I find it kind of funny that your shared link url contain tracking parameters.

Why should we give advertisers any data at all, I don’t get it? I agree it’s better than how tracking is being done today, but why create a tool to distribute information about my behavior across different sites (yes, anonymized)?

The system would be fair if it was both positive and negative tips. Then at least I would consider tipping. It’s a but rude otherwise.

Yeah, strange design choice since the other buttons in theUI are not pill shaped.

Aside from that things look very nice.

Ah, that makes sense

Yeah, pretty much as Flex at 97% which is a nice comparison.

Edit: See mattd’s comment

Have a look at the MDN link about the Nav tag. MDN is probably the best source on html standard, aside from reading the W3C html spec.

There you’ll see that the main example is using an unordered list. There is another example explicitly saying you don’t have to use a list in a nav tag.

I’d say your coworker might know what they are talking about.

You’re right, and went back to read again and I totally misread the original article on Pivot to Asia as being more positive to china, which it wasn’t. I apologize for that, and thanks for still keeping up the conversation. I owe you to at least have a look at your last reference.

Just trying to keep up with what message you’re trying to convey. First you said it started during the Obama administration, then you agreed it was later, during the trump administration.

I don’t have time to check even more sources you reference. Feel free to mention why your last source is relevant to our discussion and I might give it a glance. Or at least why it worth a read.

So, based on your source, it’s Trump policy rather than Obama policy?

That sounds like the opposite. In the article they mention changing the policy in 2017. Is that what you mean?

I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech. (Not saying you aren’t)

The definition is tricky and if such law should exist it should have a good margin from being used for arbitrary “I was offended” type of offenses.

I don’t think prison, as you suggested, is a reasonable consequence either.

Yeah, fair, definition can be hard. But to give an example that I think is pretty clear cut: people standing outside of a mosque/synagogue/church arguing that those [certain people] deserve to be dead or put in labor camp.

You could argue that those are just words, and be correct, but for the individuals that are targeted it’s not just words. They know for a fact that those words and ideologies do turn in to actions.

I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech.

Ah, yeah, that’s a fair criticism. Thanks.

But hate speech is never good, is it?

Is that a thing?

Why is that?

Everyone should get their personal tip app that we can show the person at the counter. “Would you like to give me some tip for buying your goods?”

Intentions matter, and to what degree you do it in pursuit of money. You do need money to have a sustainable business. But that can of course be to a point where it’s just greedy. Maybe they have gone to far in that respect, I don’t know.

That’s a fairly good analogy, and it did made me this over a bit more. I agree that it would be weird if they put captions behind an extra fee. I suppose captions are more part of the “standard” offering historically so I would definitely just expect it to be included whereas timed lyrics is not something I’d expect by default. But I do an acknowledge that this could shift, especially as this feature enable deaf users to enjoy music. Hopefully Spotify can take the critique and find a good compromise that helps this user group. I just don’t think they thought to do this to squeeze money out of deaf users. I’m guessing it’s more of an unfortunate side effect.