So overall in a general sense- “what do I do?” Use this as a growth opportunity and be thankful that the situation wasn’t worse, then move on with your life.

No one needs to be hurt or killed either. A spilled drink or spilled paint or dye, a ruined project, a broken heirloom or personal item- there are lots of things that can go wrong especially when you burst in “blind” of what is going on behind “closed doors.”
Even if you don’t care or dismiss these things it is just simple manners to knock or announce/request before entering someone personal space like that, both out of respect and out of prudence because as you know first hand- we never know what is going on behind closed doors.

Reflect on that fact and think about what would have happened if your sister was cleaning her ears or putting on eye makeup or doing crafts with a blade etc. and had stabbed herself. If she were climbing to hang wall decorations and fell and broke bones or hit her head. Reflect on the fact that she or someone else if startled might hurt you. You could be shot while pulling scare pranks, a scared person might attack you with bare hands or whatever object they are holding. People have literally been killed by a single punch or slap. The odds are relatively low but it happens and would that prank have been worth it? Is it worth having to have seen your sibling masturbating? Neither of you needed to have that unpleasant moment.

This may seem confusing if you try to relate to other concepts. “So fire isn’t hot then?” Generally fire is hot- but fire isn’t really a singular type of matter- there isn’t a “fire molecule.” At the molecular level fire is generally fuels, gasses, multiple types of matter that are involved in a reaction. Heat can cause fire, so all those molecules have atoms that are excited and this state of excitement is one of the primary means that what we know as heat is radiated. So fire is a reaction not a cohesive element or molecule. Fire is inherently tied to the changing of states of matter within the fire.

In this sense science is pretty straightforward that water itself is not wet. It can be made wet in theory, and it can make other things wet, but water doesn’t really get wet from itself, it produces wetness when interacting with certain other matter.
Of course by many dictionary definitions water could be said to be wet. This depends on the dictionary and in some cases how one chooses to interpret the meaning.
One can also argue that in nuance, while a moot point, that on a technicality wager could be considered at the saturation point with itself. There are a few other arguments to be made on the front that water is wet. The current general consensus in science is that water is not wet.

There are examples of where one might add another liquid to water and water hls become wet from the other liquid in theory, but water isn’t self wetting. Water can’t saturate itself. There is no limit to the amount of water you can add to water. If you keep adding sugar to water, eventually the water can hold no more sugar and sugar will start to float freely in the water or fall to the bottom of the vessel the water is in. If you continue to add water to water, you will just have more water because it is already and will remain “100% water” so long as you continue to add “pure water.” Any matter which is not water might eventually saturate the water and be free, but you won’t have water discreetly floating or settling that isn’t part of the larger mass of water.

Pretty much. I mean- It’s apply. Complaining to the manager or calling corporate if you are legitimately in the terms of service and not mistaken or pulling a screwy one will usually get you something- and a lot of the time if you’re just cool but insistent they’ll do something for you anyway just to keep you happy. Maybe not if the device is second hand and 10 years old or whatever. But Apple isn’t perfect and neither is every employee or store so yeah- basically as you’ve said. Get it documented and get the details and if they refuse legitimate service you have multiple channels and social media to turn to.

Well- kissing a man isn’t the ONLY way to learn about it, but it is one way. I know more than a couple women one could kiss to find out about it too, but- asking usually works too. If in doubt you can buy a Juggernaut and toss it at someone that is like 70/30 start a conversation or get kicked out of the store. At least according to my research.

Nice historical reference.

We know ages of conquest- where the strong or cunning preyed on the weak or weakened. We know of slavery as one of the oldest and most universal and enduring institutions. We know that much of history was kingdoms and empires and oppression and subjugation because where there is the freedom to do so and those with will and any ability, they will take control by force. Freedom doesn’t last on its own. That is history. Societies must create the most freedom they can protect and then protect it if they want to keep any freedom at all long term.

Only bound by physics and natural law. There were no governments or hierarchies until we made them. There were no marriages or police or jobs.
There wasn’t free information and only someone there to see something could watch it- and there were few enough people that you could easily not be seen.
At some point this changed and we know that much of the oldest history into the modern age shows a very similar pattern. Where there was lawless freedom, the ambitious and cruel tended to consolidate and use abuse and force and other means to constrain others to ultimately live their entire lives in service to the elites. We know that most of human history across most of the world was ran by rulers- singular or small groups with power and wealth which they usually kept to themselves.

So there is a balance. Life is all balance. Anyone who believes in total freedom is either ignorant or cruel. That is a world where parents do not guide children, where toddlers crawl between machines in motion to lubricate parts or die. Where children receive no education because they don’t want to go to school or learn and you can’t make them. Where children eat until they die or are crippled by poor nutrition- where people rape and murder each other without consequence if they feel like it and have the power to overcome the objections of another. It is s brutal and savage world where knowledge most likely stagnates. It is a place where free from rules, kings and depots create dynasties that last for centuries or millennia. Once upon a time, as far as we know, our ancestors were as free as wild animals.

