samfbiddle

I encourage you to look up the word "exigency"

It's considered a robot by its manufacturer (https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grum...), the police who own it, and California state law, so I am confident in my choice of terms here.

It wasn't suggested, it was explicitly stated in the meetings and in the proposed authorized use language, both of which you will conveniently find quoted in the article.

I both named the exact model of the robot (Northrop Grumman Remotec Andros Mark 5-A1) and specify that it's operated via remote control.

Hi, author of the article here. I don't care if you read my story or don't, but if you're going to accuse me of "clickbait," I'd encourage you to actually read it. The plan here is to literally load live 12 gauge shells into the robot's PAN disrupter device, which typically only takes blank rounds, in order to shoot and kill people under special emergency circumstances. It's a shotgun. But don't take it from me, take it from the cop who proposed the plan!

“Yeah, physically a live round can go in,” Daza-Quiroz answered. “Absolutely. And you’d be getting a shotgun round.”

What resources?

This is completely wrong. Gawker Media was a profitable, growing company until Peter Thiel wrecked it and its subsidiary sites were sold to a series of increasingly incompetent owners. Deadspin's "non-sports" articles were regularly among its most widely read.

In fact, here's a person whose job it was to sell ads for Deadspin explaining that you are incorrect: https://twitter.com/jillian_schulz/status/118967386127042969...

This is a neat idea but I don't think I'd use it unless I had some assurance that my videos would be deleted at some point after they're viewed.

I specifically added a paragraph stating, explicitly, that RSA per se is not under threat. Please don't conflate misreading with "malpractice."

Do you still have a copy of this?