 |
|
|
|||||
The “American woman in Pakistan” now has a crypto coin. If you dont know who that is, American Onijah Andrew Robinson recently went viral after claiming she flew to Pakistan to marry a 19-year-old she met online, only to be rejected. Instead of returning home, she has become somewhat of a celebrity in Pakistan, holding high-profile press conferences in Karachi where she demands money and declares her plans to rebuild the country. Thanks to TikTok, she has since gone international as that “American woman in Pakistan.” In an interview with the City 21 news channel, Robinson announced her entry into the crypto market last week. I would like to say I am launching a bitcoin under Onijah, but it would run under Nidal Ahmed, she stated in a viral clip (Nidal Ahmed Memon is the name of her 19-year-old former fiance). Memon, for those keeping track, is the name of the man she apparently traveled to Karachi to meet and marry in October last year. At the time of the coin launch, Robinson had overstayed her visa in Pakistan by at least two months, remaining in the country despite her permit expiring. According to Bilal Hassan, a Pakistani TikToker who has been translating the saga into English for audiences around the world, Robinson allegedly catfished Memon during their online interactions, using a filter that made her appear as a blonde white woman. This revelation reportedly alarmed Memons mother, who locked Robinson out of their home and disappeared with the entire family. Nobody knows where they went, Hassan claims. A man claiming to be Robinsons son told a local news outlet that she has a history of mental illness and local news reports say she was admitted to a Pakistani hospital in February, where she was seen by psychiatrists. However, in recent weeks Robinson became a minor hit in Pakistani media. In one press conference, Robinson announced a plan to reconstruct this whole country. In order to do that, she said she needed $100,000 in donations. In another press conference, she asked for a weekly payment of at least $2,000. I want $20,000 up front, $5,000-$10,000 to stay here every week, she said, according to videos circulating on TikTok. And I want those demands from the government right away. Now, some four months later, local media reports she has finally left Pakistan.
Category:
E-Commerce
The majority of Google Maps users across the globe today will notice a significant change on the platform if they zoom into the body of water south of the United States and east of Mexico. Thats because Google has updated the name of that basin from the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Heres what you need to know about the name change, including why it was made, who will see it, and if the world’s other major digital maps providerApplewill follow suit. Why did Google rename the Gulf of Mexico? The fact that Google has renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America is no surprise. As a matter of fact, back in January, Google announced it would be making the name changea move it was widely ridiculed for on social media. So why is Google making the change? Officially, its because the Gulf of Mexico has been renamed the Gulf of America in the United States Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) register. In a blog post announcing the name change, Google said the name change is consistent with our longstanding practices of adopting the names used in the GNIS. But many have claimed that the real reason for the name change is to appease President Trump, which the search giantlike most other American tech companieshas been trying to keep happy since his return to power last month. In January, President Trump issued an executive order that mandated the oceanic basins name be officially changed. Can Trump and Google really do this? As Fast Company previously reported, the president of the United States has the power to rename geographic locals to whatever they wishwithin limitations. While presidents can mandate name changes, they can only do so on the national level. Other countries are under no obligation to recognize any such changesand as far as Im aware, none have yet embraced the new Gulf of America moniker. As a private company, Google doesnt have to follow any naming changesbut not doing so would risk the wrath of the president. Who sees Gulf of America in Google Maps now? Not everyone, but a majority of the world. In a blog post announcing the name change, Google says the specific label you’ll see on the gulf depends on where you are located in the world. Based on your location, youll see the gulf labeled in one of three ways in Google Maps: Users in the United States: will see the basin labeled as the Gulf of America only. Users in Mexico: will see the basin labeled as the Gulf of Mexico only. Users outside of America and Mexico: will see the basin labeled as Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America). As Google explains, The names you see in the Maps app are based on your country location, which is determined by information from your phones operating system (e.g., iOS and Android), including your SIM, network, and locale. It says users of Google Maps on the web will see the name based on the region set in their accounts search settings, or based on their devices location. Will Apple Maps rename the Gulf of Mexico? While Google Maps is the largest digital mapping provider in the world, it has a strong competitor in Apple Maps. As of the time of this writing, the gulf basin is still labeled as the Gulf of Mexico in the Apple Maps app. Will that change? Thats yet to be seen, but if Apple designates geographic landmarks based on their names in the GNIS register, as Google does, then it is likely we can expect to see the Gulf of America name change show up in the iPhone makers maps, too. Fast Company has reached out to Apple to ask if it will be making the name change. We will update this post with the company’s reply.
