I'd call it 999,999,996 idiots that love to drink piss. Fetish?

Debian has a full set of offline install ISOs. If you just download the network install cd, you shouldn't be surprised when it requires the network.

Also, if you've never had to install wireless drivers on a Windows machine, then you've been using some pretty ancient hardware relative to the OS version by Windows' standards. (In the modern era, it will just auto-download if it's able to establish any connection to Windows Update, but historically new hardware released after or at the same time as the Windows version typically had a nice yellow exclamation icon over them in Device Manager. Due to the missing driver.)

That's not even worth responding to, but....That's not a complete list of options.

The parents could easily monitor what their kids do online, they refuse. (Despite the fact that the software to do so exists.)

The ISP (the company the parents get a bill from every month for providing an internet connection to their kids) could implement a content filter or set up some anonymous signaling on their side indicating the device is owned by a child, that the kid's device can't do anything about and has no control over. The ISPs aren't required to provide these as an option to parents. (Some states however have this in their schools. As a result of the legal paper clipping done by Congress with USDA funds for the free and reduced lunch program.)

The parents could also stop using the screens as replacement babysitters. They continue using them for that purpose, and actively seek out any and all excuses for why they continue to do so, despite them openly admitting the harm it does to their children.

TL;DR: You're giving a false dilemma.

So.... they'll eventually release iOS 18 and 19, then have to skip 2* because some apps' version checks will break? :P /s

Please don't give legal advice without the IANAL tag. There are some OSS projects out there that actively reject AI generated code due to legal liability. (Wine for example.)

The US Congress doesn't agree with you.

Also, IANAL.

Yeah, it's called "dictating the life of your employees", and "not having that office real estate / lease become a liability on my watch."

Only if the goal is actual productivity. If the goal is to make the managers look good and justify their paychecks, then face-to-face communication is actually harmful. (To the managers.)

It would be marvelous indeed. Fortunately, this is one problem that will eventually take care of itself. Unfortunately, we may not be alive to see it.

And yet if you force educational requirements at a higher level, (state / national), you'll just get more of the same. The contents of the syllabi changing with the majority of politicians in power.

The simple issue at play here is trust. People want a syllabus immune to the whims of politics, that they can enforce regardless of who's in power. At the same time, they distrust the enforcers, and disagree about the criteria used to judge syllabi for "political bias." (One's "obvious bias" is another's "objective fact.") You can't fix that with facts and figures. Fixing trust takes time and a willingness on both sides to work together for a common benefit. Even if it requires personal sacrifices in the short term. (For the greater good.)

Until that simple trust issue is fixed, this conversation will bear little fruit.

1. Non publicly verifiable claim. Sure you can post receipts, how many are going to do so? More accurately, how many are going to claim "genAI deep fake" as justification for declaring such evidence inadmissible?

2. Use of Windows isn't a requirement to have an opinion about it, nor is it a requirement to criticize Microsoft's actions and request a reversal. The same applies to other concepts.

3. See 2, but FYI, the same mechanism is also used when ripping CDs to another format. (Used to auto-populate the metadata of the chosen destination format.)

4. Your priorities don't invalidate the opinions of others, nor do they make the opinions of others "stupid."

If anything your repeated beratement of others for stating their opinions suggests utter contempt for them. Perhaps a change of venue would suit you better? That and it also suggests a deep passion for the subject, in which case why shouldn't others voice their opinions?

Actually, it translates to: "Why do you voice an opinion I disagree with?"

He's not debating on the merits of the opinion, he's complaining that the opinion is allowed to reach him in the first place and trying to cover it up by grasping at straws.

But will the media PlaysForSure?

The reason the codecs don't work any more, is because no-one is making software that uses them. Microsoft promotes the Windows Media Foundation APIs over DirectShow, and as a result DirectShow Filters (The technical name for your "codecs", FYI.) aren't used by modern Windows software.

DirectShow Filters can still be used on modern windows, even Wine / Proton, but unless the software has support the DirectShow API, it won't utilize them. (In fact there's some OSS projects out there that have bug reports / feature requests for implementing DirectShow support for this exact reason.)

The Windows Media Foundation APIs use "MFTs" (Media Foundation Transforms) as a "replacement" for the functionality provided by DirectShow filters. Note, the quotes around "replacement" however. MFTs are a "replacement" insofar as MFTs are where the decode / encode logic for a particular format is expected to be in WMF. Not because MFTs or WMF itself provides a proper replacement for the use cases that DirectShow's API covers. As a result, most MFTs that exist are made by Microsoft themselves, and shipped with Windows. (Either built-in, or subject to download from the Windows Store.) The developer documentation for making new MFTs isn't exactly great either. Certainly not on the level of quality and abundance for making new DirectShow Filters.

Another issue, is the overall lack of new media formats in the modern era. Back when DirectShow was first made, there wasn't much of a standard API for media handling. (Yes, I know about MCI. For the sake of brevity, we're ignoring that here.) As a result most developers bought some codec from another company and shipped it along with their product. DirectShow Filters made that process easier (Only need to ship the filter, not an entire library), and provided a common interface for other interop with other applications. (A new feature.) In the modern era, most people settled on H.264, using MP4 as a container for storing video in their products. Which Microsoft provides an MFT for. and handles the licensing. As a result, there's little motivation for Windows developers to switch to something else that the OS won't support out of the box, and that often would require additional royalty / licensing payments on top of whatever is already being sent to the MPEG-LA. (See also the reason why Google, and OSS in general, are so happy about AV1.)

As a fun side note: See also why Wine / Proton have poor AV support in modern software. The software requires MFTs in order to decode the media, and because there are few OSS replacement MFTs, Wine / Proton is forced to try and do a messy conversion from WMF to GStreamer to ffmpeg. (I'm kidding. I'm sure every Wine / Proton user out there has purchased and installed a properly licensed H.264 decoder for GStreamer. ;) )

Small correction: The US DMCA only applies to the US. DMCA style legislation is exported from the US via the US Trade Representative, but that requires agreement of and equivalent national legislation from other countries. The Italian legislation tries to bind the entire world absent consent. Ignoring the sovereignty of other countries.

(Cue the claims of "The US will do the same" that have some credibility now. Due to the US's recent international actions.)

If only we could REISUB idiots back into a sane state.... /s