I very much disagree with you. While I think that derogatory statements might (might!) be a problem, I totally disagree when it comes to swearing. It's what we (Europeans!) do, and I really, really, can't cope with this US-American anti-swearing self-censorship-shit.
It's immature, and it's constantly lamp-shading itself, actually drawing attention to itself by telling me "I would be swearing, but I'm censoring myself now" constantly. In other media, it's even worse: Beeping is just obscene.
But she won't, because she's the playing ball of lobbyists.
It became very apparent in the debate about copyright a few years back, where the Queen was parroting the copyright maximalists, and you could see that she did not have any grasp on what was really going on.
The same will happen here; because the Queen lives in a very bad filter bubble.
Maybe the US should invest more resources in DEFENDING from cyber attacks
You've got two choices.
a) fix vulnerabilities, which will make everyone safer and more secure. That is the defensive stance. Fixing vulnerabilities, however, will also make your enemies more safe, and thus diminish your offensive potential.
b) hoard knowledge of vulnerabilities. This will make everyone, including yourself, more vulnerable. But then you have a bigger offensive arsenal.
One of these choices shows you're an idiot, unless your side has less technology that needs defending in the first place (like: if you're a terrorist outfit, and not a country, then you don't need to defend anyone).
Your so-called "French" fries are actually Belgian in origin. And hereabouts we call them by their French name, which happens to be "pommes frites" (fried potatoes; the pommes would be short for pommes-de-terre, actually).