Those cards would be worth far more than the data at the moment.

Good for browsing and side by side though.

The use case is you have a decent size screen on a device that you can pocket. If you look at the latest foldables, they aren't much thicker than non-foldables. About as thick as an iPhone from a few generations ago.

They seem to have reached the point where the tech is reasonably mature and not excessively fragile. Now they just need to get the price down.

What really scared them was other countries not tolerating that bullshit and in most other countries if you lose a lawsuit like this the other party can come after you for damages. They don't care about negative PR, but a case where they are forced to pay out for having their spurious claims disproved scares the living shit out of them because it sets a precedent.

Yeah... Android manufacturers need to pull their finger out and give Apple some better ideas.

Multiple manufacturers have tried the folding phone several times with little to no success. I can't see Apple succeeding (they'll pretend they are though).

What I can see is Apple presenting their most rigid phone ever as "the iFold 1billion and 2 PRO" with someone standing on stage showing us that it flexes slightly if measured with laboratory equipment... and when people break it in real life telling us "you're folding it wrong".

Special Operator type training is far too advanced for a corporate retreat, what they really need is basic. Learning how to march as a unit, work as a unit, understand and follow orders, et al. Shit that a soldier is expected to have down pat long before they ever get advanced training. Training that might actually be useful in helping people work together or improving discipline... However the ego of your average corporate dick will never allow that, they think they're special so they want the special training.

But in reality they aren't getting anything special, just paying to be shouted at by someone who claims they were a SEAL, SAS, et al. but in all likelihood never were.

Not really an unknown consequence.

Popular brands know never, ever release your cheap products under your brand. Airlines are famous for this, when QANTAS wanted to release cheap, no frills flights under a LCC model, they didn't brand it as QANTAS CHEAP because that would cheapen the brand QANTAS, they created a new airline called JetStar and even though they are wholly owned subsidiaries. It's not unusual for a budget airline to operate under the parent airlines AOC (Air Operator Certificate... the bit of paper that says you're allowed to carry passengers), LEVEL (Spanish low cost carrier) operated under another AOC until it got it's own (Iberia's I think). The point is, they didn't want to associate the parent brands just in case they got successful.

But this isn't exactly off brand for Apple, they're charging $700 for a $300 laptop and $300 is being generous as we know it's really a $200 phone.

Puts anyone accused of being Satoshi at great risk.

When you win the lottery in the UK, they help you hide the wealth. Special bank accounts, advice on how to avoid other people finding out, that sort of thing. There is a risk of both crime and people coming to beg for money.

No, Governments are not expected to move humanity ahead.
That's a bizarre disconnected form of Statism on your part. Do you have a shrine to the Government in your home for all its noble deeds?

Governs are expected to do what they're elected to do, no more, no less.

You can't make routers, but you can choose whether or not to buy one.
Do you also believe that you should be able to use the Government to force routers to be what you consider secure?

I think you are a cancer. Itching for a boot to lick, as long as it's a gentle one. No holocausts this time, please.

Don't know, chief.
Honestly- no fucking clue.
Obviously communism, for a litany of reasons, isn't a workable solution with human culture being what it is at this point in our history and/or development.

"Socialism" is vague enough of a term that I feel like you threw it out there as a trap.
There are many socialist aspects of every single democracy on this planet. Are more of them better? Sometimes. Are less of them better? Sometimes. Are none of them better? Universally not.

All I know is that when you're driving off of a cliff, "well where else are we going to go?" isn't a fucking productive addition to the conversation.

The US does not own Saudi area oil fields.
So yes, that's precisely what I'm saying.

Kicks and kicks? Absolutely not. The oil economy is critically important to US hegemony.
The accusation is plunder, and that's what's stupid.
Saying "we're over there because of oil" is perfectly accurate. But it's not because we need it.

It's not.
You also left out how much we export.
The net inflow is about 2mbbl.
Basically, fucking nothing.
And none of it comes from the middle east.

Your own links demonstrate that you were wrong about this thing.
For how many years have you been saying the US went into the middle east to "steal its oil" without bothering to do the 15 minutes of research it would have taken to demonstrate that you were wrong?

That makes you a fucking moron.

In the medium to long term the main outcome of this war will be accelerating the move away from US based currency and payment systems. Lots of alternatives to Mastercard and Visa already have some momentum, and trading oil is moving away from USD.

With such a system you can tolerate a lot of false positives, to ensure you don't get false negatives. All that happens is the false positive image gets sent to the ground for verification.

And remember that the other option is having nothing at all.

Didn't they try to do that kind of image recognition in the 90s and find it unreliable? IIRC they tested it with tanks and found that rather that detecting tanks it was detecting sunny days, and once they eliminated the weather variations it couldn't do anything useful.

Today Tesla's vision system is notoriously unreliable, and you would assume that in military applications the aircraft are going to be camouflaged.

But then you have to transmit potentially massive amounts of data back to Earth.

Say you want to detect aircraft entering airspace. They are difficult to detect with radar, so you want to do it optically. You need decent resolution to capture small drone sized ones, and you need multiple images to help with camouflage, false positives, and determining flight path.

That's a lot of data. The data rate is likely to be the limiting factor on what resolution and how frequently you can image an area. Being able to do the detection on the satellite, and only send reports or images that suggest further investigation is worthwhile, is going to be very useful.