Enter the big problem. Revolution tend to be illegal. The fact is that most modern governments and nations and even groups exist on some form of terrorism or violence.
Rebellion against tyranny or oppression. In a world without secrets and privacy there would be no United States or China or So on. Most of the rights for LGBTQ+, women, many ethnic or “racial” groups. These groups who often have faced systemic or social spanning persecution and even hostility against groups of numeric and/or position of power superiority would likely have been thwarted in efforts to gain rights ir even exist. Anne Frank couldn’t hide in an attic if there were no secrets. Subversion and change and secrets can be for good or bad. Not everyone would agree that the things I listed above are good things. They may argue some of those are arguments against secrets and privacy. Whatever your politics or beliefs there is likely some example where privacy did or or would have served your proclivities.

Now I personally do not advocate for the school of thought that “people with nothing to hide don’t need secrets or privacy.” For one thing I believe everyone has something to hide. I wonder how many of those people who say privacy isn’t necessary if you have nothing to hide would feel differently if we invented a cell phone app that could accurately read minds? I think that those people often either lack the self awareness to realize they do have things they want kept private or would be ashamed or upset to have known, or they are just good at keeping that stuff in their heads, but if there were truly no place safe from the sight of others, I believe they would not be happy.

There is that word again- consequences. So what is different between when your spouse or elder says that you can’t go into an area like the sacred lodge or you will be exiled or face punishment vs. When a legal system tells you that you can’t go into an area like a restricted zone or private property and you will be punished or exiled if you do?
If no one is watching- why have that rule? Because maybe you’d feel bad for breaking it? Then why have a punishment at all for people who break the rule of you can’t enforce it? If you can’t enforce a rule why have the rule? It’s pretty fundamental.

In a group of people you are never free of the perceptions of others, their opinions, the obligations and compromises of social relationships. You are never free of the contracts you enter.
And that is the rub- a person can use their freedom to give up or trade their freedom. When you form a tribe or family there is almost always obligations created. Things they need or want and you provide; things you need or want and they provide.
To meet these obligations you can’t be “completely free” as those obligations might conflict with what you want to do at any given moment. We can argue you are effectively free because you could choose not to meet you obligations if you desired to not meet them and were willing to face the consequences.

Once you make a rule to protect freedom, people aren’t “totally free” because there are rules. If you have rules you have to have people to enforce rules and methods to compel compliance and ways to deal with people who break rules or else your rules are useless. For those rules to mean anything you have to have consensus and consistency. People who agree on the rules and what they mean and how to enforce them. If you don’t want people to abuse the rules or self enrich or become despots you need checks and balances and rules about the rules and people to enforce those.

“That is different because lifting the weight no one will stop you except you, robbing a bank the police will try to stop you so that isn’t free…” not true at all. In an anarchy anyone can stop you from anything for any reason they choose. If you decide to walk through the park- someone can hunt you for fun or food or because they claim that park. That’s how anarchy works. That is what “total freedom” is- anyone can do anything they want- including kill you or hurt you. Wether you go outside or hold up in a fortress you can be hurt or killed at any moment if someone wants to and the only things stopping them are their desire and your strength. What? You’ll make a rule that people can do whatever they want as long as it doesn’t hurt other people or take other peoples freedom? That’s basically the underlying principles of the American legal system you rube.

In total anarchy you have inherently no more freedom than you do at this exact moment. You are never free from consequence. Nothing stops you from doing anything- except consequence or fear of. People argue that for example- just because a person couldn’t lift a 1000lb weight because they wanted to, they are still free because they could try, because they could possibly “earn” the ability through work and strength.
If that is true then you are just as free to rob a bank or become a world leader or anything else. It is not a lack of freedom that stops you from breaking the law, you simply lack the strength to break the law and be able to beat the police or others who would punish you.

There is no “true freedom” beyond living alone and naked in untouched nature and even then you aren’t “truly free.”
You are always constrained by the laws of nature and physics as far as we know.
Wether an animal or a plant or your own body or a micro organism- your will is never absolute nor is your baseline healthy ability. You are free within the confines of your circumstances. A quadriplegic is as free as any other citizen but cannot decide to go for a walk in the park. That is their circumstance. In absence of society and the law and order that underpin and facilitate those things your freedom is only as far as strength and luck allows you to take. You aren’t “free” because you can’t just do whatever you want. Or- you are no more free than you are right now.

So to know what is or isn’t being done privately vs. As a representative or what or personal vs. concerns your interests you either have to ask a person and go off what they tell you at face value, or you have to first know what happened so you can decide if you think it is your business. To know if it is something you think you should see or something you shouldn’t see you need to see it- but by the time you see it you can’t unsee it right? And then if you had no right to see it, their privacy is already violated.

If we try to say it is because what these people do concerns us- that basically abolishes most peoples privacy- parents and children, husbands and wives, bosses and employees- each of those people can do things that concern us.
What’s more… how do we know? It’s the “top secret” paradox. If you sue the government they can refuse to provide evidence or allow the suit because aspects are “too secret.” However to decide wether or not something is legitimately too sensitive to share you need to know what that information is- which you can’t if that information is too secret to share right? And the only people who can see the information to decide if the information can be shared are the people who don’t want you to see it….