As someone who is neither a lawyer nor an expert, I always wondering if refusing donations gave them less surface area for civil suits from advertising companies for stolen revenue.
How could they complain about stolen revenue? Even if he took donations that doesn't make any sense. He didn't sign an agreement with the advertisers, the page displaying the ads did or the person viewing the page clicked through a "thou shalt not block ads" but that is extremely unlikely to stand up in court plus horrible PR. I know I would personally end any relationship with and boycott any company that pulled that on a regular Joe.
I'm a self-admitted cardio addict. But stationary exercise equipment is something I find mind-numbingly boring. What is the peloton doing differently than others? Are the online classes really that motivating? Or is it something about the machine itself?
I think that is perfectly acceptable for a product that is otherwise very good and completely free. You don't even need a Google account to use it (at least in the browser, not sure about on phones).
You 100% need a google account on Android. Recently, for a month or so, Maps had been malfunctioning for me -- it wouldn't show any maps. It would still do turn-by-turn directions, but not maps.
It turns out that I had logged out of my google account and forgot to log back in. Once I did that, I could see the maps again. Not that I really want to -- those sponsored locations are much too annoying to tolerate. So I've switched away from Google Maps and logged back out of my account.
Compared to Slack, it has much worse responsiveness, message editing, and search. It feels like there is 500ms latency on every click. I have a bunch of individual, detailed gripes with the message editing. And I'm generally not pleased with the quality of the search results.
