[tha0x5]

>Interested in disussion or pedantic corrections?

Not necessarily, no.

>So, the same thing I referenced from my dictionary lookup: that literally was used for emphasis while not being literally true.

You still don't get it, and you're wrong as you didn't reference a dictionary.

Both literally true, and used for emphasis are both false statements. There are people who care (literally), and there are enough people who care that "literally no one cares" (figuratively) is incorrect. QED.

>And I argued that this issue is something generally fixed fast (within days by most companies), and thus the speed MS fixed it doesn't prove that it's not a small (trivial) issue.

That is not fast for a critical customer data leak by any stretch of the imagination.

>I wrote "days" precisely to argue these issues are fixed fast. Replying that such issues are fixed in hours, not days, doesn't counter my point, it's just a pendantic correction that re-inforces it.

You wrote "days" because you appear to be clueless. It does counter your point because there is a large difference between a couple of hours and a couple of days. It's a pedantic correction that re-inforces that you're wrong.

>You'd be surprised. Don't believe the hype:

I can hear the goalposts being scraped across the ground.

All of what you listed only proves my point that this was by no means a "slap on the wrist". Multiple indictments and the largest fines ever levied to an auto maker by definition makes this not a wrist slap. QED.

The sentencing and fines were at the top of the sentencing guidelines for the crimes.

>Poor people have gotten worse sentences for stealing a TV...

No they haven't.