The recent federal raid on the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson isn’t merely an attack by the Trump administration on the free press. It’s also a warning to anyone with a smartphone.
Included in the search and seizure warrant for the raid on Natanson’s home is a section titled “Biometric Unlock,” which explicitly authorized law enforcement personnel to obtain Natanson’s phone and both hold the device in front of her face and to forcibly use her fingers to unlock it. In other words, a judge gave the FBI permission to attempt to bypass biometrics: the convenient shortcuts that let you unlock your phone by scanning your fingerprint or face.
You’re projecting a lot of tone and intent that doesn’t exist in my comment, nor in my view of the issue, and you’re doing it with a hefty dose of snark. That’s unnecessary, unhelpful, and unkind.
In future, you might consider multiple ways that other people’s comments could be interpreted, rather than leaping to assumptions that give you an excuse to criticise them and control the conversation.
Be well. Goodbye.
if you want to avoid people “leaping to assumptions” - or “filling in the blanks” as I might call it, then you could avoid comments like
which is inviting exactly that.
I’m not making any assumptions about tone; my parody of tone was meant to emphasise the pedantic nature of the point, regardless of how you would have spoken it. No, that’s not kind, but this is important. It’s not kind to distract from the real issues.