Do elaborate?

I wasn't "taught" it by anybody, just like you were never "taught" how to spell. But slavery exists in modern-day Western society, just as human trafficking still exists.

Nah, I'm pretty sure this one's a robot. But it's a robot that's purpose-built to run a half-marathon. Huh? What's the utility of that? And somebody's going to have to convince me that it's not remote controlled.

Put it to you this way: You know what else can beat a human in a marathon? A car.

Uh-huh.

Even supposing you are right (which you are not), it's not much of a badge of honor to end something you started.

Pretty much sums it up.

Ask your city managers to prohibit drones.

Drones are dangerous. We have heard of only a few serious accidents. If drone delivery continues, there will be many more accidents, including a package delivered by a drone hitting someone.

Perhaps, but PCoIP was a specialized protocol aimed mostly at niche markets. Graphics production for Hollywood movies was one, where leaks of pre-released materials could sink the whole project. With PCoIP, you can distribute your graphics work across multiple independent studios, and none of them actually keeps any of the assets on their own machines. They're essentially doing their high-res graphics work on thin clients.

Another market was testing for higher education, for similar security reasons. People try to cheat on tests all kinds of ways.

Teradici always kind of struggled to market PCoIP, though, because their primary "product" was really just a protocol. Their model was to license it to other companies, who then used it to build bespoke solutions for clients. There was a bunch of intellectual property behind it, but not everybody could see the value. They even considered open-sourcing it, but I don't think they were ever serious enough to get someone to consult them on how they could do that and still preserve the licensing revenue.

(Full disclosure: I spent about a year helping Teradici with PR.)

What? You're not going to advocate for it??? I thought you were invoking some kind of principle or something.

You're down with Russia killing far more Ukrainians, whom they claim are their own people?

You're down with what China's doing to the Uyghurs, whom they claim are their own people?

And while we're on the topic, how many Iranians should we be willing to kill to save them from their leaders? Nuclear extermination would surely do it... do you advocate that?

But maybe it won't take that much. Regime change in Afghanistan only cost 2000 American lives, 175,000 Afghan lives, and 2,000,000,000,000 dollars, but we sure got rid of those sorry... What? They're back in power?

Only the simplest minds think intervention automagically yields the intended result. In fact the current sorry situation in Iran is a direct result of us trying to "fix" things more to our liking in the middle of last century.