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.
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.
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.
I think you’re missing a detail here, which is that before streaming was a thing writers would make significant amounts of their money by getting a show syndicated on a network, that was the whole deal. Streaming is being treated differently, effectively resulting in then receiving a very large pay cut because even if they make a successful show the payout doesn’t come.
And it’s true they could structure things so that they don’t receive a secondary payout, but their base salary was negotiated with that later payout in mind. You and I don’t receive secondary payouts for our work, but our salary is also adjusted to recognize that.
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”.
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 🤦♂️
It seems likely biased as well unfortunately if they let teams decide on their own what to use. I would wager that teams who on their own switched to Rust are probably teams that were already productive.