It's worth noting that historically, Israel and Judah are iron age settlements. This makes references to the authors of the tanakh "bronze age sheepherders" wildly inaccurate at best and mostly offensively reductionist.
The second bullet point on the abusive aspects of phones address specifically your argument:
"They tell us the onus is on us to manage their behavior. It’s our job to tiptoe around them and limit their harms. Spending too much time on a literally-designed-to-be-behaviorally-addictive phone? They send company-approved messages about our online time, but ban from their stores the apps that would really cut our use. We just need to use willpower. We just need to be good enough to deserve them."
The abuser's refrain of "it's your fault, look what you made me do" is well-known.
They are throwing tokens at codebases and finding mostly vulnerabilities in cases that have not been worth the limited time and effort of the chronically underfunded and understaffed professional groups. There’d be a lot more value in the companies giving the money they spend on their synthetic text extruders to the organizations doing quality security research work.
Sounds about the same idea as taking a low-res picture of a document and saving it as a low-quality jpeg in folder full of low quality jpegs and then expecting those images to be useful.
Given the state of the power grid in Texas, this could be the most important consideration. Why? Texas is not connected to the national power grid, and only electricity from plants operating in Texas is available. The last winter and summer, demands on the grid have severely stressed, as reported in many places. In 2021 there as a state-wide crisis and almost a complete failure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” - Anatole France
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Frank Wilhoit
From the article: ”Loszak rejects the claim that nuclear’s new entrants threaten safety, arguing that excessive regulation has held back a technology”. I think I hear the ghost of Stockton Rush, who said the Passenger Vessel Safety Act of 1993 "needlessly prioritized passenger safety over commercial innovation" and, “I think I can do this just as safely by breaking the rules“.
So the article calls it "knowledge gaps". Has technical expertise ever mattered when the law wants to ban or restrict something it doesn't like? The DMCA comes to mind.