> "Think of the children!" - Say the 40-year-old millennials who were exposed to the Wild West of internet content as children and are still fine.

While I'm not 40 yet: I was exposed to "the Wild West" and I was certainly not fine. And even then, I'd argue that today's social media is even more damaging for the psyche than everything I was exposed to.

> "Our child will become a pariah without the internet!" - In what way, exactly? They still go to school, still play sports, still go to chess club/band/theater/etc, still ride bikes around the neighborhood, still hang out at friends' houses, etc. All the kids will not hate them because their parents refused to give them a smartphone. (How do I know? I know a kid who grew up without one. Has plenty of friends.)

Not all communities are like this, but I have certainly seen it:

- They still go to school: Sure, but they will miss out on class group chats that, depending on the school, might be important. Or, even worse, will miss information from teachers. - still play sports/go to chess clubs/etc: Sure, unless all club communication happens over chat apps/social media and is required to join. - All the kids will not hate them because their parents refused to give them a smartphone: Maybe not. Maybe they will be because they are the odd one out (How do I know? I was the kid who grew up without the back-then equivalent)

Tbh there are more issues if they wanted to be compliant with EU regulations. I'm fine that they aren't compliant (they aren't in the EU, after all), but it's something to be aware of when ordering from them.

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20140118011319/http://www.haz.de...

But since this whole ordeal started, I'm divided where to place the blame (besides the attacker, of course):

- Can we really victim-blame someone for falling for an attack? Sure, people in positions this important should know better, but I don't think we should put the blame on the victim. - Should we blame Signal for even providing the functionality that allowed the phishing in the first place? Signal announced changes that supposedly makes phishing harder, so apparently, something could've been improved before? - Should we blame the software-world entirely that having credentials that can be shared is even a thing? (Looking at passkeys) - Should we blame society that the knowledge about phishing attacks isn't ingrained into every person? (being a bit hyperbolic here) - Should we blame the administrative staff that allowed exposed politicians to even have apps that make phishing possible? It would be possible to make a super-secure messenger that needs much more verification than just "having the credentials". It's just super annoying and impractical for most people. Should we prevent exposed politicians from even having access to not super-secure messengers?

I feel like things could be improved to prevent phishing attacks in the future. I just don't know what is the most sensible point to start.

What I'm saying is - just because the BSI authorizes something, doesn't mean that it has to reach the Bundestag ;)