What if the white hat AI introduces the vulnerabilities?

I don't know why they emphasize the cybersecurity dangers though. It's like they want to get sued for encouraging attacks on company networks. Perhaps they think in America you can attack anybody without consequences. Perhaps they're right?

What for? The energy required is mainly for leaving the Earth gravity well, so substantially the same if you're merely slingshotting around the moon no matter where it is. The launch window is mostly a function of terrestrial climate and slightly unpredictable. The time to reach the moon would be less than 5% longer, a few hours more over 3 days. Probably timing the arrival for around peak TV times would be more important than minimizing the distance.

Joke's on you, Russia! Every single router had the credentials admin/admin.

Were they? Or are they just going along with TACO Tuesday pretending they negotiated?

That's not a breakfast! That's a space station!

It's no longer worth the effort with how cheap music streaming services are.

Are they? They're about 2x what they were 10 years ago. Maybe it's a case of frog in the slow boiler syndrome?

That's not convincing. Glass is more scratch resistant than plastic, but so what? If you can print rollable plastic phones for cheap, then you can sell disposable phones for cheap. Not everyone wants overpriced premium looking jewelry that they have to treat with care.

Like they did with Usenet....

From wikimoon, the orbit of the Moon relative to Earth is almost circular with an eccentricity of 5%, with an apogee approx 40,000 km greater than the perigee. That means, depending on the date, that the moon can be up to 40,000 km further away from the Earth (25,000 miles). That's a potential noise to signal ratio of 10:1 for comparing Artemis II with Apollo 13.

Why glass? Plastic would work just as well. And 3d printing is not necessarily required. Chips are printed using photolithography.

You beat me to it. He needs revenue ASAP, or if not, then to scare the lawmakers enough so that, when the investors come knocking, they'll be willing to bail him out, because bad.

Indeed, the American judge issuing the ruling definitely has no clue what a "swap" is.

Just because someone does a bad thing with a tool, then turns around and says he didn't do it... well that's not a good reason to believe them. In the real world, we call these people criminals and hunt them down, we don't say "oh, the tool messed up, could have happened to anybody."

Here's your answer.