nothingnew2

That is true enough. In this case, I think a useful learning outcome is that the backwards reading is, in theory and ignoring the emotional word choices, as politically extreme as the forwards reading. However, I doubt most will see it this way.

It's better than "polarised but unbalanced".

Polarised, but still balanced due to the symmetric nature of the poem's structure!

I think you've missed the entire point of the structure of the poem - the backward reading (ie, immigrants may share my home and food) is as "tame" as the forward reading.

>That means you must also oppose empathetic messages in release notes, to be consistent.

Yes. It will be interesting reading these cultural artifacts after 50 further years of geo-political development.

I like how you get to read it in the direction you most agree with. Very politically balanced!

Sure. https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?&_nkw=nokia+105&_sacat=0

YMMV, depending what cellular bands are available in your country.

I've succesfully rolled out a (IMHO) better version of the "Freedom" app, that comes with a load of other benefits like being cheaper and even more effective. My phone can only make calls and texts because it's a dumb phone, and I have to go to my computer if I want to waste time on the internet.

>in the hands of a kid, today's phone technology and it's inability to stop this crap it's the incarnation of evil.

Yet you continue to pay his phone bills.

Rejecting "technology" is, IMHO, a perfectly rational response to the typical layers of consultants, sales teams, and general lack of knowledge of the fundamentals of tech that result in the isses described above. You can't win.

We have been ensnared by our own technology.

https://netfuture.org/2001/Nov1501_125.html

Have you ever tried making this complaint? In the context of OP's comment about schools and technology, you will only ever get told "well, everyone else wants this". Sadly, this is true.