But can those $6-$120K PhD's work 24/7, require no benefits? If I'm paying $20K a month for an AI subscription, it will be processing data 24/7, even if just validating and refining its own outputs. "Great code AI PhD, now validate it, write unit tests, inspect it for any known vulnerabilities, come up with the plan to break it, now fix the code so it cannot be broken this way, rinse, lather, repeat".

Spoofing is very hard to accomplish, as it has to be targeted to a specific aircraft (no way to have a generic spoof for the area), and it gets harder if your target GPS is hardened against malicious interference. As you said, time is only one variable, comparing against INS is another. Directional discrimination (preference for signals coming from space rather than he ground direction) is also another. Even time is not easy to jam, as there will likely still be a higher number of legit signals than jamming signals. Of course, hardening GPS receivers against jamming makes them more complex and more expensive, but perhaps that should be a new reality for aviation. Sure, hardened GPS can be brute force jammed completely with help from satellites, but that just leaves it unable to report position, not report the incorrect position.

Besides translation, does it also match the speaker's voice, emmotion, intonation, etc? If double checked by a professional translator, this might actually improve the quality of dubbing.

They get to now have people fill out detailed personal information, social security, banking information, collect biometrics, location tracking, maybe even require sending in a blood sample for age analysis and DNA sequencing - all in the name to ensuring the user is an adult. Then of course sell that to the merchants to focus advertising and set prices to extract maximum value out of their products.

For 81 trillion dollars the account holder could have bought all of bitcoin and other major crypto. Now that would have been interesting to watch.

Well, first, online shopping by definition has "electronic price tags", and you said you'd never visit any store with those. They can still vary prices bases on non-personal things, like crank up ice cream prices when it's hot. Second, if you think your setup makes you untrackable, do a little more research. Especially if shopping, when you have to actually provide payment and shipping info. Advertising companies use a myriad of technologies to track you, from simple cookies, to recognizing who you are based on your typing pattern (yes, when you are searching, every keystroke is recorder, including its timing - it takes very few keystrokes to identify a person to a high certainty, especially if you combine other factors like time of day and site visited, what was searched for, which IP or even which VPN service was used to access the site, etc). There are so many methods. I remember watching a lecture from a professor who studies privacy once who did everything she could to hide the fact that she was pregnant from advertisers. She and her husband did not tell anyone, they did not search for any baby stuff, they have been using VPN and privacy guarded browsers for a long time by then (that was her area of study). It took google less than a month to start serving her baby related ads.

It is next to impossible to be anonymous if you do anything on the internet at all.

Ok, so a discount based on how much you earn, discount on how well you dress, discount based on how much you want something. All these fit your criteria of "discounts that any one get and based stuff that is the same for all". All people who make under 40K get greatest discount, those who make more get a lower discount inversely proportional to their income. All fine by you because it's same for all? Want a bigger discount, make less money.

Obviously, even with a flat tax percentage, the more you earn, the more you contribute. You make 2x, you pay twice the tax. Progressive taxation say if you make twice, you must pay more than twice the tax. If you define "rich" as the level at which progressive tax rates kick-in, that makes every American who pays taxes rich (since below certain income level you pay 0% federal income tax).

So you never buy anything from the internet (by definition electronic pricing), or buy airplane tickets, concert tickets, etc?

I never used the term "rich", as it is completely ambiguous. Most people define it as "someone who has x% more than me", so billions of definitions in the world. Most people don't realize that they fit someone else's definition of rich. Heck, majority of Americans are rich compared to someone living in poverty in a 3rd world country. What I said was "more affluent people pay more", which means even if you don't consider yourself not rich, you still pay more than someone who has less than you.

Those who make more pay higher percentage of income in taxes, subsidizing those who make less. In case of surveillance pricing, those who are more affluent pay more for products, subsidizing the costs of store maintenance etc (if a lot of rich people shop there, stores will have better amenities, checkouts and such, even the poor who pay less can use them). So, if democrats are for progressive taxation, why are they against progressive pricing?

I head they are looking to increase taxes, perhaps they got more ideas like this to fund.

If it is in fact a subscription to a service, that service costs money to run. Unless the lifetime subscription cost does in fact pay all costs and profit to provide said subscription for whatever "lifetime" means, it is mirage, a Ponzi scheme at best. If it does pay for lifetime of costs and profits, why pay up font? Is the company offering you some unbelievable yield on your initial investment? If so, shouldn't you be just as suspicious as of anyone offering outrageous guaranteed returns?

It is however important to draw a distinction between an actual "service subscription" and "goods leasing". "Subscriptions" which offer no recurring service with costs from the provider, but instead renting you fixed functionality of a physical product, are just leases (or rents). For example enabling heated seats in your car. There, a "lifetime subscription" just means permanently enabled, and "monthly subscription" just means a lease payment.

The additional insurance is on top of the fact the bank has to cover all the customer loses, so if customer writes their password on the phone case, leaves the phone on a bus, then someone steals $10,000 from their account, the bank covers the $10K and insurance gives them additional $10,000 (or more, if they bought more of that insurance)? Or are banks only responsible for the fist $1,000 or some other amount, and the rest you have to buy insurance for yourself. That $1.49/month example you provided, how much does it insure?

Ok, make the theaters put fine print that there may be up to 30 minutes of commercials during the show, so that people are clear what they are paying for. After than, let people vote with their money. There are no public safety aspects to this, so other than informing the customer, leave it alone. If the public doesn't like it, they will stop attending, forcing the theaters to change.