Immigration that is happening today in context of North America is largely, predominantly about economic migration. People from less prosperous and less stable countries want to move to a better country and do not care that such move has negative effect on the country they are migrating to. You are trying to weave pseudo-historical narrative about colonial oppression by the West is divorced from history. That narrative was concocted by Soviet propagandists to sabotage West.

I don't know why you call it political system when it is culture, but other than terms you used - fully agree. More so, failure to assimilate is more likely with the higher migration levels. Newcomers join ethnic enclaves and continue operating as if it was their home country.

You identified the issue, but misdiagnosed it. Globalism is falling apart, not capitalism. By this point everyone realized that exporting manufacturing jobs elsewhere or importing mass cheap labor benefits nobody but globalist elite that have no allegiance to any country or any people.

Joining organically? There is nothing organic about what is happening right now. No Western population wants such high level of migration; you had Brexit, you have far-right parties coming to power in France, Trump 2 in US, etc. It is universally opposed, unpopular, top-down globalist policy that is going to destabilize established world order. The real question is why force it on the unwilling population and risk inevitable chaos, unless causing chaos is the goal?

Smearing your political opponents as racist is so passe.

Most of these places always high level of crime, poverty, corruption, and never knew any other form of government but dictatorships.These endemic issues also predate colonialism. These don't cause exodus, having an accessible alternative in the West is what cause exodus. Yes when these migrants arrive to the west, they continue destructive behaviors that led their home countries to be drowned in crime, poverty and corruption.

Because before modern era border guards would shoot at would-be migrants if they approached border.

Yes, it is going away from Swissness.

Why leave out crime, corruption, and dictatorships made by their own people?

Siberia in Russia, Northern Canada are huge and sparsely populated. Yet there is no migration to these areas. Why? Because current migrant crisis is all about economic migration and not climate migration.

What banking has to do with immigration? Are you trying to argue that countries with successful central banks are not allowed to control migration? If that is your argument, what level of inflation is acceptable while still maintaining borders? 5%? 10%? 100%?

Central banking is not unique to Switzerland, Zimbabwe had the same ability to issue unlimited currency (and they did exactly that multiple times).

So according to you, when Switzerland natives want to keep their country it is eugenics, but when the very same people move elsewhere they become vile colonizers. Why such double-standard?

This is further automation of QA (testing) and not development (coding). QA automation is nothing new, AI is just a new necessary tool.

To put it differently, the "compiled and run it once" bar have been raised.

Sure. The attacker is now out of some CPU time and bandwidth. Unlike previously, where attacker's time would've been wasted.

There are some efforts to automate vulnerability tracking, like incorporating SBOM tools into QA process, but largely this is still done manually. Which means that AI's throughput will simply overwhelm all existing manual system until everyone catches up on automation. I expect we will see 100-long exploit chains of trivial vulnerabilities, I expect we will see AI getting integrated with fuzzing, I expect we will see longstanding low-level protocols exploited in novel ways.

There is no way anyone but a non-techie boomer would get a cable when you can stream or pirate.

Regulation tends to be the most expensive option. You can look at Canada and dairy supply management - better milk, more stable income for existing farmers, but it is very expensive for consumers. That is the best case scenario.