So you're probably right that I'm giving the man himself too much credit but I think in practice it will be implemented as a vague hovering threat rather than US marines riding through Caracas tomorrow.

I may of course be eating my words quite soon

I think there's always a bit of a difference in what Trump himself says/wants and how it actually gets translated into practice, half the time because he gets talked out of it. Führerprinzip but the Führer is sometimes gently talked out of his wildest flights of fancy

One of those videos where one wonders how many of the participants are actually still alive.

I read it as an implied threat of future action: "if you don't cave and install someone we like, we'll be back"

Interesting, thanks!

To put it another way, why would reverting make the ELAC any less vulnerable? Because I was under the impression that single-event errors (which I'm guessing is the issue here, but please correct me if I'm wrong) are above all a hardware issue. Could the update have created a new point of failure?

What's really interesting to me is that this particular vulnerability was apparently caused by a software update to ELAC and the fix simply involves reverting to an earlier version. Would you be willing to speculate as to what could change so drastically in just one update?

When "beware of dog" signs aren't enough of a deterrent

The War Thunder school of combat performance evaluation

Hoping that being nice about his legacy will save them from the crackdown that has already started. Or legitimate brainworms