>They have to be always online, to get updates.

You think the military doesn't have their own private networks, so they don't need to depend on the public Internet for mission critical communications? How naive.

>If our nukes are connected to the public Internet, we might as well just push the Armageddon button now and git it over with!

FTFY.

Whenever they wanted me to take a drug test, I said "OK, which ones do you want me to test?"

They have to tell people not to trust the Artificial Idiot?

You fail by focusing on outcomes and not law.

>Americans have very little understanding of politics. ... I don't think the average American is going to understand just how bad a deal it's going to be when Trump runs for a third term.

Before commenting on US politics, you should take some time to acquire more than a "very little understanding of" them: US 22nd Amendment.

There should be no software patents.

LOL. When you define everything to be AI, it's easy to claim that AI affects everything.

Maybe buy puts on AI recommendations?

>The issue is TPM 2.0

Yes, Big Brother wants to take full control, you can't be trusted to take responsibility for your own security. Of course, they can't be either - they're happy to turn your personal info into profit.

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.

>Isn't it more like the spy glasses from the first Mission Impossible?

More like the Cone of Silence from Get Smart.

>We need to ask our legislators to get stronger exceptions for libraries added to the law.

Nah. We just need to revert to original copyright terms. 14 years, with one 14 year renewal. No one is creating content expecting it to take more than 28 years to make it worth their while. US copyright is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times..." Extending those Times doesn't promote, instead it works against Progress.

I can point to a lot of copyrighted material which isn't "useful", except to make a profit.

>USB-C is very resource demanding. Lots of 4-pin USB 2.0 ports don't burn the resources.

You have no idea what you're talking about. First, there is no "USB-C". You can replace a USB 2.0 "A" receptacle with a Type-C one, no changes needed other than the connector. A "USB 2.0 Type-C receptacle for USB 2.0 platforms and devices." is what the spec calls it.

>More ports is what he's looking for.

Then they should say that, not "It's premature for brands to phase out USB-A [sic]." Because, the Type-C spec defines a "USB Type-C to USB 3.1 Standard-A Receptacle Adapter Assembly" (yes, it's backwards compatible earlier USB specs). So complaining about "A" ports being removed simply demonstrates ignorance. You can use any device you want which needs a "A" connection with a Type-C port, just get an adapter cable.

>Trump don take no steenkin notes.

No, he takes classified documents to store in his pool house.