I disagree that it’s so simple, 10 is different because for a long time it was unclear 11 was ever going to happen, the biyearly releases were the new versions. For most of the other Windows versions they didn’t stop receiving security update until well after the next version or two were out. 11 will have only been out for 4 years when support for 10 theoretically stops.

At least I attempted to looked it up, rather than everyone else who assumed it just can’t happen at all while also knowing nothing about it.

No, what I’m saying is that a quick Google suggests you can get jail time for this in Colombia even if Apple is the one suing. Obviously I’m not an expert, but my point is that Apple’s threat of possible jail time is not completely unfounded, you can’t assume it just works like the US legal system.

I think you might be making too many assumptions about the Colombian legal system.

The irony is that it very well could have been a disadvantage for her to get picked. The incumbent advantage isn’t really a thing for people appointed to the seat, and she’d be stuck doing Senate things for the next year instead of campaigning.

Keep in mind it’s not an all or nothing thing, they’ll assign percentages of fault. It’s also important that they name name basically anybody involved because the others will try to blame Google to shift fault off of themselves.

Effectively you want to name everybody possible so that they all fight it out.

Much of what she was brought on to do (negotiating with advertisers I guess) isn’t really public facing, so from that respect it’s not that surprising that she appears to be doing nothing. I also think she’s not taking the L yet, if things get even worse Musk may blame her as an excuse to walk things back (“I was following her advice” or whatever).

Maybe, but there’s a market out there for CEOs who are willing to take the blame for some unpopular decisions and then walk away. There’s also something to be said that “-50%” might actually be an improvement over where it was before she was hired, and the bad decisions weren’t hers.

What’s the point of downloading a game if not to experience it?

“Nobody deserves to get paid for creating the games I enjoy”.

Ehh, you might as well waste as much of the admins time as possible.

I totally agree with you that a typical CEO would not put up with this at all, but then I don’t think this is a very typical situation :D I would assume she knew what she was getting into. He named himself CTO so it’s not like he’s no longer involved in the company, and the CEO can’t really ‘overrule’ him on any product decisions or anything else since he’s technically also her boss.

Now, if he’s smart he will hopefully at least take her opinions/guidance into consideration, but 🤷

He still owns the company so it doesn’t matter who the CEO is, he is their boss. If he wants to continue making big business decisions then he still can, and if the CEO doesn’t agree he can either fire them or just go over their head.

Are we sure on that? I’ve seen conflicting reports on whether they actually started paying or not (Ex. Engadget article from a week ago says they are). It’s not public information so it’s hard to verify.

Does Twitter Blue show ads? I guess I assumed if you’re paying you don’t have to see those, but that would make too much sense 🤦‍♂️