> > I don't recall he ever did that. > He specifically exclaimed "Fuck it, I don't care, we'll pay the fines" rather than having that adornment in the vehicle.

> > I don't recall he ever did that. > He specifically exclaimed "Fuck it, I don't care, we'll pay the fines" rather than having that adornment in the vehicle. Just because your literalism says that it's not, because there were no mashed fists against the floor, doesn't make it less so, particularly when the definition of tantrum is around outbursts of anger, often immaturely. You could say it's an immature choice when you look at the consequences. But it's not an outburst of anger. No clenched fists, no sweating, no crying, no hissing. He didn't even raise his voice. Was he angry? Sure, he used the word "fuck". Throwing a tantrum is an exaggeration. You can call me a literalist. --- > A USB stick was plugged into the car. It didn't happen OTA, but nothing was touched or removed or installed on the vehicle. But I'm sure that would somehow be a recall still. You have a good point. The difference between plugging a USB key and sending an OTA update is mostly technical. The point of making a distinction: When you recall a car (by physically relocating it, to make it clear), you make it unavailable to the owner until it is returned, at great inconvenience to the owner. If a service update rendered the car unavailable to a similar extent, I'd see the similarity better. I still think the word "recall" would be wrong, not because I'm trying to undermine the extent and severity of the matter. I'm sure we can come up with better, similarly critical words, e.g. "Tesla bricking all their cars for 48 hours".