Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday January 18 2018, @05:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the maybe-someone-doesn't-like-the-color dept.

5 shuttle buses chartered by Google, Apple apparently vandalized on I-280, possibly with pellet gun

Shuttle buses carrying Apple and Google employees were apparently vandalized Tuesday while traveling to and from the South Bay, officials said. No injuries were reported.

Five buses driving in the northbound and southbound directions of Interstate 280 between Highway 84 and Highway 85 were damaged during the Tuesday morning and evening commute, said California Highway Patrol Officer Art Montiel. Four buses were chartered by Apple and one by Google, the officer said. The Apple campus is located off I-280 in Cupertino. Google headquarters is in Mountain View off Highway 101.

According to Montiel, several bus windows were damaged and cracked, possibly by pellet guns, BB guns or rocks.

According to an article on TechCrunch

In response, we've learned that Apple has rerouted the bus routes for employees living in San Francisco, adding 30-45 minutes of commute time each way, as the company works with authorities to see what exactly is going on.

Also at The Guardian.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday January 19 2018, @07:37PM (1 child)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday January 19 2018, @07:37PM (#624850)

    Medical care is an easy example, If we force them to take medical care, do we force them to follow doctors orders? Do we open back up all the asylums we closed in the last 50 years, and fill them full of people who didn't get the advantage of a fair trial before we remove their liberties for something we can't even necessarily prove? I would be much happier letting the proverbial Christian Scientist die of appendicitis than round up all the Mennonites and force them to get a physical.

    The huge number of homeless people seems to suggest that maybe we should bring back asylums. As for the Christian Scientists, what about their children? Do they have the right to force their kids to die of treatable illnesses, which amounts to negligent homicide?

    You have a lot of focus on moving people and job training, while education and training are great, I can't see any example of forcing that on somebody that doesn't resemble the worst aspects of communism. Forcing people to move directly is a clear constitutional issue. If they would rather live on the bare minimum and spend your days bitching about all the coal mines closing, I can't see taking that away from them being ethical.

    If they refuse to move to where work is, even when relocation assistance is offered, then what? What other assistance should be offered since they just want to sit and complain? And what about other voters who think that's not enough, that we need to bring the jobs back to them? A bunch of those voters just gave us the current President.

    We have to educate the public, and it will be exactly those disenfranchised masses, be they black, white, blue or red, who we can't afford to write off as stupid, but must try and bring them around to our point of view.

    What if we can't? I guess it just proves that we have the government we deserve.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday January 19 2018, @10:24PM

    by insanumingenium (4824) on Friday January 19 2018, @10:24PM (#624962) Journal
    I am all about providing mental care, but medical incarceration has some obvious issues. Your conclusion that we would be better with asylums doesn't sit well with me. I think I have made my concerns on that point clear.

    I think religious preferences vs medical care of children is an issue that is already an acknowledged problem, making that care available to all doesn't change the ethics of it. I am inclined to side with parental rights as a default, but I don't deny that there are situations where that is a bad call. The have been some highly publicized instances that would make great examples here.

    I think I already made it clear that if they want to languish on the minimal existence that UBI could provide, I am happy to let them. The idea that there will be a percentage of real or perceived bad actors I am willing to accept, because I don't want to throw the good out with the bad. I can't see any other solution that doesn't amount to what I would consider a horror story, like the government forcing you to move or deciding what you will do for a living. That said, if there really is such a popular demand for those services, perhaps those will be viable jobs again. Brewing was a dead profession 100 years ago, it has been booming for decades now. Perhaps some lateral transition that they will accept will arise, but that is a private concern. Frankly I do not understand how you haven't quibbled over other perceived bad actors but are really stuck on this example. My straight answer in case it isn't clear is no other assistance is necessary, give them survival and the opportunity to create more for themselves and their children if they desire. That is a fairer shake than we have ever seen on a wide scale, and I would be beyond proud to see it in my lifetime.

    If you think you can identify any single group of voters as having given us Trump, you are mistaken. The whole damn country participates in this farce, not just coal country or the rust belt.