I'm sure a lot of the bloat is due to needing to make every single thing backwards compatible due to corporations using it and building tools with it for decades.
What gets me still is our work using MS SSO for all our work credentials but it always tells me to "open outlook and select displayed numerical code" to sign in on my phone but never once has it actually worked even if I'm literally sitting at the desktop with Outlook open on the screen. I always have to select "more options" and have them text or email a verification code.
Funny considering the argument here is that these lights are too expensive to replace after something like a crash, yet your argument is that we should use headlights that make it much harder to see at night which just leads to more crashes.
it reduces the need to manually update your status, and it also enables co-workers to know that you're at work so that they can coordinate in-person meetings with you.
They're not even trying with these weak ass justifications anymore. Are either of these things an actual problem for anyone?
So what's your position, that there's a possibility that he did say something demonic and its all being misconstrued to make people "feel good?" For someone who's so interested in 'just asking questions,' you don't seem very interested in finding answers.
The article links to the sources of this controversy in the very first paragraph by the way.
Here they are for $470 each with a CAPA certification for body shop repairs:
OEM parts are always going to be ridiculously priced because the OEM has a monopoly on OEM parts. Your 2011 headlamp assembly also has removable bulbs while the newer Avalon uses built-in LED lights with all the circuitry to drive them.
Those lights were absolute garbage though and the vehicles that used them got half the gas mileage compared to new ones due to their blocky shape and lack of aerodynamics.
I saw some other company did this same thing in Iowa. They hold these public meetings at private facilities so that they can police who is and isnt allowed to attend. In the Iowa case they told all reporters (I believe it was A More Perfect Union that was covering this) that they weren't allowed in the building, which caused a scene when residents found out, which lead to them abruptly canceling the meeting early and the datacenter people blaming it on reporters being in the vicinity. I believe in this case they also had the city council sign NDAs so that they couldn't talk about it either, which doesnt seem like something that should be legal (if it even is).
"Now that the conference is over, the damage is done, and these people no longer pose a threat, I'd like to express how sorry I am and hope we can all move past this."
Isn't he the one that encouraged the fans outside the stadium to hop the fences and sneak in which lead to several people getting trampled to death?