It's not just the implied associations; popular music lyrics are usually about the life of 20-somethings.
I'm now 38 and still enjoy ~1/5th of regular new pop music, but the rest just seems to be talking about things I simply don't care about any more.
I'm also less likely to follow pop fads. Looking back, I no longer enjoy the pop fads of my own youth either.

It's the same with movies. Who over 30 would watch a Twilight movie? Who would have probably watched it back when they were 20?

The people who's data was spied upon, never agreed to any EULA.

Then disallow calling 911 from NSI phones and start giving away free but registered 911-only SIM cards with the phones.
Heck, make it empty but upgradable pre-paid cards and telecom providers will probably pay you money to give them away.

Holy crap, you mean all this time the pirates could have actually been stealing movies and thus kept the rest of the world from ever seeing them? I guess we're lucky they only made copies.

We could just call the cat "God" instead and suddenly it'll have millions of devout followers.

App developers aren't some special magical people that have extraordinary powers to influence users.
They have a moral responsibility not less or more than that of a store clerk, a fashionmodel, a garbage collector or pretty much everyone else.

I think you're using the reasoning that only religious people can be atheophobic. That would explain why you though you saw a rational used that wasn't. Both religious and non-religious people can be atheophobic. Unless you define all non-religious people as atheists ofcourse, in which case this all is merely a semantics argument. Then again, perhaps even atheists can be atheophobic ;)

My conclussion being what exactly?

Gerald the pink-furred cat only exists in your imagination.

Spoken like a true atheophobe..

Art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
Completing an art college does not make you an artist, it makes you a craftsman at best.
Having people willing to hand over their own money for what you've created makes you an artist.
This does not include government subsidies and grants; that's OTHER people's money.

FWIW, I do like some of modern art. Skill shouldn't be any factor; if somebody can create something mindnumbingly awesome with minimal technical skill, I'd still consider it art, because it's still mindnumbingly awesome and I'd pay for it.

The last electrical device after humanity ends will be the deathray which the aliens used to blast humanity out of existance.

Serves you right for deliberately making incompatible apps.
The world has known about the evil of IE-only apps well before .NET existed.

Thing is, these are really hard problem to solve, since they are essentially all about moral values, which are always subjective in nature.
The technical bit is just about the least significant; you could probably make a really accurate dog vs. human detector, but -like all software- it won't ever be 100% free of bugs.
This is why lawyers keep bringing up the problem of who is responsible in a self-driving car.

If you can legally get content for free, you'd be stupid to pay.
If you can't, you'd be a asshole to take it for free anyway.