bitcrafter

If they had believed it was the best option at the very beginning, then nothing had been stopping her family from fleeing somewhere else instead of going into hiding when it would have arguably been easiest to do so.

Also, it would not be enough to wound some of the soldiers; you would have to kill all of them before they were able to kill you and then capture your friends. Nonetheless, once her family had been discovered, I acknowledge that was really the only option that had a chance of keeping them from being captured. It is one thing to say that, though, and another to actually start shooting when you are the one faced with such a decision.

Nah, keep it around and poison it with bad information so that the people using it make poor decisions, just like they did with Sauron in the Lord of the Rings!

If the people keeping her family in hiding had chosen to open fire on the Gestapo instead of keeping her family's presence a secret, then it is not clear to me how it would have resulted in her living longer than she did.

They didn't, but lots of people here have wished that they (or someone else) would.

Agreed, but if you had the option of hiding your friends, then that would probably be better than shooting at the people trying to take them away for the simple reason then you would probably get outshot, and if not then more would likely follow. If you don't have that option, though, then by all means start shooting if that is the only way to save their lives.

Applied to this situation: it would probably be better for this group to protest peacefully for as long as they can because once they start blowing up buildings then most likely martial law or something similar will be declared and they will likely lose the ability to do anything unless they can win against the military. Additionally, they would likely end up alienating the general population, so there would be few places they could go to for support.

I mean, if you are not going to engage with the things I actually said, then there is only so much I can in response. 😃

Enjoy your "later dork" Parthian shot.

I genuinely appreciate your concern, but you do not have to worry about me. 😀

I can understand that, but keep in mind that, from my perspective, my original comment,

I think that you might not get to claim the mantle of peaceful protest when you start blowing things up yourself.

was intended to be perfectly innocuous (if a bit wry). After all, the article was about a largely peaceful protest, and introducing demolition into the mix seems like it would be going against the spirit of that.

Regarding, "only tangentially related to the topic", I think that you will note that the paragraph I wrote just now analyzing the effect of the protest on the developer conference and the likely effect it had on recruitment in the long term is more than anyone else in this post has said about what actually happened in this particular protest, rather than various fantasies of Palantir's destruction. I actually would have loved to have more interesting discussion along those lines (because my analysis is not the only valid one!), but there is not much evidence that anyone else here read more than just the title...

This article is about protests that were (arguably) largely peaceful, and I presume that was intentional on the part of the organizers. I doubt that they would be interested in dropping the mantle of peaceful protest in order to gain license to start blowing up buildings. I could be wrong about that, though. Certainly no one here seems to be interested in peaceful protest.

Who would make an argument that exploding anything is peaceful?

You, by posting a comment disagreeing with my original comment pointing out demolition crosses the line into not being peaceful.