Python - First appeared 1991; 25 years ago

That's Python 1.0 which is crude when compared to Python 2.0 which was released in Oct 2000.

If you are going to cite Python 1.0 which was limited and ran only on the Amoeba OS then you might as well compare it to Oak (Java's predecessor) which existed in 1991.

Using NRA's logic: If you don't have a gun to protect your family, you'd just use a knife or a baseball bat.

Everyone understands the concept of sale and ownership. However, you haven't explained how this "right" compels manufacturers to make their goods consumer serviceable or even to supply parts to the consumer.

I understand the concept quite well thank you.

You haven't explained how manufacturers are required to make their goods consumer serviceable or to supply parts for repairs.

Playing the devil's advocate... Where exactly is our "right to repair" granted? Is it in the constitution? Is it a bill signed into law?

Judging by the lobbying efforts that are taking place now, we actually don't have a right to repair. We would like one though.

driving their SUVs while never driving off-road or hauling cargo or carrying lots of passengers and complaining about the price of gas

Jealous? It's their money and they can spend it anyway they see fit.

You don't like it? Tough. Spend your own money how you see fit.

Do I think the world is full of assholes? Yea. Just don't become one yourself.

Actually you're wrong. You always had an option to use a different OS. You could even purchase a computer that didn't run Windows.

The courts decided that, since Microsoft had an overwhelming majority share of the desktop market, they should be considered a monopoly. They abused their monopoly by not only preinstalling internet explorer and making it an part of the OS but also by restricting the OEMs ability to preinstall a competing browser as a condition to receive heavily discounted licenses per machine sold.

Despite the actual motives behind Russia decision, the argument used against Google is very similar to the ones made against Microsoft. Google has a large share of the wireless handset market and it is alleged that they require manufacturers to make Google the default search engine. If this is actually the case then I can see why people liken this to the US vs Microsoft case.

Increasing the contact area of the bullet means more kinetic is passed on to the target instead of simply passing through.

Compare swinging a sword at a target versus swinging a baseball bat using the same force.

I use TSA locks to keep the zippers on my suitcase closed. TSA know how to unlock them during inspection and they lock the zippers back in place when they are done.

That doesn't prohibit modifying the device with such parameters, this prohibits having devices that are even able to be modified, and a device that is merely able to be modified, period, is able to be modified with such parameters.

That actual term is "properly authenticated software". That doesn't mean the firmware can't be modified. It means a method must exist that authenticate the firmware executed on the device. You are implying that it means no modification is allowed, but the FCC purposely waved their hands on the details of who or how the firmware can be authenticated with "the manufacturers may consider applying existing industry standards for strong security and authentication."

The FCC regs linked in the summary above:

An applicant must describe the overall security measures and systems that ensure that:

1. only properly authenticated software is loaded and operating the device; and

2. the device is not easily modified to operate with RF parameters outside of the authorization. The description of the software must address the following questions in the operational description for the device and clearly demonstrate how the device meets the security requirements. While the Commission did not adopt any specific standards, it is suggested that the manufacturers may consider applying existing industry standards for strong security and authentication.

(Usual IANAL applies)

The FCC is only interested in and authorized to prevent RF interference. Basically the FCC wants the manufacturers to put safeguards in place that prevents the device from operating out of its authorized bands and/or cause willful interference to other devices. It didn't ban all firmware modifications. The manufacturer needs to make the radio not operate out of its approved allocations and make a method to ensure that the firmware is modified by authorized individuals using standard authentication methods.

You are free to continue to panic if you desire.

Don't forget the more vague sentences that seem to cover the bots:

Our Site and our Service also is geared to provide you with amusement and entertainment. You agree that some of the features of our Site and our Service are intended to provide entertainment.

The cost of changing all the documents and textbooks that reference that mountain.

Even history textbooks are updated and replaced at regular intervals. More facts are discovered and the textbooks wear out from use. Nothing is forcing anybody into quickly replacing textbooks. It will work itself out.

Teachers can also point out the new name of the mountain. I think they can handle it.

That's fine, but it doesn't belong to the people of Alaska. It's a national asset.

While that is technically true, I'd give more precedence to the Alaskans since it is within their state.

The Ohio delegation has been from both parties.

Of course it was. That just shows how desperate Ohio is for the attention.