With things like rain, deserts and humidity existing, any phone should be IP64 at least, so it’s paranoid to expect it to fail near a bath. Meanwhile many modern phones are IP67, meaning you can literally put them under water.

So who’s the idiot here, the person using a device within its specifications so they can have more fun, or someone still stuck in the 00s ?

One of the downsides of getting old, my fellow millennial.

Watch this video. Market inefficiency will have people freezing to death in the streets, unable to afford travelling to a place with work, unable even to afford accurate information on where to find work. Many turned to crime to survive.

In Tudor England’s case, they “solved” this by kidnapping people ICE-style and deporting them to the colonies as indentured servants or putting them in for-profit prisons.

Open borders are good, but you need to be anarchocommunist about it. People need to base their migration patterns on accurate information, which means information given as mutual aid rather than for profit or for manipulation (e.g. if people constantly say “we have no space” when they have space, people learn that “we have no space” means “we probably have space”, so if there is no space you get disaster).

It also needs to be mutual aid when people are there. Expecting people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to slot into the economy of a foreign culture is “leaving money on the table”. It’s much more economically productive to get people everything they need to be comfortable so they can instead spend their labor on efficient tasks they are specialized in (which then help other get what they need faster in the positive sum game we call society).

Many state communists oppose open borders. The USSR, China, and Cuba all had/have citizenship privileges and controlled migration, and generally people that support those governments are also called “leftist”.

The same goes for many social democrats and socialist reformists. Even unionists often oppose migration because migrants are imported by the capitalist order to use as scabs (see “guest workers” in 1970s West Germany).

All basically want a walled garden in which leftist ways of living can flourish, usually with the idea to export them later.

But especially in activist and discourse spaces, people tend to be in a pretty narrow band from pop liberalism to anarchocommunism. Socialists, socdems, and unionists tend to be busy with their job, because that is what their praxis calls for. And state communists tend to walk away exasperated when people condemn genocide.

But anarchocommunist praxis is for a large part prefigurative sharing of information, ideas, and tentative structures. So we’re relatively loud and as unemployed as we can get away with.

You have less power but more wealth than a Mycenean king. You have a more steady diet that is healthier for you, with better healthcare, better housing, more time for leisure, less chance of being robbed or murdered or killed in battle, etc. etc. But the king could have people killed or tortured; he could send people to their deaths; pass judgment in any moral dispute between hundreds of his subjects; etc.

The capitalist elite gladly loses wealth to gain power. And the power a rich person has over someone who must work for them to eat is incomprehensibly greater than the power a rich person has over someone who can eat regardless of whether they work for them. Thanks to ICE and other anti-immigration laws, rich people can effectively keep undocumented migrants as slaves again. What are they going to do? Complain and get themselves sent to a concentration camp?

What do you think a billionaire would rather have? A hundred mansions, ten private jets, twenty yachts, and a thousand unionized employees; or ten mansions, one private jet, two yachts, and a hundred slaves?

Wealth truly is not equivalent to power.

But that relies on the capitalist assumption that producing trash and CO2 is free because you can dump it withouth having to pay for it, and destroying nature to stripmine for the raw resources only costs the purchasing price because the environment isn’t monetized.

Plus the imperialist assertion that providing decentralized electricity to poor people in developing nations is net negative because it increases the cost of labor from those regions because they can do other productive things than work in your factory.

Are you being sarcastic? Because we’re still reaping the benefits of all of those. Violently gained interracial marriage got legalized at 25% public support while peacefully gained gay marriage only got legalized at 65% popular support. Peacefully won trans right are more fragile than violently won labor rights.