The zionist game? That’s been the main playbook of all the Hamas supporters. “What do you mean we fired thousands of rockets aim at civilians before the IDF came in here? They’re just trying to oppress our rights to self expression”

Your example has occurred in dozens of companies, but people just don’t care.

The news outlets I saw reporting on this were mostly calling out that violence was started by agitators rather than counter-protestors

Nah, you have it backwards. The protestors broke into a building, so police was sent to get them out. It would be the same outcome as if you decided to break into a building and lock yourself in.

You got a source on that?

Bad timing on your end. The Colombia protestors just raided one of the halls and barricaded themselves in.

Tents on a lawn is one thing, even if they did nothing to silence the calls for hate among their ranks. Breaking (in the literal sense) into a building and causing damage is a whole level of escalation from the protestors. At what point do they shift into a violent riot?

W safety of some students cannot be comprised by granting other students their freedom.

Wrong, try again.

I’m talking about the deadline today. The university already started handing out suspensions for those still there, but haven’t cleared them out yet.

When the cops show up at your home are they your own funded private security? The university called them in due to trespassing protestors.

Go read up about what the first amendment actually is and how it applies to private entities (hint: it doesn’t).

Their camp is still there on campus past the deadline. They clearly haven’t fully faced the consequences of it yet.

Nah, I expect people are dumb enough to think the first amendment protects them from private institutions and consequences. I’ve seen enough people over the years that have proven me right and were then surprised by the consequences of their own actions.

I can’t wait for the surprise Pikachu on their faces when the university takes action. If they think actions should have consequences for others, why shouldn’t it apply to them as well?

I doesn’t operate in Europe, so they don’t care to be GDPR compliant. They do operate in California, so they need to support those laws. It’s still not worth it to look at changing their policy towards GDPR even if they’re complaint.

The hardware still looks so great, but responsiveness has gone to the shitter in recent years.

Mr hackerman couldn’t get to the car because it crashed first due to a software bug the customer did not have time to take his car to the shop to fix.

The real world is quite different than the idealistic one.

And how often were they actually followed vs discarded because the customer just didn’t care?

You do realize your entire first point is invalidated by the comment you’re replying to? I just said the customer has to press a button on their phone to initiate the update. On that same phone they can view release notes that clearly outline the recall. Additional on first use, the car will display those same release notes on the screen.

Sure, safety vs convenience is a huge factor in software development. The biggest factor to safety is unpatched software. You know, the kind that requires significant effort to update, such as needing to bring your car into the shop to apply.

Overall your doom and gloom argument against OTA safety updates is pretty weak.

Right, because the recall for the icons on the screen needing to be a tad bigger is as serious as uncontrolled acceleration of a giant hunk of metal.

They need a new name for software update recalls and physical recalls. They both need to be serious, but a distinction is needed.