Hondor

Is it really law though, or just an option? Don't give your password and don't enter.

My comment was about things staying the way they were, not only immigration. China is unrecognizably different now because of growth. What if you didn't like high rise apartments spoiling your ocean view? Sorry, it's changed. What if you didn't like having no young people working on your farm and looking after you when you're old? Sorry, it's changed. What if you didn't like not knowing your neighbors because there are too many of them? Oh, and people in cities have even largely changed their dialect to be able to communicate with Chinese from other areas. Somebody who prefers to keep their same way of life wouldn't get on well there.

Locals don't have to learn immigrants' languages. They also don't have to integrate with them. But they can. If you value integrating and sharing a language, then you personally should go to the trouble of doing that, not complain that somebody else isn't doing what you want.

Expecting things to stay the way they are isn't compatible with economic growth. If you want a stagnant place, you should find one which has such restrictions written into its laws or bylaws so you can have more confidence that it'll stay how it is. What else don't you want to change? Young people looking at their smartphones all day instead of having conversations with you? No new slang words? Where are the boundaries of what you expect other people are obliged to do for the benefit of your feeling of familiarity?

Is it migrants that refuse to learn the local language, or locals who refuse to learn the migrants' languages? I don't see that either group is in a position to demand what the other group learns or how they conduct their private activities. If you want to be part of their community then learn their language. If you prefer to isolate yourself with your fellow locals, then do that. Both ways are OK and you have nothing to complain about.

The native Maoris were pressured into learning the immigrant's English language 100+ years ago. Perhaps you would be happier if that never happened?

It's ironic that you're in Singapore, an openly multi-lingual country. Which groups are using the "wrong" language there?

Stealing back your car can certainly cause problems if done privately by the owner. But here it's the product itself that already came with a bricking mechanism built in and activated it itself. The buyer trusted the seller not to provide a self-bricking phone, and got ripped off. It's never going to affect an innocent phone. It's also no physical items being taken or damaged. No baby is going to be trapped in it, etc.

Actually, there's a very analogous thing for cars - LoJack. Is that wrong too?

It happens with copy protection on software. I've heard of games that become impossible to win if they detect they're pirated. Others that just fail entirely. Is that not OK either?

They company surely did lose something. Customers who wanted to buy their product ended up buying an illegal competitor's product instead. There might even be some customers who go back and buy a genuine phone now that they can't use their fake one.

They're enforcing their copyright. Why not? The police can also confiscate computers with pirated software on them. They even do that sometimes. It doesn't return the money to the IP owners but it's still a way to deter theft.

It sounds like a good idea to me. Even if it doesn't recover their lost sales, it should prevent future black market copies since customers will know to avoid unofficial sellers.

If you bought a car that turned out to be stolen, you might wake up one day to find it's gone because the police recovered it for the owner. It's similar here - buyers looking for a bargain that might be illegal are part of the problem of IP theft. They can seek recourse through the seller they got it from, and if that doesn't work, they shouldn't have trusted a dodgy overseas black market seller with their money.

> ... has access to your browsing history, your search history, your entire internet history ...

That's a bit over the top. They'll only have access to data that you already knew lots of people have access to anyway. Not HTTPS sites where they'll only have the domain name. So they won't have your Google search history but will for Bing which bizarrely defaults to HTTP.

Perhaps if a bike is unused for a long time, or repeatedly gets returned immediately after borrowing it, they assume it's broken and pull it out for servicing. Not having docks, they wouldn't need to put the replacement bikes back at the same location or time and that could be done in cheaper batches.

It does't matter how poor the poorest people are. They'll always be extremely poor. The important change is that their numbers are falling. If your job is to work with the poorest people, you won't see the ones who never became poor in the first place due to global improvements in quality of life.