If you want to fight them in court, you need standing. To have standing, you have to have been affected by the law.

You can not fight them in court until they do something. You can not sue for what someone might do.

I didn’t create demographic trends older than I am to obfuscate anything.

Demographically most of the world has shown an explosion of population as industrialization of agriculture, medicine, and sanitation almost eliminate famines and childhood disease. And then you see the curve go down. Often all the way to negative. This is repeating in other countries, and just like they’re catching up faster economically, the social results are following as well. I’m not as sure about other countries, but Canada would have had negative growth since the 80s if not for immigration.

So, while smartphones might be a factor, they can’t be the primary or only cause of a trend that predates their existence by over a quarter of a century.

The demograpic downturn started decades before that, but in the west it was (and to some extent still is) hidden by immigration.

https://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3546

I grew up with rotary phones, and I only knew about 2 numbers then. My notes about these numbers have just moved from a piece of paper pinned onto the wall.

At a demographic level, I am near certain you’re right on the money. But you are not an interchangeable part, identical to all the others in your bin. Neither is anyone else.

There are people who can use these tools to enhance their abilities. That’s how I use GPS navigation: to get me there the first time, and on trips to larger cities to avoid traffic. No amount of skill on my part is going to tell me that I need to turn onto a side street because there was an accident 10km further up the road.

So there’s nuance here. We can possibly have our cake and eat it too.

The USA already has them. And Oman does not, and can not get them within a reasonable time frame.

So the winning move is to let the others slug it out, even if they get hit. They don’t have enough power to act up.

Even more sensible. It can always be worse.

I think this is a neurodiversity thing. Different people find different things challenging, and I’ve noticed within my circle of friends that navigational ability varies wildly. I would find it unlikely that I’d have trouble finding somewhere I went using satnav once, but I could also see someone else using it several times without it teaching them the route.

I imagine that in the same way some people will use AI and have it be a learning experience, while for others it will be a crutch.

It might be more of a problem for people who grow up with it though; less of them may find the need to develop the underlying skills.

Gandalf has traits, and he never has or will exist.

Things that don’t exist have traits all the time. The two ideas are not mutually contradictory.

It’s a very mildly textured oblate sphereoid.

Consent is an action. You can do nothing while you don’t exist. (Usually not doing things is all you do while not existing.) You must be alive (or have been alive) to consent (or have consented).

“Against my will” requires you to have preferences to be ignored. This can’t happen before you have preferences.

“Against your will” means you refused.

I take this kind of stuff seriously, but I don’t go all McCarthy on it.

I have yet to find a team without resentful morons on it. It may just be part of the human condition.

It’s easier to see the faults in those we already disagree with, and forgive those who are “on our side”. What’s an “unforgivable violation” is a “tragic forgivable character flaw” in someone you already support; “after all they are doing so much good”. You can see some really extreme versions of this line of thought recently.

There are a lot of liberals who are only liberal because they find a sense of moral superiority from it. It lets them speak rudely to anyone they disagree with, because those are “bad people” so it’s not actually bad to be unkind to them.

That kind of self justification of cruelty is a lot of the attraction of most extremist movements, whether it be political, religious, or social. So many people want to be cruel but can’t bear to see themselves as a bad person, so we give ourselves excuses.

“Without consent” would be a far more technically correct way to put it, and still convey most of the same emotional weight.

But worrying about the technicalities of communication instead of the intended message is all sizzle and no steak. Communication is about communicating; and the listening part is too.

Sort of. It’s kind of another “won’t anyone rid me of this meddlesome priest” thing.

Britain got tired of having their people killed by the local terrorists and left. That’s not pre-recognition of the government that those terrorists later set up.