No, an engineer who designs a sexbot has an app for that.

Survival strategy for the genes, not the organism.

Debtor's prisons were real and need no quote marks. As late as the 19th century, if you owed debts you could not pay, you could be literally imprisoned in a workhouse where your tiny wages went to pay off the debt, often far insufficient to make headway paying it off. The poster is not insensitive, but rather has a better history education than you.
The dilemma is that in order to pay off your student loans you need decent work, but in order to get decent work you need to pay off your student loans.

How dare you make distinctions, sir! This ridiculous amount of sense you're making threatens my confidence that I am not in fact the Archangel Michael, but only named in his honor. I won't stand for it!

The tail heats up so that it's more obvious to the snake than the body, while it moves rapidly to reduce the chance of the fangs actually stabbing the flesh of the tail.

They just cancel your account?

That carries no legal weight. The fact of a copyright is something determined by law, not by "agreement". You are not bound to obey copyright on the force of having "agreed" something is under copyright, you are bound by whether a work actually fulfills the requirements set forth by whatever applicable copyright law is in effect.

It isn't. What is their fault is choosing to deliberately sabotage their identity validation procedures with the express purpose of keeping call volume (and hence government reimbursement) high, while knowing that the increased traffic would be largely overseas scammers, which they represented themselves as properly blocking according the deal they made with the government that allows them to operate the service in the first place.

Your responsibility under the ADA is to take the calls... not to take suspicious orders. If a hearing caller making the same order would be refused, then it's just fine to refuse the order from the relay caller... but you must provide the same service to a relay user as you would to a regular hearing caller.

Relay services operate under FCC regulation and the Americans with Disabilities Act. FCC rules do not permit interference with calls, even calls involving illegal activity. This is because the phone calls of hearing impaired callers must be functionally equivalent to those of hearing telephone users. Hearing callers do not have operators on the line listening to their calls and disconnecting them if they do bad things, and so neither must hearing impaired calls have them. For the same reason calls are confidential. The only basis AT&T has to stop these was when the FCC first allowed the exception that international callers were not entitled to relay services, and required that relay providers develop procedures to reliably identify and disconnect such fraudulent scam calls. Evidently the problem for AT&T is that they did not take that responsibility seriously enough, perhaps as compared with the success rate of other TRS providers.