As someone who's 23 and grew up with smartphones and all of that as they were starting to become popular I feel like I have some takes on a lot of the opinions I've seen on the different sides of issues like this. I lean in general towards giving your kid a phone once they're old enough to want to be able to talk with friends and do things on their own afterschool but having some non-intrusive ways to keep an eye on what they're doing with it until sometime when they're a teenager. That just seems like the best way to not ostracize them from other kids while still making sure they're being safe online. Even though in general things worked out fine for me with my parents letting me have my own laptop and iPod touch and eventually iPhone from a pretty young age without really watching what I did on them I definitely see a lot of times that I could have ended up being taken advantage of online if things had been slightly different. And the reason I say non-intrusive ways to keep track of what your kid is doing is because I knew kids who did have like parental restrictions on their phones and all of them knew ways to bypass them and do what they wanted to do anyways. So the only way you're gonna successfully keep an eye on them is if they don't know you are and you only interfere if it's a genuine safety problem, and even then you make sure to not punish them for it as that will make them start hiding things from you actively, you treat it as a learning moment and help them understand why what they were doing wasn't safe. I'm still very much figuring out what my exact views on this are but I think leaning too far in either direction of not letting them have social media or a smartphone at all even when they're starting to reach middle school or letting them have unrestricted access to social media and a phone both have their problems and you have to find a good balance in the middle.
WarlordSdocy
I mean the problem with your argument is then that there's nothing we can do, as there isn't really any pathway towards impeachment right now. As Republicans hold both houses and have pretty clearly shown their loyalty to Trump even with the fact that they're getting so much backlash they won't hold town halls anymore. So at this point these kinds of protests are one of the few ways to try and hurt the people in power, as well as to start building community that is needed for any kind of more direct action. It also gives Trump and Elon the opportunity to overreact against protests (like if they decide to follow through on the domestic terrorism thing) which will further galvanize people into action.
Yeah the problem here though is that Israel is the one with all the power here to stop the violence as they're the ones forcing people out of their land. I view it in a similar way to what happened in Ireland, if you want to stop the violence you have to make efforts to negotiate a true lasting peace, then whatever groups that are left that still want to commit violence will slowly lose support as the people stop supporting violence with a good peace treaty in place. But instead of doing that Israel is basically using the same argument the US used for why freeing slaves would be bad as in their mind at the time if they freed them the slaves would kill all the white people.
I mean I don't know a ton about SQL but one thing to keep in mind about SSNs is they were not originally meant to be used for identification but because we have no form of national id and places still needed a way to verify who you are people just started using SSNs for that since it's something everyone has and there wasn't really a better option. So now the government has been having to try and make them work for that and make them more secure. The better solution would be to make some form of national id that is designed to be secure but Republicans and people like Musk would probably call that government overreach or a way to spy and track people.
Didn't Bernie literally lead an effort in the Senate to pass an arms embargo against Israel? I legitimately don't understand how people say he's pro Israel compared to other Democrats who won't even support that.
What else is a protest but a way to cause a disruption until politicians care enough to fix the issue you're protesting for? If you're not causing some kind of disruption it's not really a protest cause people can just ignore you and nothing is gonna get done from it.
I mean at a certain point legality doesn't matter if they black bag you and deport you before you can even have a trial. Which clearly seems to be their goal by the fact that they move the detainees away from where they apprehend them to avoid the court there being able to have jurisdiction. As well as with the large numbers of people who were put on planes without any kind of trial or process where they can prove they're there legally. With this becoming the norm at a certain point your only option really is to fight back and resist arrest or be deported without due process.