My position is neither silly nor extreme. It's the way it is usually done and other comments here have been along the same lines. In fact you are trying to spi

My position is neither silly nor extreme. It's the way it is usually done and other comments here have been along the same lines. In fact you are trying to spin what I wrote to an extreme to make your point. By the way, it is not about 100% success assurance but assurance that failure does not brick the unit. This is an assurance that should be, and can be, close to 100%, indeed a good number of 9s because, obviously you cannot brick 2 cars out of 100 for every software upgrade!