The article does not say that.
This article states That
National guidelines, introduced in January 2024, recommend banning smartphones from classrooms
There is a quote that seems to reference students not having their phones between classes, though it is not said whether they are prohibited or do not have access to them.
in the breaks between the lessons, students would be on their phones and now they’re forced to talk …
Focus is the end goal in the classroom, otherwise why bother going? They are not prohibited from using smartphones in their life, only in class.
Honestly what 'software restrictions'? You were a kid, I was too, most of us were. What's the first thing you do when you're told you can't do something? You find a way around it.
what did you learn in school today little Timmy?
i learned to drop tables tunnel into a VPN so I could watch Reels in class
And with a 2 to 4% approval rating she is clearly worth the money.
This article is pretty good in that it points out that Thailand has regulations in place to limit who large quantities are sold to. As always the problem is not legitimate sellers, but illegal sales.
And of course illegal sales will happen no matter the regulatory framework. This just hurts legitimate sellers, and the exchequer through decreased revenue .
Do you have problems reading this? On mobile I use ironfox, but I can read this fine with chromite too. I am in 'France' using Orbot. I also have tailored DNS blocking.
This is an honest question because I never have issues with the Guardian, with Cromite I occasionally get a 'Please register/ I'll do it later' message. With ironfox I don't even get that.
Isn't it not just cheap rice, but cheap Japanese rice? People in Asia are very particular about rice. They should be, rice from Japan, China, Cambodia, Taiwan, etc. all have a different taste. Nationalism plays in to it, but they are different. I think rice might be the ultimate Terroir crop.
When they said it was going to be refloated and serviceable in a month. It's basically scrap at this point. WWII ships you could salvage, modern stuff is kilometres of cabling connected to computers. Fix the hull and replace everything inside. Unless this isn't as advanced as it's made out to be.
It's vote with your dollars, which does in a sense shift blame to the consumer.
This doesn't have anything to do with trump though, its been going on forever. There will always be rich countries and poor countries. Poor countries provide labor for the rich.
The better argument to make is that $208 is higher than the average wage in the country for unskilled labor. That doesn't make it right, and it looks like shit when you break it down to 'I paid $45 for this shirt, and that's one of the 209 shirts that person made on Tuesday'.
The real issue here is that neither Nike nor almost anyone else in this sphere owns a factory. It's all contract work. So Nike, H&M, whoever, says 'I need 1 million black t shirts' and they put it out to bid. Manufacturers from Cambodia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, etc. Bid on it and Nike goes with the lowest bid that meets their standard of quality. Workers are paid by the month, not by the piece. Currently the wage in Cambodia, is $208, for six days a week.
If that is not acceptable to you then change your buying habits.