Agreed - to an extent. IMO the current term of copyright is the primary issue - and the balance has tipped too far in favour of copyright holders; This case is a good example of the ridiculousness of that state - the artist has expired and is no longer able to enjoy the benefits of his work - yet he descendants expect to continue to profit from his work - which seems unreasonable and detrimental to society.
One nice thing about Next.js is you don't need to use SSR unless absolutely necessary - it will statically generate all your pages by default (which is similar to but not the same as SSR - it runs once at build time rather than on every single request), so the result is similar to CRA but with quicker first page load times and a much better developer experience.
But you have the power to use SSR where necessary too, which is not really possible with CRA (without unscalable hacks).
This case refers to alleged lawbreaking that may have occurred, and is fairly easy for people to morally reason about (CSAM), were it proved to be true.
The question in my mind is as to what the limits of this snooping is? Discussing out of state abortions in a location where it's outlawed? Conducting a homosexual relationship in a repressive state?
I see there are already multiple people busy Motte N Baileying you. Don't you like goodness and light, gatvol? Why don't you like progress, gatvol? Why? All we're asking for is good. What's wrong with good?
Well... yes. The main work described in the article is a work of fiction. i.e. a work of imagination, which means the author listens to his own inner muse. The protagonist is fiction, his experiences are fiction, his story is fiction. Lies, simply, but (if we're lucky) entertaining lies. The author is under no obligation to listen to others (especially their 'truths',) and may in fact harm his work by listening to others rather than trust his own sense of story. If he's an obligation to anyone, it'll be to the buying (and reading) public who'll decide the fate of his work.
Oh please. They also posted an interview with George Dawes Green[1] where he talks to Nick Gillespie (PHD in post modern literature) about his new book and has good things to say about interacting with a sensitivity reader despite his initial reluctance. Reason Magazine has a perspective but isn't just one thing. Kat Rosenfield the author of this piece has her own particular perspective, and is specifically writing about the manias of Young Adult fiction, which is notorious for moral panics and circular firing squads.
In answer to your second question: no, not really. The only thing to learn is that, like a certain North Pole elf, Tonto is a work of fiction. As is the Lone Ranger. As are all the bad guys they hunted, the sheriffs they met, the girls they wooed. Even the silver bullets came out of someone else's imagination.
