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 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.