> Well... It's a pass from me. Anything claiming something is "think of the children" is at best facetious.
That's taking it too far. It's really good to "think of the children," it's just that we have to be mindful of when that's used as a smokescreen to distract from a particular policy's highly objectionable consequences. That kind of expression also has multiple senses (e.g. "children are vulnerable and must be protected" and "we should build a better future for our children to enjoy"). The people behind this browser may not have English as a first language, so they may not be able to precisely tailor their language to English very online sensibilities.
> Well... It's a pass from me. Anything claiming something is "think of the children" is at best facetious.
That's taking it too far. It's really good to "think of the children," it's just that we have to be mindful of when that's used as a smokescreen to distract from a particular policy's highly objectionable consequences. That kind of expression also has multiple senses (e.g. "children are vulnerable and must be protected" and "we should build a better future for our children to enjoy"). The people behind this browser may not have English as a first language, so they may not be able to precisely tailor their language to English very online sensibilities.