One part constantly fears it's missing a beat and jumps on new tech without thinking about it.
Another part believes that kids are able to construct all human knowledge by playing together in a field.
Education Technology seems to focus on selling education machines [1] (now with AI) to the first group while the second group focus on resenting any form of testing at all. Which leads to * , indeed, a huge legal minefield, that will be shirked up to government for 'not providing leadership' years down the road.
* If you are in any way involved with a school, ask them how many, and importantly what %, of non-statutory requests for comment from government agencies they've responded to, you may be surprised how low the number is or if they even count. Despite talking about 'leadership', not a lot walk the talk.
Once you have enough budget for full time lawyers, legal minefields are just another thing to test. Many times, the mines will be inactive, at least long enough to earn money. Better to ask for forgiveness than permission, etc.
My company has been asked to sign a form 899, which seems to be interpreted as meaning we have to ensure that our entire supply chain does not use Huawei
I'm not sure how we can do that. For example the only ISP we can use in one of our offices provides internet via a devices with a Huawei MAC address. Now fine, I can see it's part, we could close the office, but how can I confirm that a security contractor we have in Kabul doesn't own a Huaweii mobile phone? I'm sure our company employs foreign agents somewhere in the company -- there was always an open secret that the cleaner in the Moscow office worked for the KGB.
It's with our lawyers, but they basically say the way it's been presented is any business with operations in any way reliant on the internet cannot sign the form. Maybe they're overparanoid. Maybe US legal practice is that you sign and hope for the best.
I can see jobs programs for rocket scientists to stop them emigrating, but for lawyers?