To be real clear, the only thing this does is screw over the hourly employees trying to survive on tips.
It does absolutely nothing to the business, they don't care, at all. It doesn't impact them in the slightest.
Yes, by law, if someone makes so little in tips that they would be getting paid below minimum wage the business is supposed to make up the difference.
Assuming that happens for the entire shift.
In practice, by all accounts... That pretty much never happens.
I would argue that we are, as a planetary civilization, almost past the point where a war of that sort is even possible.
On the other hand, if China were to ever shun NK, I would bet that their government would likely collapse in less than a decade.
Sadly, China has a ton of reasons to want to prevent that, one of the bigger ones being the border with NK where many, many refugees would try to cross into China.
I could however see, someday, China agreeing to a massive backroom deal on a scale that would be unprecedented:
China abruptly works to ensure a complete collapse of the NK government, without any NK nuclear weapons either coming into play or any NK nuclear weapons going missing (except to China itself, if it wants them).
And SK along with a good chunk of the Western world agrees to immediately conduct one of the largest humanitarian missions in history, to ensure that nobody is fleeing NK into China unless they have tons of assets and they want to avoid repercussions for their actions.
There are, sadly, a lot of reasons why China wouldn't want the western powers capable of pulling that off to have control of territory that close to China though.
SK would be their safest bet, but SK doesn't have the resources to pull of that kind of a humanitarian effort.
And the chances that someone like the US wouldn't take the chance to plop a military base in what is currently NK seems awfully slim.
From the comments, I think that the general answer is: We all recognize it, because a lot of different places used a logo sorta like this in the 90s.
And we can't pin it down exactly, because a lot of different places used a logo sorta like this in the 90s.
And being the 90s, a lot of that was never on the internet in the first place.
It rings very strong bells for me, and I don't think the reason is one that (at the time of this comment) has already been posted... But I can't for the life of me remember what it was for.
Yes and no.
I suspect that Reddit is going to lose a fair number of chargebacks, because the credit card association rules are often a bit more strict.
Because they are unilaterally removing benefits that people have already paid for, and are explicitly stating that they will provide no refunds.
If you paid for a year of premium, a good chunk of the benefit has been the coins to buy awards.
After they get rid of both coins and awards, well, you have still paid for premium in advance, but it is now worth a fair bit less to some people.
Also bad, but more arguably in regards to the law, they are choosing to remove all past awards on posts and comments.
Which means that people who have bought coins (or premium to get coins) are having all of that undone, again, without any possibility of refund.
Arguably, this is much more problematic for people who had purchased coins, but who had not used them all before the announcement. Because that's taking the money, and then simply choosing not to provide the service that was paid for, while simultaneously stating that there will be no refunds.
You could try to argue that, well, they can use those coins up until they turn buying awards off... Except, well, one of the nice things about awards is that they last as long as the post or comment does.
This is... Problematic.
Extremely problematic.
Mastodon absolutely does have a weakness of making it more difficult to find people that you want to follow based on what you have already engaged with.
And from a purely user perspective, that is a weakness.
But it's also a very distinct choice. Because having enough data to be able to meaningfully make such recommendations means having a central database of every user interaction by every user.
And it also means making choices and value judgements which, almost by definition, can not be value neutral.
If the creators of the algorithm are good, they will actually be aware of the choices and value judgements being made, if not, well... They will still be making them, just not in nearly as educated of a way.
On the whole, I really hope that we eventually come up with answers to these problems that make it possible for a user to make those choices, and to have the amount of recommendations that they want, while somehow not having anyone have the huge database of user interactions. I'm not sure if that's even possible, most especially if you assume that there will be entities on the fediverse that are fudging their data to get recommended in ways that other users don't want.
But it sure would be interesting to try.
The advice to always use a unique password per site is an excellent one.
The why is multifaceted, and some of them are moderately complex.
First off, not every site is going to be storing your password in a good a secure manner.
In an ideal world, every site on the planet would be hashing it with something like bcrypt with a fairly aggressive cost setting, and good salts.
And they would have a way to automatically rehash your password on login in the event that the password hashing settings change. (Almost everyone misses this one.)
In practice... It could be stored in plain text. It could be hashed with classic crypt(), or with md5 or sha1 with no salt. There are so many ways to get it wrong.
On the rehashing one, they could have picked something that was best practices at the time, you setup your account, and then two years later, best practices have changed, it turns out that there was a way to attack the previous way, so they change how they do it... And that's great for everyone who changes their password or sets up a new account after that change, but everyone who did it before that change? Well, those passwords are just sitting there hashed by the old method indefinitely.
Or someone could compromise the site, and grab every password everyone enters.
Or you could fall prey to a phishing attack, and type your login to what looks exactly like the site in question, but is infact a common typo of the real domain.
Again, there are a lot of ways for the password used on a site to get compromised. Many of those ways are entirely out of your control. It is standard practice for attackers to attempt to use that password and username / email on other services when this happens, just so that they can see what else they can get into.
Don't let that work.
I use + addresses for stuff.
Well, since I run my own mail server, I tend to use _ instead of + as the separator, simply because more places will consider it a valid address.
But it's amazing how useful it is to include the name of whoever you're giving the email address to in the email address. It lets you keep getting email for stuff like password recovery. And when an address is leaked, not only can you block that one, but you also get to know who leaked it.
Which is awesome for knowing which businesses to never use again.
Don't do this.
Just use a good, random, password generator with decent settings.
Varying away from that just to 'change the kind of password' is only going to reduce your security.
You want as many random bits of information as possible in the password. That's it.
If there are not already people running fediverse nodes that exist specifically to harvest potentially 'interesting' data, there will be.
You edited it? That's maybe interesting. You deleted it? Same deal, maybe interesting.
It looks like an email address? Definitely might be interesting. A phone number? Yep.
An address? Definitely could be interesting.
If you posted it, assume that it will always be available to the exact people that you don't want to see it.
When I was a teenager, well, there's a whole lot involved, but I basically didn't have any dental hygiene to speak of.
Who cared?
Well, I had more than one root canal by the time I was 20.
I'm a bit obsessive about it these days, but I have not needed any more root canals.
Take care of the teeth that you want to keep. Don't worry, if you don't, they'll go away.
Every now and then, I try to browser without an ad blocker.
That generally lasts until I encounter something that's bad enough that I don't really have a choice, and then I turn it back on.
The page needs to actually function. It needs to be possible to click on something and actually be clicking on the thing that you're intending to.
And it can not have stuff that blinks in a manner that causes a segment of the population (which includes me at times, but not 100% of the time) significant neurological problems.
That last one has been the driving force behind stuff getting reenabled a fair bit.
Oh, and if it's ads on video content, they need to be at least vaguely reasonable in regards to interruptions and length. Youtube is way past that at this point.