> OP's premise is that "Firefox is gone" and "Chrome is the only option". That suggests Chrome is better than current Firefox.
To be fair, OP asked if "Chrome-ish" is the only option, i.e. Chromium-based browsers - not Chrome itself.
Even so, I don't think the implication is that Chromium is better than Firefox, but that without Firefox only Chromium-based browsers remain. "If I don't want to use Firefox, is it really only Chrome-clones available?"
When Firefox removed Do Not Track in December last year [0] people also freaked out, which came as a considerable surprise to me; I thought most tech-savvy users were well aware of the flaws with DNT, and were well aware of DNT's newfangled replacement (GPC) that Firefox had already adopted [1].
I will never understand why people attack Firefox so eagerly at every given opportunity.
There are no "100% safe" solutions. There will always be weaknesses and vulnerabilities in any system. The sort of criminal who requires or expects 100% safety is quickly going to be caught due to being a dullard. Knowing you're never truly "safe" is what good criminals are keenly aware of at all times: you can plan and prepare for certain eventualities. Once you think you're "safe", it's the beginning of the end.
You don't do something, once, and then are good to go forever. Banks don't just put cash in a safe and forget about it; they have audits, security guards, cameras, threat intelligence profiling criminal gangs, etc.
I'm in the same boat; diagnosed with ADHD-PI (UK, so we don't use the term 'ADD') as an adult. I've improved vastly thanks to medication and good routines but it remains a constant effort, and improvement is a continual process. The book Taking Charge of Adult ADHD by Russell Barkley helped me significantly.
For me, it was fantastically depressing: basically it says: “OK, so you have ADHD. Sucks to be you. Go through this huge laundry list of these and those things to do, don’t forget to take your medication, find a mentor — assuming anybody would want to deal with you, and who could blame them? — and if you are extremely lucky, and with heavy effort, maybe you can become half a normal man or woman who runs through all of this effortlessly, which you’ll never be. What a burden to society!”
All of this is true perhaps, but now I just want to die.
Whilst I didn't get that exact impression from the book, Barkley is known for being "realistic" about ADHD: he doesn't hide the fact that, depending on severity, ADHD can levy a heavy toll on a person, significantly impacting their quality of life. ADHD sucks, but we can make it suck significantly less through good habits, good routines, healthy eating, exercise and, where appropriate, medication and other forms of psychological support.
It's a cliché, but comparing yourself to others is a bad idea in this domain. I have yet to meet an ADHDer who makes these sorts of "upward comparisons" and derives anything useful from them; they typically just exacerbate feelings of inadequacy and hopelessness.
Personally, I know I might never be as effective or productive as a person without ADHD is capable of being, but I can be the best version of myself — it's fruitless and unhealthy to ask more of yourself than this, right?
I thought that too, but perhaps only personal data is deleted irrecoverably, allowing them to retrieve other/periphery account data; maybe an account's "fans" aren't considered personal data, for instance? I'm not familiar with TikTok, admittedly.
Otherwise, perhaps there was some delay on account deletion?
I support EFF from time to time, but ISTM this case could have inspired some reflection on the not-completely-graceful COPPA regulation itself, in addition to the low-calorie castigation of the latest Chinese-origin USA moral panic. How effective is COPPA in meeting its stated goals? Could it be more effective, with fewer undesirable side effects like those described here?
According to the FactCheck article you linked, the law requires that families either be separated or released.
> In 2016, a court ruling limited how long children with their parents could be in family detention centers.
Obama released families. Trump has taken a stricter stance against immigration, which requires some unpleasant enforcement, but once again according to FactCheck, he did order that families be kept together as long as possible:
> On June 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing Nielsen to keep families in custody together “during the pendency of any criminal improper entry or immigration proceedings involving their members” at least “to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations.”
Yes, because Trump doesn't really have the legal power to ignore the Flores settlement with an executive order, but the public pressure made it impossible for anyone to challenge the EO.
Out of curiousity, how would you suggest people trying to enter the United States with children should be handled, without just allowing them to enter freely?
To be fair, OP asked if "Chrome-ish" is the only option, i.e. Chromium-based browsers - not Chrome itself.
Even so, I don't think the implication is that Chromium is better than Firefox, but that without Firefox only Chromium-based browsers remain. "If I don't want to use Firefox, is it really only Chrome-clones available?"