts of single-occupancy vehicles on the environment. The EPA says that transportation accounts for 28 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions.
“Parking is such a huge, huge point of contention for every city and being able to explain to somebody why a transit lane or a bike lane or a parklet might be more beneficial for the community at large as opposed to having people freak out over removal of two parking spots,” said Chu. “That’s a shifting conversation we, as an industry, need to have in order for everyone to start moving in the right direction, away from single occupancy vehicles.”
Remix is currently working with a wide variety of markets, including HonoLulu, Auckland, Dallas, Seattle and New York.
from TechCrunch https://tcrn.ch/2u3nVnT
- In 2019, daylight-saving time (or DST) begins on Sunday, March 10 at 2 a.m. Clocks move forward one hour at that time.
- The practice started in the US the early 1900s as a way to conserve energy. Today many Americans think the it’s no longer worth the hassle.
- Research also suggests DST time shifts cause more problems than they solve.
- There are two main ways we could get rid of DST: Create fewer time zones or move to one universal time.
It’s almost time for the start of daylight-saving time, and you should be furious.
This Sunday — March 10, 2019 — most clocks in North America will advance themselves by one hour at 1:59 a.m., altogether skipping the 2 o’clock hour and moving straight to 3:00 a.m. Owners of any analog clocks will have to manually adjust them.
This is only the beginning of the woes caused by one of the world’s dumbest rituals — a tradition that’s long overdue for abolishment.
Daylight-saving time, or DST, has existed as a concept since at least the late 1800s. However, it gained most of its traction during World War I as a way to cut energy use: Not waking up in the dark, the thinking went, would decrease fuel use for lighting and heating, and this would help boost energy supplies for the war effort.
In the US, the practice was implemented year-round in 1942, during WWII. (Much of Europe starts its variant of DST, called summer time, on the last Sunday in March.)
Decades later, though, the US is a divided nation on this topic. A 2012 Rasmussen poll of 1,000 American adults found that 45% thought daylight-saving was worth it, while more than 40% considered it worthless. In 2017, about 41% of Americans polled by Princeton said losing an hour in the spring was disruptive, while about 55% of people in the same poll disagreed. (I’m not sure what planet the latter group is from.)
As of today, people have sent about 164,582 messages to Congress for a never-ending (and often comical) petition to end DST in the US. Some of the public comments are practical appeals.
"I own a child care [center], every year we have children crying because, ‘it’s getting dark and mommy or daddy have not picked me up yet.’ They don’t understand," wrote an anonymous signer from Crestline, Ohio.
"This is the worst energy wasting garbage idea ever conceived," said David D. from Losa Angeles, California
Others issued blunt emotional appeals.
"Please stop this, everyone hates it," said D.H. from Swedesboro, New Jersey.
I’m with them, and here’s why.
What’s the problem with DST?
According to advocacy groups like Standardtime.com, which are trying to abolish daylight-saving time, claims about energy savings are unproven.
"If we are saving energy, let’s go year-round with daylight-saving time," the group says. "If we are not saving energy, let’s drop daylight-saving time!"
In his book "Spring Forward: The Annual Madness of Daylight-Saving Time," author Michael Downing says there isn’t much evidence that daylight-saving actually decreases energy use.
In fact, sometimes DST seems to increase energy use.
For example, in Indiana — where daylight-saving time was implemented statewide in 2006 — researchers saw that people used less electricity for light, but those gains were canceled out by people who used more air conditioning during the early evenings. That’s because 6 p.m. felt more like 5 p.m., when the sun still shines brightly in the summer and homes haven’t had the chance to cool off.
DST also increases gasoline consumption, something Downing says the petroleum industry has known since the 1930s. This is probably because evening activities — and the vehicle use they require — increase with that extra daylight.
Changing the clocks also causes air travel synchronization headaches, which sometimes leads to travel delays and lost revenue, airlines have reportedly said.
There are also health issues associated with changing the clocks. Similar to the way jet-lag makes you feel out of whack, daylight-saving time is like scooting one time zone over. This can disrupt our sleep, metabolism, mood, stress levels, and other bodily rhythms. One study suggests recovery can take three weeks.
Reasons to keep daylight-saving time
Despite those early studies about energy use, one analysis from 2008 did find a small amount of energy savings after we extended DST by four weeks in 2005.
