I think that they have a good case against him on two counts:

1. making a false statement to federal agents when they asked for his passcode.
2. intentionally causing the destruction of any evidence which might have been on the phone.

His defense would be that he was acting under duress, and that his rights were being violated as they had no reasonable justification to search his phone.

The circuits have previously issued conflicting rulings on the application of the "border exception" to 4th amendment right to privacy with regard to the contents of cell-phones. It would wind up at the Supreme Court (many years from now), and there is a chance that the case could go against the government -setting a national precedent that the government does not want.

Prosecutors are risk averse. I expect they will make a deal or drop it altogether -eventually. Expect him to be dragged thru a couple years of court appearances. There is no reason for the government to make it easy on someone who defied them.

We know what satellites are made of: mostly aluminum, titanium, and carbon fiber, with small amounts of silicon, copper, lithium, plastics, etc.

The amount of crap that burns up in our atmosphere from naturally occurring meteorites and "space dust" dwarfs man made objects in space:
-Approximately 100 tons of natural space debris burns up in our atmosphere every day -or 40,000 tons annually.
-The total mass of all man-made objects in space is less than 20,000 tons, only about 1,000 tons of which burns up in the atmosphere annually.

It is a fart in the wind.

"I do not consent to any search or seizure. I want my attorney and will not answer any questions without my attorney present. I am invoking my right to reman silent." Then SHUT UP and wait.

Oh... and don't forget to ask: "Am I free to go?" The answer may be "yes."

If he actually did what he is accused of, then good for him! I hope the ACLU steps in to provide for his defense.

I would wish that the court would find "Fuck you, he has the right to privacy" (wishful thinking, I know...)

Even if he wins in the end, they are going to make his life hell.

...limits [on access to foreign models] could "stifle competition or drive innovation overseas."

Translation: "They copied from us, and then released an improved version. If you block us from copying from them how will we build our more-improved version to leapfrog them?!?"

Everyone is copying everyone and each release is an improvement on the competing models. Restrictions will only slow down progress.

The government putting its thumb on the scale will not help to make better tools.

Yeah, but in practice it does not. The Executive does whatever they decide to do, and no one can stop them. The courts say that they lack the authority -it is Congress job to do. Congressional leaders lack the will to stand up to the executive, and even if they tried the members of Congress would have to agree on any action -and they cannot agree with one another.

An uncaring Court, a divided Congress, and unitary Executive power.

This does not surprise me.

I know the options are still there... but have no experience with what the choices actually do in modern versions of Windows.

Windows has built-in default drivers that work for most standard device types. Installing the specific driver package that includes advanced features specific to a particular make/model of the device should be something that the user has control of.

A monitor will work with default drivers. A mouse will work with default drivers. A keyboard will work with default drivers. The special features may need an application installed. Windows Update can detect the device ID and offer to install the software for it, but it should not install it without user consent.

I think that it does work this way for most things.... In Windows Update, you have to enable optional updates to get 3rd party driver updates. I don't see why the LG monitor drivers would be mandatory.

/pinky /dr.evil

Automation can help a lot with understanding dependencies, especially dependencies of dependencies of... use the tools!

You didn't? I grew up a computer geek. I actually read this kind of stuff for fun... .

But my point only applies to the functions you are using -you don't need to know all of glibc by heart, but if you are including #menumaker_4.0c you should step thru it before trusting it to not be malicious. When you include it in your app -YOU- are accepting responsibility for what it does on your clients machine.

The answer to this problem is the same as for every other piece of software:

Stop embedding other peoples code into your code if you have not fully vetted and understood it.*

When you embed or link other people's code into your code, it becomes your responsibility. If you are not competent to understand/vet/maintain the full code base, then you are not competent to be in charge (lead developer/maintainer/architect/whatever-you-want-to-call-it).

This is not to say that less proficient coders cannot be part of the team, but someone has to be on top of ALL of the code in the product, no matter who authored it. Larger projects may need multiple people each responsible for portions of the code.

*I know this is inefficient. I know it is counter to modern coding practices. It is the only way to be confident your work is secure: Trust but verify. Verify everything, every time.

Agreed. I like my coffee. So I drink it.

It is a mass-production thing. It is easier to maintain consistency when it is burnt and bitter. In mass-produced corporate coffee, consistency is more important than quality. Taste can be adjusted with standard recipes as long as the base is consistent.

Unfortunately, the third-wave coffee movement has embraced under-roasted inconsistent coffee as a way of differentiating themselves from the mass-produced coffee. Nasty stuff.

The Australian government is trying to balance capitalizing on the A.I. boom with setting parameters on a fast-changing industry that has sparked backlash over environmental impacts, energy use and lack of contribution to local economies.

Require that all proposed buildouts be fully funded. No discounts on the basis of "anticipated future benefits to the community". Require an insurance bond in case of abandonment due to "changing economic conditions", sufficient to complete any projects and/or to remediate any damage caused. Include completion clauses in the planning permission. If the company does not complete according to plan and on time, the whole thing reverts to government ownership and the bond pays the government costs to complete/remove the whole thing. If the company decides to fold an unprofitable AI datacenter after a few years, the bond pays out to the government and the government takes ownership. etc.

This is a sovereign government making a deal with multinational corporations. It does not have to be a fair deal. The government should dictate terms that are good for Australia and the corporations can accept or not.