For a small fee you can get your bullshit before everyone else.

That's a reasonable guess, but I bet the language was French or German, and there often are changes in meaning when one translates. (Even within the same language. Consider "Baby sitter" vs "nanny".)

OK. That's a specific use case that's hard to argue with. It didn't occur to me as I've never needed it...and I can't think of anything that it would be useful for that I either do or would like to do.

Have a little faith, everything will be fine! I have not yet read an account of AI doing something awful for which it failed to offer a heartfelt apology afterward.

"I'm sorry. I seem to have burned down your house, despite your clear instructions not to do so. I'm very, very, terribly sorry."

I wonder what "wearables" represents in the original language of the decision. That would make a big difference.

What do you use an oura ring for?
(Since you've bought an upgrade, you must have some uses...but I couldn't think of any, so I never considered buying one.)

Can you? In my experience rechargeable batteries tend to have a lower voltage and slightly larger size/stored power than well designed single use batteries. Once you get to hearing aid size this may be significant. (OTOH, my experience of the comparison is about two decades old.)

Useless? To whom? This is being run by the government. It will provide the advice the government desires it to provide. It will collect the information the government chooses to collect.

In principle this could lead to an ideal outcome, but that presumes that all controlling parties have consistent good will and excellent foresight. Not something I expect of any entity.

Descartes started off looking for his axioms. He settled on "I think therefore I am", but if you believe that was his only axiom, you reasoning is faulty. That, by itself, can't justify choosing between solipism and predeterminism, never mind the other possibilities.

I don't know enough about Kant to be able to specifically refute your assertion that he's an example, but since I'm already disagreeing with Descartes I suppose I may also be disagreeing with Kant. I'm NOT disagreeing with Euclid, and anyone who does had better be able to explain why if they want me to take them seriously.

It's not just up to them, it's up to copyright law.
And why do you think you speak for all book authors over all time?

People like you think libraries should be shut down, fair use removed, and no one allowed to resell a book they read.
Literally the logical conclusion to your post.

I suppose I need to pay you every time I point someone to you works to?
Do I have to pay you when I finish you book and give it to someone else?

Did they ever mention copyrights on Star Trek???

Why would that even come up?
We would absolutely have a form of copyright post scarcity. Because post scarcity one of the thing that differentiate people is what they created.

Any you got your law degree from...? and you have read all the contracts.. when? and where in these contract violation in the contract?

Don't tell me you are some ignorant blowhard spewing nonsense that fits your bias?

Yes, it does in America. Please read US copyright code. fair use is a things. I can give you a used book for free, and you can read it and give it to someone else for free and so on. No copyright violation. Yu can access works for free through Libraries.
Copyright expires.

"It is not a court case you'd win; the details taken from the Disney version are beyond excessive."
We have decades of court cases that show you are wrong. STFU.

"beyond excessive."
based on what?