According to the Christian Science Monitor:
"Most advocates cite a 2008 report to Congress by the Department of Energy which showed that total electricity savings from the extended daylight-saving period amounted to 1.3 terawatt-hours, or 0.03 percent of electricity consumption over the year. That’s a tiny number. But if electricity costs 10 cents per kilowatt, that means an estimated $130 million in savings each year."
More evening light also inspires people to go out and spend money.
Downing told NPR that this comes in the form of activities like shopping and playing golf; in 1986, the golf industry told Congress that an extra month of daylight-saving was worth $200 million. The barbecue industry said extending DST would boost sales by $100 million.
Extending daylight-saving time to November might also help the Halloween industry — the longer kids can trick-or-treat, the more candy you need to buy.
Plus, changing the law can be expensive. One legislature representative in Alberta, Canada, suggested that holding a referendum on DST may cost the province $2 to $6 million, even if it were put into a standard election ballot, and that holding a no-DST vote on its own might cost $22 million to organize and execute.
Still, some US states have managed to abolish DST, at least partly, and more keep attempting it.
A world divided over time
Other areas of the world have gotten rid of daylight-saving time, or never had it to begin with.
The map above shows the breakdown. Blue areas observe DST, red areas never have, and orange areas once did but have since abolished it.
Morocco is the country that most recently abolished DST. As the map also shows, some parts of the US have chosen not to observe daylight-saving time, including most of Arizona (excluding the Navajo and Hopi reservations in the northeast), and until 2006, parts of Indiana.
A bill to abolish DST was once recommended for passage in Oklahoma, but it was not signed into law. A lawmaker in Utah also introduced legislation to try to abolish DST, but his bill died in committee. Similarly, the "Sunshine Protection Act of 2018" in Florida failed to be enacted.
In California, though, 59.75% of voters in the 2018 midterm election approved a measure to lock time in DST, though only with a two-thirds vote by the state legislature.
Standardtime.com has a unique suggestion about how to address this DST problem.
Their proposal is to split the continental US in half (based on the red line below), creating two time zones that are two hours apart.
Compare that to the current state of things in America.
Right now, the US is broken into six time zones: Eastern, Central, Mountain, Pacific time, Alaska time, and Hawaii-Aleutian time, each one hour apart from the next.
These time zones exist so that areas in the east of each time zone get sunrise at about the same time.
Under Standardtime.com’s proposed system, the US’ East and West Coasts would only be two hours apart. This would standardize more travel and meeting times within the country.
But the downside would be that sunrise and sunset would happen at wildly different times for many areas of the nation.
For example, the sun rose in New York City at about 6:15 a.m. EST today and in Chicago at 6:10 a.m. CST; but if the two were in the same time zone, sunrise would be at 8:15 "Eastern Time" in Chicago.
Johns Hopkins University professors Richard Henry and Steven Hanke have come up with yet another possible fix: adopting a single time zone worldwide. They argue that the internet has eliminated the need for discrete time zones across the globe, so we might as well just do away with them. The proposal also includes a 13-month "permanent calendar." (The idea, understandably, has encountered some resistance.)
No plan will satisfy everyone. But that doesn’t mean daylight-saving time is right.
The absence of major energy-saving benefits from DST — along with its death toll, health impacts, and economic ramifications — are reason enough to do away with this ritual altogether.
from SAI https://read.bi/2XHgqQV
Koenigsegg is a name that’s synonymous with the fastest cars(s) on the planet. The 1,500 HP Koenigsegg Regera is arguably the most luxurious supercar ever built. The Koenigsegg Agera RS set the top speed record a while back.
Now, we have the Koenigsegg Jesko, the world’s first 300 MPH car due to a light frame an absolutely insane amount of horsepower. Bugatti, McLaren, and others were racing to release the first 300 MPH car and Koenigsegg has won with the Jesko, unveiled at the 2019 Geneva Motor Show.
This beast of a car is packing ‘5.0 litre twin-turbo V8 engine producing 1280hp on standard gasoline and 1600hp on E85 biofuel’ along with Koenigsegg’s new 9-speed Light Speed Transmission (LST). It has redesigned carbon fiber chassis which has allowed for additional legroom and headroom for the driver.
The 5-liter V8 with 1280 horsepower will push this car past the 300 MPH mark but if those numbers sound familiar it’s because they’re almost identical to the Hennessey Venom F5. The difference maker here is weight and displacement. The Jesko weighs ~11 pounds less than Koenigsegg’s previous model (Agera) and has the ‘world’s lightest production V8 crankshaft’, this was enough to break the barrier of the world’s first 300 MPH supercar.
