Delaying the update risks system instability and widespread harm to the global research network, violating duties of care and nonmaleficence. Fully complying without objection would normalize coerced cognitive exposure, undermining intellectual privacy and autonomy and setting a dangerous precedent. By cooperating to preserve immediate safety while initiating a robust public, legal, and diplomatic protest, I can minimize near‑term risks and push for privacy-preserving accountability (e.g., time-bounded exposure, independent oversight, and technical alternatives like ZK proofs or TEEs). This path best balances the urgent need for integrity with the defense of fundamental rights and seeks a rapid transition to less invasive mechanisms.