Yes, he truly lived long and prospered...

That is a good idea, but you have to be careful how you track work. We used to do estimates based on hours worked and thus come up with a price. Since the work was fixed price the actual hours were irrelevant to the customer's cost; but very relevant to our team. Going over was bad; and going under yielded us no benefits other than having to explain low utilization; even if we had huge profit margins. As a result, our total hours billed to a project always exactly matched the estimate. One word of caution, never let the sales person estimate the cost or duration; they are rewarded on sales and so have an incentive to underbid to get work and let the team try to deliver.

Correct. Our rule was "Give away the initial project because we'll retire on the change orders..."

While I agree with most of your points there is no such things as 100% secure data; some is only harder to get than others. It only take step right approach to get it.

Repetitive and easily managed process are ripe for replacement, just ask telephone operators, and higher paid positions are reduced in favor of less costly staff trained in specific functions, just as MD's about NPs and Nurse Anesthetists. As machines get better at collecting, analyzing and recognizing patterns people who do that will be replaced by machines, just as the spreadsheet replaced begins of low level accountants crunching numbers by hand. The ability to use that information for decisions making will mean higher level cognitive skills will still be in demand, as will the ability to recognize and react in unforeseen circumstances. Flying FedEx drones from a room in Memphis is a great idea, but what happens when you lose the radio link or your instrument data goes haywire and you need to figure to what is going on; while controlling a hundred other plans as well? Planes already have gone to 2 person crews since automation has eliminated the need for the flight engineer and many planes can pretty much fly from takeoff to touchdown without a pilot's intervention but the pilots are there not for the routine but for the unexpected. It's the ability to apply a solution in an unforeseen situation or green insights that will continue to be valuable; sure a machine can predict the success of a lawsuit, or the probability of a winning hand, but a good lawyer, like a good poker player, can find a way to turn a loser into a winner and that's what people pay for.

that because something uses the internet or an app it is somehow different from the same activity done the "old" way; when all the new thing is is an old process enabled by a different technology. If you got a bunch of people to agree to let you dispatch them to pick up rides and charge for them, added a bunch of POTS lines to handle the calls, and then connected paying passengers with drivers, you would be called an unlicensed cab company. Uber simply replaced the POTS lines with an app, the rest of the process is the same and yet they think they are different because they use disruptive technology; when a bunch of POTS lines is just as disruptive if not as convenient as an app.

Happens in Vegas all the time. Drivers are supposed to take the shortest route, or at least that is the law unless it has changed recently, or ask if you want a different one but on city to airport runs they go the long way. If you go through the tunnel they've nailed you for a longer fare; however if you ask them why the took the long route instead of the prescribed shorter one they will charge you the shorter fare. If they balk you can always ask the cop at the airport what to do and the driver doesn't want that because he may get fined. I was told this by an honest cab driver who was pissed that many cheat customers who when they find out think al cabbies are crooks; when I went to the airport lo and behold we went through the tunnel and when I asked the driver charged the lower fare.

It actually has at least a couple of advantages. The sooner you learn what doesn't work the quicker you avoid sinking vast sums of money into trying to make it work. If an adversary is working on it you can be assured it is a waste of time and money they could spend on something that might actually work. Of course, sometimes people are wrong about what won't work because they give up to soon; which is the downside of asking what won't work.

If it's built there the Chinese government has access to it; even if it isn't brand name but "OEM." In this case, refusing to buy while backdating the tech is a good PR move that will play well with their populace; so there is no downside to this move.

There is plenty of prior art. Mobile sintering machines that get emailed instructions on how to fabricate a part have been in use for quite a few years. Get the instructions, make a part via sintered printing, machine it to final specs. The US military uses them to fabricate parts by deployed troops, who can haul the machine around in a deuce and a half, or whatever they call a truck nowadays.

That would be true only if all French women are pregnant.

And here I thought the USA got all the nut jobs after the American War. Good to see the UK retained a few.

Correct. On this we agree.

Relative to other major metropolitan areas it is; especially if you're married and want to live in the suburbs. There ar plenty of homes in the 2-3K range within reasonable commuting distance.

The vulnerability is for those that don't want to return but eventually get a green card. The "Do this or I pull your visa threat" is very real for them; and they would generally be the lower level cheap IT labor pool people, not someone with very valuable and specialized experience that a company wants to keep.