After debuting at the 2019 Geneva Motor Show, Koenigsegg announced the Jesko on their website with a full lineup of specs and facts. It’s already won the Guinness World Record and displaced the McLaren F1 for having the ‘most powerful production engine’ in the world.
The Light Speed Transmission is a definite game changer for Koenigsegg:
The Koenigsegg Jesko features an all-new 9-speed, multi-clutch transmission – the second transmission to be 100% designed and built in-house at Koenigsegg, following the Direct Drive system designed for the Regera.
The Koenigsegg Light Speed Transmission (LST) represents a scale of evolution not seen since the development of modern dual-clutch technology at the turn of the century.
LST comprises nine forward gears and several wet, multidisc clutches in a compact, ultra-light package. The LST is capable of upward and downward gear changes between gears at near light speed thanks to the simultaneous opening and closing of clutches that allows for totally seamless acceleration/deceleration.
This car is also powered by Koenigsegg’s UPOD technology, or Ultimate Power on Demand. This is the brain that optimizes the car’s acceleration and has pushed it to unimaginable speeds.
You can click here to check out the full specs on Koenigsegg’s website.
from BroBible.com http://bit.ly/2XGB57A
In the very early days of programmatic buying, publishers typically used only one auction to sell their ad inventory. Today the programmatic ecosystem has evolved into a much more complex marketplace where a single ad can pass through a mix of over ten different auctions, with different rules, before a winning bid price is selected and an ad is served. This complexity has made it difficult for advertisers and agencies to properly value programmatic inventory and it has driven our publishers and app developers to implement increasingly complicated ad monetization strategies, reducing transparency across the industry. Further, the increasing intricacy of programmatic has made it operationally very difficult, even for experts, to determine what’s going well and what needs to be improved.
In order to help simplify programmatic for our partners, in the coming months we’ll start to transition publisher inventory to a unified first price auction for Google Ad Manager. We expect the transition to be complete by the end of this year. By switching to a single first price auction, we can help reduce complexity and create a fair and transparent market for everyone.
What this means for our partners
With this change, every offer from programmatic buyers will compete in the same unified auction, alongside inventory which is directly negotiated with advertisers. An advertising buyer’s bid will not be shared with another buyer before the auction or be able to set the price for another buyer. The buyer that wins the auction pays the price they bid. By simplifying our auction in Ad Manager, we can help make it easier for publishers and app developers to manage and get fair value for their inventory.
Preparing for this change
Since the change from second to first price will require both buyers and sellers to make changes in their programmatic strategies, we’ll give everyone time to prepare over the next few months before we start testing. During this time, publishers and app developers will need to rethink how they use price floors and technology partners will need to adjust how they bid for Google Ad Manager Inventory.
It’s important to note that our move to a single unified first price auction only impacts display and video inventory sold via Ad Manager. This change will have no impact on auctions for ads on Google Search, AdSense for Search, YouTube, and other Google properties, and advertisers using Google Ads or Display & Video 360 do not need to take any action.
We are excited to take this next step to simplify the programmatic ecosystem and help our partners grow. As we get closer to the start of our transition to a unified first price auction, we’ll work with all our partners to help them get prepared.
from Official Google Blog http://bit.ly/2NOJi53
Governments have been exploring digital driver’s licenses for a while, but there are quite a few flaws with existing approaches. You usually have to rely on a proprietary app, sometimes with uncertain security… and what happens if your phone is low on battery when you need to flash your credentials? Google might have a solution. XDA has discovered that Google is working on an IdentityCredential framework that would securely store and display digital IDs, including driver’s licenses. It could also display your ID even if there isn’t enough power to start Android — you’d just need the power for a secure chip and a "low-power communication channel."
Google would take steps to prevent unauthorized access to your ID card. If there is security hardware, it could create dynamic authentication codes that would be difficult to crack. If not, the phone could rely on remotely stored authentication keys that prove the information is legitimate. Android could only show a handful of information when relevant (say, your age when buying alcohol), or impose stricter security implementations depending on the nature of your documents.
Don’t expect it any time soon. The technology is only just getting started, making it an unlikely candidate for this year’s Android Q. Whenever it does show, though, it could help make digital driver’s licenses a practical reality. You really could leave your wallet at home, even if you normally need to carry a pack of IDs.
from Engadget https://engt.co/2NQUWN6