I'm not trying to claim superiority for never having dropped a phone - I understand that different people have different needs, and one of them is a phone that can survive frequent falls. However, I also recognize that features that myself and others use regularly are often removed from models that emphasize durability, whether or not their removal is actually helping, or just cutting costs. So I don't want to push phone manufacturers to focus so much on that one feature - that is important to some, but not to others - that they end up removing features that are equally important to certain people.

I got my first cell phone in middle school, and I knew that if it broke I wasn't getting another one, so I made sure to hold it securely when using it, since I didn't want to drop and break it. When I eventually upgraded to a smartphone a few years after they started getting popular, I held it even more securely, since it was even more expensive, and even more fragile. At this point it's just second nature to me to handle phones like I'm transporting fine china.

I agree that the features are possible while still making the phone sturdier, which I wholeheartedly support, but I also understand that capitalism doesn't usually let us have upgrades, only tradeoffs, and usually bad ones.

Keep it around so you can stick it on any particularly stubborn bananas or oranges later on.

Well, yes, but that's kinda my point. If you don't patent, you get exploited, like how the discoverers of insulin synthesis decided not to patent, so companies patented similar, but not exact methods, and now it's incredibly expensive. But, as you said, if you do patent, there is still a risk of exploitation if the patent holder sells to an exploitative company. However, that exploitation is still less likely than when not patenting, so I support the practice so long as patenting is still possible.

I worked at a small nonprofit back when genes were still able to be patented; we mostly studied the condition Pseudoxanthoma Elasticum, and held the patents to a few of the genes associated with it. However, we still allowed people to research them freely - we only patented them to prevent a company like Myriad Genetics, who had been patenting genes so that they could sell expensive genetic tests, from patenting it instead. We celebrated when genes were no longer able to be patented; I imagine that the researchers working with golden rice will do the same if we're ever lucky enough for GMO's to no longer be able to be patented.

The huge difference is who holds the patent. The example you gave involves Monsanto, the patent holder for several GMO crops, and a terrible company that does everything in its power to make money by exploiting people. Golden Rice, however, is patented by the scientists who designed it, who likely only patented it so that a company like Monsanto couldn't just make some similar GMO and patent it instead, using it to exploit people even more.

This same thing happened back when genes themselves were able to be patented; some companies like Myriad Genetics would patent genes like the BRCA gene, a common source of inherited breast cancer predisposition, so that they could charge an arm and a leg for testing. So, researchers and non-profits would patent genes that they found just ensure they could be fairly studied and tested for.

All uprising means innocents killed. There were many innocents killed in the American revolution and every other revolution, yet most are celebrated, because we all understand that revolutions only happen because far too many innocents are already being killed, and at least this solution stops that eventually. Revolution as a whole is meant to be a horrifying last resort for people who are left no other choice.

You're right. I'm a disgrace. Each and every one of us has the power to start a revolution, but we don't, and that makes each and every one of us a failure. I talk a big game, but I'm not going to be the one to rise up and stop warmongering. All I have the willpower to do is to hope that someone else finds that strength, and to point out the hypocrisy that I and every other person who supports Joe Biden while pretending to have a clear conscious displays.

You'd think so, right?

Sweet! I sure hope the inflation wouldn't completely invalidate the extra income, but I still have very little faith in American capitalism allowing for there to be money not immediately being funneled into the bank accounts of the 1%.

Tailgaters. I was terrified that if I slowed down too quickly they'd smash into me, so one time I took a turn too fast and crashed into a car I couldn't see because of a hedge, and the other I didn't brake quickly enough to stop for a guy who suddenly realized he wanted to take a left turn right then. I eventually told myself that if tailgaters crash into me, that's their problem for being so close behind me, and I just need to focus on what I'm doing.

Congrats! You don't have fetal alcohol syndrome!