Category:
E-Commerce
Hawaiis Supreme Court ruled Monday that insurance companies cant bring their own legal actions against those blamed for Mauis catastrophic 2023 wildfire, allowing a $4 billion settlement that was on the verge of collapse to proceed. Other steps remain in finalizing the deal between thousands of people who lodged lawsuits and various defendants, including Hawaiian Electric Company. The massive inferno that was the deadliest in the U.S. in more than a century decimated the historic town of Lahaina, killing more than 100 people, destroying thousands of properties and causing an estimated $5.5 billion in damage. Soon afterward, attorneys began lodging hundreds of lawsuits. A settlement was announced last summer, but insurance companies held out, insisting that they should have the right to go after the defendants separately to recoup money paid out to policyholders. Mondays ruling resolves a key roadblock to finalizing the deal and sends the case back to a Maui judge to determine next steps. Insurance companies that want to recoup billions paid to policyholders by pursuing legal action against the defendants said in a statement they’re disappointed, but didn’t say whether they’ll seek review at the U.S. Supreme Court. A key question that was before Hawaii Supreme Court was whether state laws controlling health care insurance reimbursement also apply to casualty and property insurance in limiting companies ability to pursue independent legal action against those held liable. The justices answered yes. Plaintiff lawyers were worried allowing insurers to pursue reimbursement separately would be a deal-breaker, drain what is available to pay fire victims and lead to prolonged litigation. Gerald Singleton, one of the many attorneys representing the plaintiffs, said they’re still trying to make sense of the ruling but are pleased with it. Now the settlement can take the next step forward,” he said. A few days before the one-year anniversary of the Aug. 8, 2023, fire, Gov. Josh Green announced that seven defendants accused of causing the tragedy had agreed to pay $4 billion to resolve claims by thousands of people. They include the main defendant, Hawaiian Electric, as well as the state of Hawaii, Maui County and Kamehameha Schools, the largest private landowner in Hawaii. Attorneys representing the individual plaintiffs agreed to the deal amid fears that main defendant Hawaiian Electric, the power company blamed for sparking the blaze, could be on the brink of bankruptcy. Victims attorneys acknowledged that $4 billion wasnt enough to make up for what was lost but said the deal was worth accepting, given Hawaiian Electrics limited assets. They need every penny to restitch the fabric to bring the community back together, attorney Jesse Creed told the justices during a hearing before the state Supreme Court last week. Creed said he could relate to the losses the victims face because his own home, childrens schools and place of worship just burned in the Palisades fire, one of the wildfires that brought widespread destruction around Los Angeles last month. Todays decision will help our people heal much sooner, as we continue to rebuild and recover, the governor said in a text message to the AP. Green had previously denounced as unfair insurance companies’ moves to recoup money they’ve paid to policyholders in a legal process that’s called subrogation.” Subrogation is one way companies recover the amount of claims paid to policyholders. Insurance companies say subrogation is a way to offset costs associated with a catastrophic event so premiums wont have to go up. The process isnt for natural disasters such as hurricanes, but for when there is someone at fault. So far they have paid more than $2.3 billion to people and businesses affected by the Maui tragedy and expect to pay $1 billion more. Subrogation is vital to a healthy and stable insurance market, and allows insurers to hold at-fault parties legally and financially accountable,” the insurance companies said in their statement reacting to the ruling: “Preserving the rights of insurers to utilize subrogation is of importance to the insurance industry, and is ultimately beneficial to all policyholders and residents statewide. Jacob Lowenthal, another attorney representing the individual plaintiffs, said the ruling doesn’t totally prevent insurance companies from getting reimbursed. Instead of going after the defendants, insurers will have to prove to a judge that they deserve to be reimbursed because a policyholder received money from the settlement that was more than their claim. Now that the ruling answered the subrogation question, work can focus on the administrative claims process to determine awards based on facts of each case, he said. The Hawaii Supreme Courts ruling was the correct outcome, Lowenthal said. The resolution of this critical issue allows the global settlement to now move forward, putting money into the hands of the Maui fire victims sooner than later. Jennifer Sinco Kelleher, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||