I’m obviously not advocating or defending any particular behavior.

Legally speaking, why is what age they are today relevant rather than the age they are depicted as in the picture? Like, imagine we have a picture 20 years from now of someone at age 37. It’s legally fine until it’s revealed it was generated in 2023 when the person in question was 17? If the exact same picture was generated a year later it’s fine again?

If you make a picture today of someone based on how they looked 10 years ago, we say it’s depicting that person as the age they were 10 years ago. How is what age they are today relevant?

If you make a picture today of someone based on how they looked 10 years ago, we say it’s depicting that person as the age they were 10 years ago. How is what age they are today relevant?

Literally nothing I said justifies that assumption.

Nothing I said suggested beating or anything physical at all.

No one mentioned hitting or physical discipline of any kind.

They should make batteries that swap out completely so you can load a fully charged one in in a few seconds and let your old one charge while you’re off driving somewhere else. Or you just exchange the battery permanently like with some propane tanks.

This is why individual insurance is better. You can switch to a better provider without convincing a large bureaucracy first.

It varies by region or state. Some places you can discipline pretty easily, others your ex will use your any discipline at all as a reason to take your kids away.

People just want fewer kids now, or they want them later. It’s not the money, it’s that kids are a drag.

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that’s actually neutral. The government has full control over where they host their videos. Using that as a reason to TRY (a likely long and drawn out process) to force Google to change its policies company-wide is silly.

I’m not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It’s easy.

No, not really. Google can’t do anything about my taking my Firefox browser and watching videos from somewhere else. There are countless other video streaming services.

That’s less restrictive than what I said. McDonald’s won’t let you bring tacos in at all, doesn’t just make you wait at the door for 2 minutes, etc.

Edit: and to anyone quibbling with my McDonald’s example saying you can in fact bring tacos in, that was just an illustration. I can find plenty of examples of one establishment not letting people bring food in from somewhere else.

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald’s only selling McDonald’s burgers or preventing you from bringing Taco Bell tacos in from outside?

The current US Federal Trade Commission is quite agressive compared to other FTCs historically.

Amazon is very much not a monopoly. There are thousands of online retailers. There are also a lot of delivery services, no idea if there are thousands, but there’s a lot.