Science Demands Facts, Not Dogma
I've long considered myself a lover of Science (even with a capital "S"). As a kid, as my mother still reminds me sometimes, I read the encyclopedia a lot, unlike most other children. When I turned 18 I studied Computer Science (with a capital "C" and capital "S") and my wife was finishing her Computer Science degree. It was around the time the "first" tech-bubble suddenly burst (dot-com).
See, private capital and science race against each other; that's why such bubbles exist in get-rich-fast schemes. Also known as "pump and dump".
Analysing and explaining science (or Science) is meant to be uncontroversial. We're told it has nothing to do with politics, even if climate science has been polarised and politicised, as have vaccines. All of a sudden people get malicious personal attacks for merely "not agreeing" with the "politically-correct" (beneficial to rich people) science. Whole families come under attack (we'll have ample time to explain these attacks) and it's totally beyond reason.
Saying that restricted hardware is not secure hardware should be common sense; nothing controversial about it, but when state-connected tech-monopolies are political monsters rather than scientific entities saying the truth is "heresy" and scientists who are honest (not on the payroll of these monopolists) are "heretics". █
