It seems like a stretch to argue that a world in which thousands of people are simultaneously injured or killed by an electronic device they had no reason to fe

It seems like a stretch to argue that a world in which thousands of people are simultaneously injured or killed by an electronic device they had no reason to fear is not meaningfully changed by said event. The world is in a continuous state of change, and the fact that these pager attacks are now in the public consciousness introduces a whole series of potential pathways of thought and action that wouldn’t have been explored if not for this event. This is in addition to gaining clarity about the world as it already was immediately prior to the attack, i.e. yes we were vulnerable, and an entity was in the process of actively exploiting that vulnerability. Now we're aware, and that awareness has/will initiate a new cascade of change. ETA: I'm very curious to understand how/why people disagree with this.