"forcing leaders to ask themselves uncomfortable questions about their own preparedness for a threat landscape that appears far more serious than many realized just a week ago."
It's probably even more serious than they think it is right now too.
In fact, all I see are talks of securing these executives. And as the article points out, security is a sunk cost. There is no financial gain. That means as security gets more expensive, they will have to weigh how to afford it versus the problems they cause.
Fear isn't the word I think we want though, fear seems too normal. Terror sounds closer to what they likely need to feel before things get better.
I imagine the children with these things are emotionally disregulated in some way shape or form. A small group of children sometimes don't learn to self soothe when they are very young, others in ASD struggle with it for a lifetime. Some with ADHD have a very difficult time when their medicine wears off and their emotions kick back in to overdrive.
For all those groups I mentioned, the whole concept of this thing was almost brilliant. Something that they can go to knowing it will be able to help them guide through emotions while mom and dad are doing something necessary like cooking or fixing something outside, or in the bathroom.
If you haven't had to deal with a child that has emotional regulation problems, then it is hard to explain the difficulty that the failure of this device will make. It is true that they will adapt it, they always do, that's how things work. The problem is that the emotional disregulation leads to broken things at home, aggressive behaviors with peers, getting kicked out of preschool and day care, etc.
It truly is a nightmare scenario. The parents have to prepare for all of these things and a new way to help their child through the limited existing means.
Telling your kid that needed an emotional support robot friend that the robot friend is going to take a nap for a long time and might not wake back up? Ooo boy.
Helping a kid through a divorce is hard enough. This seems like a terrifying nightmare.
No, they will declare that a copycat and they have the right guy.
Then they go on a wild goose chase grabbing more people that fit the profile. It will quickly fall into political arrests - only the politics are the wealthy and powerful vs all of us.
I don't have sources on me. But I'm fairly certain that in the French Revolution you had upper class supporters of the revolution, and maybe even some nobility. Most of the revolutions did, and they provided support to the revolution usually through some supply chain they had access to.
That being said, I could be entirely making it up, because that would have been more than a decade ago I learned it.
The only thing I can see this affecting is the Secure-boot requirement.
Which is very odd to consider that anything compatibility related would likely have nothing to do with secure boot, and everything to do with Windows being Windows.
The exact same style of a shitty resolution camera catching the upper frame of a guy's face while their only suspect sits in jail with evidence constructed in parallel?
The only thing I can imagine is that they would call that killer a copycat and that they have the right one.
I believe Luigi Mangione was radicalized by pain. The shooters who follow him will all have their own reasons for what they do, their own journeys to that violent end. But ultimately, they’ll do what they’ll do because Luigi proved it’s what gets attention.
So even the author of the article, who clearly points out it was a calculated, planned, and well thought out plan, which harmed no one else but Luigi's target, comes to the the conclusion that this is about attention? Pain?
No. He wasn't radicalized by pain. The attention he got was because he saw injustice that was inflicted on him and a lot of others and decided to do something about it.
Radicalization would imply he joined a terrorist group to prepare for this. The "group" he joined was unorganized, scattered group of people who suffer from chronic pain and have no choice but to live that way. This guy wasn't dumb, he also cut off his family, had no children. He knew whatever he did, he wanted it to be entirely concentrated on someone who had a hand in the suffering of so many.
Wish I could be on whatever jury they cook up, because it looks like he didn't do it to me.
What's crazy is that some of the people I talk to, I expected to say something like "yeah, but he didn't get a trial."
It's been "yeah, he's been on trial for 3 years at UHC, and 20 before that. And he was declared guilty."