Med al ret!

I think both Apple and fictitious closed Android would be way more interchangeable and data from within would be more portable. Developers would get more of a cut. The saving grace for Google in the real world is that they can do Apple shenanigans while pointing at the open-source availability of Android and not get dumped in hotter antitrust water. If we only had two OSs and both were closed especially regulators in Europe would hit both of them much harder. And like tougher environmental restrictions on cars became the de facto US standard for everyone, the forced equal playing field (the EU guys LOVE an equal playing field) would over time make shit better for all users everywhere.

If there was no Android I think we would have a long list of failed attempts to build one that all fail because every company wanted to build their own walled gardens, and didn't get enough traction. iOS probably would have succeeded thanks to Apple marketing budgets and their somewhat cultish follower base. But I suspect it would have followed more the initial Steve Jobs idea of doing most stuff in browser; the app revolution wouldn't have happened. So there would be a big iOS share and then the lower 30% or so would be fractured into other walled gardens for poor people. One result of that would be an earlier agreement on a RCS-like texting solution and not just in the States but everywhere. Because more players would have a stake in seamless communication because stuff like WhatsApp (a reaction to high texting rates, mostly in Europe) and blue/green bubblr iMessage did not happen.

You've discovered the birthday problem.

Maybe he likes being a tad unpredictable. If I had to choose if I wanted to be his friend or if I wanted to be stuck in an elevator with him for an hour, I'd clearly say neither, thanks. History will probably record him as a stirrup-holder of full born fascism.

I don't like "belong" here. Pineapple is food. People like it, or like it in certain combinations, or they don't. Highly concentrated uranium or arsenic really don't belong in food. Pineapple is not the same as uranium.

If you've ever been a student or cash strapped you've eaten various uncommon combinations of food. You didn't care what belonged together or not. And neither should anyone care in this regard. Outside of poison and allergies, we don't need to be paternalistic about telling people what to eat or not. People who get internet mad about pineapple on pizza need to reevaluate their life choices.

We know nothing about your kid. We don't know if he's an angel or a little shit.

Without knowing more I think the bedtime rules are alright. Structure is good. If he doesn't throw bucketloads of ice water on him still snoozing 6:01I don't see a huge problem.

As for smartphone and screen time, every kid is different. These restrictions strike me more as he's been a little shit punitive. If he's never known different and doesn't mercilessly gets teased for it in school, it might be okay. Our opinion doesn't really matter as much as yours and you asked the question. So I'm sensing you may be dissatisfied with both these rules and perhaps their unilateral implementation. I would just advise you not to talk to hubby like hey I asked a bunch of strangers on the internet about your rules and here's what they thought.

Millions of peaches!

The music industry has a problem. Only the cream of the crop earn any significant money from streaming. Not enough people buy to own music. Lily Allen famously said she earns more money from here foot pictures on OnlyFans than her music on streaming. The only thing artists can earn a bit of money from is concerts. Be it tours or rich people gigs (incl. corporate ones). There are plenty of big budgets available in the top 5%.

And it's not a new phenomenon. Artists have gotten into how water for performing for Gaddafi's son, the Chechen strongman, or at the Indian richest guy daughter's wedding. These stories bubble up and down because there's controversy. A kpop band performing for the daughter of a run of the mill millionaire is causing yawns in the newsrooms. Now, if he was an arms dealer we'd be in business.

If you have a garage, at home. You might want you drop more details to get better answers. E.g. location.

I'm criticizing the use of the phrase "new global language." And I've laid out my reasons why I think that's wrong. I didn't think I was grilling OP, just the perception of Mandarin being the new global language. So I'm a little taken aback that you read it that way; that wasn't my intention.

I think the stereotype is douchebag because people don't think about all the possible legit reasons. I wear them when I have a migraine, often even at home. You could also wear them because they're prescription and you forgot the other pair at home. Or you simply forgot you have them on in the first place. We shouldn't judge but people like to judge. And they mostly judge douchebag because maybe more people wear shades indoors as an effort to build a personality around their empty shell of a self.

... how pervasive the new Global Language already is ...

I'm going to challenge you on this point. First of all, what's Chinese? I'm guessing you refer to Putonghua aka Mandarin, the erstwhile variant of Beijingnese prescribed for official use within the PRC by their political leadership.

And second, how "global" is it? It's useful primarily in one contiguous area of the world. Even there a large chunk of people kind of learn it as a first semi-foreign language because they speak something different at home. Cantonese, Shanghainese, or a language that cannot be written in Chinese characters.

Which brings me to my third point: a language that requires study of a script this idiosyncratic will not rise to a global language. Vietnam has gotten rid of hanzi, Korean pretty much as well. Ironically, the north has already completely abandoned it. By comparison, the Latin alphabet was spread by cavalry and cannon boat into all parts of the world for centuries. It spread so far that it is now used to teach pinyin to PRC schoolchildren. And while it is not without its own problems, the simplicity and adaptability of this phonetic alphabet to any language makes it far more useful than Chinese characters. And I'm not shitting on the cultural value of them: that's unimpeachable. It's just too complicated.

The alphabet spread with English, Spanish, French, and Portuguese all over the world. I'm not saying that's a good thing but it's already happened. Mandarin cannot have a similar success today unless the PRC starts colonizing at gunpoint fast.

Most Chinese as a foreign language speakers outside the PRC learned it for economic reasons. Economic ties have become somewhat dicey. If anything I suspect interest in learning Mandarin to wane.

There is also the tonal aspect. Any atonal-native language learner is going to have a much harder time than trying to remember the non-sensical English orthography.

More people on this planet learn English as their first and possibly only foreign language - if they learn one at all. The forum you asked this question on is in English. The internet cements the use of the alphabet.

I'm in Japan where foreign language education is notoriously sub-par overall. English is the first foreign language. Some private high schools offer Mandarin as an optional, I haven't seen anything substantial in state-run schools. At college level, most people chose between French and German as a second foreign language. Like we're still in the Meiji Era. I'm a big proponent that they abandon this tradition in favor of Russian, Korean, and Mandarin. It always helps to learn the language of your neighbors. Language schools advertize k-pop-trendy Korean more.