Turns out it was the last.

It's more involved than that - the US national is the person who has control of the keyboard, the non US national views the screen share and instructs them what to do.

>I don't have a strong argument for this

I think you do. Have we ever been successful at slowing down technological efficiency?

>If that comes to pass, then what people will do with that technology, and what will change as a result, will be up to the people who are alive at the time.

If it is inevitable that technology will be developed, it is also inevitable that it will be used, and in turn, further technology developed. Technology is an arms race. You can't opt out once you've started. If you do not employ the same technical progress for whatever-- propaganda, profits-- you will lose.

I know you're not posing it as a problem or solution, but I believe pinning it completely on "it's how we use it" is not a valid tactic either.

Did I miss it, but what do these "digital escorts" actually do. The article doesn't seem to actually explain it.

Edit: It's people who watch over what foriegn engineers are doing.

> Basic license management incl. library vetting is part of it.

This depends on whether you consider Compliance to be part of software engineering or a separate discipline. At least in most companies the compliance department is different from the software development/IT department, because the necessary skills are very different and barely transfer.

can someone explain this one to me?

if I had to guess, it's implied open-source-nerd atonement for the closed-source past sins of Microsoft, or something?

Interesting, so a bullet would not fire but probably launched with some kind of a spring, otherwise it would melt quickly.