They ask if you have a licence with a Yes / No choice. They don't ask for the licence number, which I'd be surprised if anyone in these islands could recall. Rather charmingly, they assume you will be honest in your answer.
I hear this a lot. I've got quite a leaky 400+ year old Welsh farmhouse (long and thin, heat-sucking 4ft deep stone walls) and I'm one of those who installed last year with the grant.
It's bloody brilliant. Way, way more comfortable than the oil-fired system it replaced. The smart meter looked a bit scary during the cold patch in January but even then, it's coming in cheaper than the oil did and without the scary price variability.
I honestly love it. Getting the size of heat pump right for the property is probably the most critical thing.
Good point. A lot of the UK has piped gas, often built before natural gas was a thing (it would have been supplied with "town gas" which you can make with coal) and then retrofitted for methane last century, I remember as a kid seeing stuff marked as suitable for the "new" natural gas - the conversion had finished at about the time I was born.
But in rural areas it makes no sense. Running a single phase electricity conductor overhead for everything is affordable unless you live somewhere crazy like up a mountain or on your own island, but piped gas, sewage, etc. is just too expensive to justify. This is another reason to favour heat pumps, the heat pump runs off the same electricity as your household appliances, your PC, and your lighting, if you fit solar panels or add a private wind turbine (if you're a hilltop farm latter can make a lot of sense) that's all electricity and it Just Works™.
I live on an old farm. I'm connected to a neighbour by a track that is narrow, has a steep drop with no barrier and a ford at the bottom. After decent rain, the ford is more like a full-blown river. It is a public footpath but otherwise is only suitable for quads or farm machinery. There's no way of turning around when you're committed. There is not a road or bridleway, there is no public access unless on foot.
At some point, presumably from satellite imagery, Google decided this was a road.
Now google maps regularly directs folk down my private drive and on to the track where they have a terrifying journey or end up having to be towed by a tractor. No amount of 'report a problem' tickets have resolved this and it's been going on for years now.
Reminds me of one of my dad's old stories - about a prosperous farmer, who lived on a dirt road. The road had a horrible mud hole a hundred yard or so beyond the farmer's barn.
By day, his farm work was forever being interrupted by optimists and city folks, who had to offer him several dollars to get him to haul their motor cars out of the mud hole. (Back then, several dollars was serious money.)
By night, he never got enough sleep - he was too busy hauling water up from the river, to refresh the mud hole.
>No amount of 'report a problem' tickets have resolved this and it's been going on for years now.
Have you tried submitting a correction to the map itself [1] [2]? It may take a while (not sure about Google Maps, but I submitted some corrections to OpenStreetMap a while ago and it took a couple of months before they were reflected in my Garmin GPS) but hopefully should eventually resolve the problem.
Alternatively, there are other means of manipulating Google Maps, such as fake traffic jams [3] that will dynamically reroute traffic around it.
It may be worth sending them a lawyer's letter threatening to sue for costs and damages (or whatever the lawyer says) unless they fix the issue. It's faster and easier and cheaper for them to placate you than to even send a lawyer's letter back. You don't have to follow through, necessarily - just poke them in the face rather than the ass.
Google will do nothing. I’ve tried for over a decade to get a fake city removed from Google Maps. I’m making the name up but imagine you have a neighborhood near you called Northfield. When google maps started someone from the neighborhood thought it would be great to make up city with the same name.
No amount of complaining will remove it. It only exists on Google maps, not on Apple Maps, Waze, Openstreet, or the various garmin/navitronics outdoor/boating navigation apps I have.
My understanding is these are called Paper Towns. Map makers add them as a way to identify when their copyright is being violated by others coping the maps wholesale.
May I suggest to create a "mine field, you will die" banner in your property with stones big enough to be picked by the satellite photo in the next update?
Or you may prefer a tasteful "sea crocodile sanctuary" traffic signal (Extra points if you draw the crocodile eating a tourist holding a beer and wearing Tyrolean pants).
To be strictly serious we are talking about block parameters in ruby which contain the values yielded to it which, in an enumeration, is likely to be a value object from a collection and only occasionally an index (where you've explicitly chained `#with_index` for e.g.). If you are nesting deep enough in ruby to call for `k` then, yes, it would be bad practice.
I work in an environment which has dozens of products, very significant complexity and legislative needs. Cucumber works very well for us because we use it for specifying outcomes. There's way to much Gherkin out there which tries to use it for describing a journey (I click this, then this, and this....)
It works really well for us to get a shared understanding between a non-technical business, devs and QA.
That said, we then hand it the Gherkin over to the SDETs who fettle it according to our house style (which is strict and must pass enforced linting) and it does take gardening as the product matures. It's our SDETs who write the test code: we wouldn't dream of letting a non-technical person actually drive the test logic itself.
In what way? From mini skirts to punk rock to gay liberation to extinction rebellion to pro- and anti-brexit protests, we seem to be comfortable with challenge. Citation required.
Well, it would be a lot harder to sack president Boris /s.
I defer to the historian Niall Ferguson who said (I paraphrase) that purpose of monarchy is to protect the people from its government. From a UK perspective, it seems to work.
But let’s take one example: the monarchy and the ludicrous rules and conventions that go with it to govern parliament are just one way working class MPs are intimidated and given the information that they are not really welcome in the corridors of power.
Let’s remember also that the British people have not sacked Boris. Conservative mps worried for their personal survival sacked him and 300,000 old white people from the south east of England have, for the third time in recent years, made Truss our PM. She has no regard for the manifesto that her party was elected on. Everything is by convention in the UK, which means people with privilege can do whatever they like.
> The dominant paradigm is "if it is not permitted it is forbidden".
Oh gosh. It’s the exact opposite. The a principle of Common Law is ‘everything which is not forbidden is allowed’ (the US for example has done reasonably well on that principle).
