Tikka Masala is an Indian-Inspired dish which was invented in the UK by people with Indian cultural heritage. That's about as concise a description as you can get without running into difficulties of definition - there's no consistent way of defining what "being a dish" means without running into contradictions.

In fact General Tso's is the perfect counter-example: Multiple Chinese people have told me they enthusiastically disown General Tso's Chicken and explicitly call it American food. So if we say "a dish belongs to a country if it's invented there", then Tikka Masala is British (which I agree "feels" wrong); but if we say "a dish belongs to a country if it was inspired by the cuisine of that country", then General Tso's is Chinese, which, apparently not!

And that's without even considering the question of how far "back" you should go with inspiration - what if a dish was inspired by how the Indians used food they got from the Persians who traded it with the Chinese - is it Indian food or Chinese food? (Idk if that's historically nonsense, but you get my point) Why is the most-recent ancestor more important than the environment of creation?

"X depends on or is built up on Y" does not imply "X is Y". Concepts, laws, techniques, etc. can depend or be higher-order expressions of QM without being QM. If you started asking a QM scientist about tensile strength or the Mohs scale they would (rightly) be confused.

Yes, the same EU. The fact that it's considering some poor choices doesn't detract from the fact that it's actions thus far have been positive and deserve appreciation. Real Life doesn't split people neatly into heroes and villains.

They're not inherently insulting - there are ways to use those phrases appropriately, but they can be (and often are) used sarcastically, when the speaker had been clear in the first place.

Sure, because something so egregious would definitely show up in a Google search for "Zach Weinersmith sweatshop", right?

Unless...you're exaggerating on the Internet to stir up outrage?

don't say [those words] in my presence

Will I regret asking why?

Thank you for answering the question rather than downvoting!

"You used to be a child once, so you aren't allowed to be frustrated at any behaviours of children or choices of their caregivers" sure is a perspective.

Yes, I was once a child. And if my parents had taken me on a flight before I was sufficiently mature not to yell during it, they would have been being irresponsible and selfish. "Babies scream, sometimes there's nothing you can do to stop them" is true, but doesn't imply that you should be allowed to take them anywhere.

Personally I (a straight person) use it in an attempt to normalize the term, so that people who want to conceal the gender of their partner have plausible deniability. If all straight people say "girlfriend/boyfriend", then anyone saying "partner" is outed as "a non-straight person trying to conceal the fact".

EDIT: but also, it connotes a deeper level of trust, support, intimacy, etc. A "girlfriend" is some chick I fool around and have some fun with; a "partner" is someone with whom I'm building a life together.

TIL Obsidian isn't FOSS!

What if the appropriate volume is "lower"?

I'm no fan of Musk/Twitter, but this is a hell of a ~~reich~~ reach.