You may not like traditional religious cultural values because they restrict your behavior, but they worked. They got us here.
There is a broad range of behaviors in accord with "traditional religious cultural values". Does the ritual human sacrifice of several primitive religions qualify as worthy of continuation because they're part of what "got us here"? Or apply the same question to Muslim clitorectomies.
Careful removal of bad practices is essential to the improvement of human behavior. Especially important is the removal of the religious justification of all commands, "because I told you so.". Bullying is implicit in the word "command", and it encourages the person receiving the command to find ways to become the giver of commands, i.e. to become a bully.
Moral teaching needs to pay more attention to doing things that are demonstrably good for all concerned. Be productive, make quality products, advance knowledge, create understanding. Accentuating things that shouldn't be done makes those things a temptation, and when those things are presented they should be shown as self-destructive, rather that just pointing and saying "BAD. Don't do that!". Conventional morality needs closer examination so that damaging aspects can be pointed out. (For instance charity may temporarily help the recipient and make you feel warm and pious and self-righteous, but it has a negative side including dependence of the recipient and making you poorer by the amount of your gift.)
"they worked. They got us here." Think how much better off we would be now without the cultural flaws that led to the fall of Rome and the Dark Ages. We might now have a civilization benefiting from an effective 500 to 1000 years of scientific advancement. "Here" is a place that includes the effects of bad religious practices including persecution of witches and beheading of non-believers.
No. You don't. Because that isn't possible to do. The fact that this guy even said that means he is clueless about mobile. He needs to be replaced.
Ah our resident doofus. If he said he had a PC to replace your phone, obviously he'd be clueless. A phone to replace your PC? Why not, for most people their phone now has way more power than the PC had ten years ago, it just has bigger input/output devices. Microsoft could make a x86 phone with a HDMI/DisplayPort/USB dock (or just an USB-C cable hookup) and it'd make a perfectly satisfactory PC for most people. His problem will be that nobody wants the phone side of it, they want their iApps or Google Play-apps.
I stopped wearing a wristwatch 10+ years ago. It was annoying to wear while using a laptop. There's clock on my phone, computer, car, radio, egg timer.. I don't see the point in carrying extra one on my wrist.
To me it's exactly the opposite, sure there are all these different context-dependent places I could see the time but my watch is always there and I can just glance down 0.2 seconds to see how long do I have to get somewhere or be somewhere or have spent on something or have left of something. I feel it gives me more control over the day than if I don't wear one because the overhead is so small, if I have to pull my phone out of my pocket I don't really do it unless I need to know the time. I put it on in the morning, take it off when I go to bed and it runs years on a battery so that very little "nice-to-have" is balanced by a no-fuzz experience. Don't know how your watch is or how you type but I don't have a problem using a keyboard all day with mine.
You don't need the totalitarian bullshit.
But the totalitarian bullshit is the principal goal.
Raising babies takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure. An adult human is mostly self-sufficient; babies are not. As somebody said, it really does "take a village" to raise a child.
Reality check: Children have grown up all over the planet for all of history with no infrastructure with poorer parents often raising half a dozen of them. The way we raise western 21st century kids means most parents have enough with a few, but unless they quite literally die they grow up every other way too. The "takes a village" saying is about society's influence, everybody wants to fit in with their peers and prevailing norms, even if that is at odds with your parents.
Okay, so we've got the mining robots, the auto-fuelling spaceship dock, the autonomous telephone sanitizers... I can't help feeling there's something we're forgetting... Oh! Right - people. Hang on. Why are we sending people again?
Because we're not smart enough to make a robot that could and would do what we'd do and telepresence would be hopeless with the delay. Take the stupidest person you know that can drive a car. Ask him to write the software for a self-driving car, might as well ask him to jump to the Moon. Not even many man-years of the best and brightest has managed to get their car a driver's license that millions of teenagers manage every year. If there's a real base there will be plenty that goes wrong or becomes defective and plenty to fix. If it's just to have humans in a bunker eating canned food until their return flight, then yeah there's not much point.
If you don't want to be homeless, build a house.
Homeless generally means both "not a landowner" and "has no money" which prevents the former even if they wanted to go there.
If you don't want to be hungry, go fishing.
Buy a license, buy a pole, collect bait somehow, weather considerations, legal locations, seasons, specific game fish, prepping, finding wood to cook with...
If you want to survive, get your ass moving instead of wasting the day pseudo-intellectualizing or lamenting about the unfairness of nature that has always existed since the beginning of time when it blew the first human village up with a volcano and the laws of the universe didn't even blink, let alone give a shit.
No, the universe doesn't, for sure. But people who are worth a shit, do give a shit.
WRT "get moving", to quote a fine summary of just one aspect of the problem, "I'm pretty sure McDonald's has an underwear inside the pants policy" (Source here at 3:31 but by all means, check out the whole performance, it's pretty much spot on from beginning to end.)
It's been standard on newer phone for a few years now.
You mean the Supreme Court which the next president will have at least two positions to fill.
The phone locks after 4 or 5 invalid attempts, so they can only really brute force the most commonly used fingers.
"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman