Exactly. That's how we know AI is just hype and will not last, the same way that happened with online commerce!

You are going to go a long way in your quest to understand and have a clue about AI, because you've got a long way to go.

The problem isn't that they are connected to the Internet. The problem is that they are not *securely* connected. I'm no more of an expert on their particular use cases than you are, but it is reasonable to assume that they have them. Banks are connected to the net and online sales has been a thing for a long time. It can be done safely, just not by people who lack the expertise to do it. This isn't what happens when you connect systems to the Internet, it is what happens when people who aren't qualified to do it are the ones doing it.

"It's always a Trump issue."

Never let it be said that the Trumsterfire isn't a walking bag of issues.

That word "obliterated" doesn't mean what you think it does. Either that or you really believe that there are no radio stations. I assure you that radio stations still exist and people still listen to them. Naturally their user share has declined due to first MP3 players then streaming services, but you can still turn on your car radio, listen to music programmed by DJs,, call in to them using your phone, and have a conversation with the DJs on air.

Don't fail to see the forest because you are focusing on the trees. What is important is this:

"The Federal Communications Commission voted 2-1 today to eliminate the National Television Ownership Rule, claiming authority to repeal a limit that was set by Congress over 20 years ago."

It is one more nail in our democracy in the effort to build an authoritarian regime. By doing this with something that people will say isn't all that important anyway they are cementing the foundation for an idea in the minds of the people that they can lawlessly do this kind of thing; that it is not really of any import that they are ignoring the legislative branch in complete violation of the law. It is a direct attack against the foundational principles of our democracy, and a clear example of manufacturing consent. Later when they do it with something of more importance they will say that this is not without precedence and is accepted practice. They will then say that the people who are objecting are objecting because they don't like whomever is in power, and not because of the underlying problem of the act being illegal.

Maybe the reason is because you might allow someone else to drive your car, and they want to do their best to make sure that whoever is driving the car agrees to the terms. This isn't an attempt to claim it is justified, but merely an attempt to understand what their reasoning might be.

If someone wants to discredit trump all they have to do is put him in front of a camera and microphone and hit record. The fact that you think you have seen "the same process unfold" for every single president for the last 30 years tells me you have literally no idea what is going on in the US right now. You need to google the term "false equivalence" and read up on the subject with great scrutiny.

It wouldn't be so sacred if native Hawaiians got paid a lot of money. Apparently, having the TMT on Spanish territory means people would have to pay the Spanish government to use it. I guess that makes it "sacred" to them too given that they're going to have to pay for a whole lot of new "citizens".

But here's a question: is the TMT sitting in a warehouse somewhere waiting to be installed? If not, what's the big deal?

Wait, I've got a solution. Let's move it to the Bear's Ears.

Right. Dry that one out and you can fertilize the lawn.

Humidity is currently 91% in Yangsan.

Why are you commenting on a subject that you admit is none of your business? I suppose it's related to the fact that you didn't understand that you literally just said you ARE NOT OK with the ban, since the government definitely DOES NOT meet the requirements which would make you OK with it (and that goes for the US and your government.)

I'm not sure if you understood that I am saying the Matrix is unwatchable or not.

So you don't think the 1st Amendment is important. You are OK with the government having power, but don't believe the people should have power. You have a right to that particular ridiculously ignorant belief. What you don't have is the right to infringe upon others rights. You don't have to like the 1st Amendment, but you do have to abide by it.

I'm well aware. I was writing software before the IBM PC existed, and before the Apple Lisa hit the market. I didn't mention Tron and the Matrix because I thought they were both released at the same time. I can't imagine why you thought that, even if I didn't already know that information, it would in any way be pertinent.