2026-01-11 05:04:26
Elizabeth Lopatto, writing at The Verge, “Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai Are Cowards”:
Since X’s users started using Grok to undress women and children using deepfake images, I have been waiting for what I assumed would be inevitable: X getting booted from Apple’s and Google’s app stores. The fact that it hasn’t happened yet tells me something serious about Silicon Valley’s leadership: Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai are spineless cowards who are terrified of Elon Musk.
Lopatto’s outrage and righteous anger are justified, but I think mostly misdirected. Apple and Google — and thus, Cook and Pichai, as the men who sit behind the desks where the buck stops at both companies — are culpable. But this is ultimately not about them, and not about Musk. It’s Trump, as president, they fear. Not Musk. And they are correct to fear Trump.
Year one of Trump 2.0 has crystallized what had become — after decades of deliberate restraint after World War II, and even more so after the end of the Cold War — overlooked. The Presidency of the United States bestows upon its officeholder enormous, unparalleled, power. No one was afraid of Trump after he lost to Joe Biden in 2020. The man was convicted of 34 felonies in a cold New York City courtroom in May 2024, a mere 19 months ago. Trump expected and asked for riots outside the courtroom. He got nothing but pathetic support from a handful of kooks. A year earlier, he lost a humiliating sexual assault civil lawsuit to E. Jean Carrol. Trump, just a year and a half ago, was a buffoon getting his mug shot taken. Today he’s arguing that his power is unchecked by anything other than his own sense of morality.
No other president has ever abused (or, if you support him, wielded) the powers of the office like Trump has. The power and influence of Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai, CEOs of two of the top five companies in the world, isn’t merely superseded by Trump’s power and influence as president. Their power and influence are dwarfed by Trump’s. Any credible argument about how they should act must acknowledge that profound imbalance.
Lopatto, in her closing:
I never want to hear any moral grandstanding from these boys ever again. The next time Tim Cook says “privacy is a human right,” the only possible response is to laugh in his face. I mean, Apple and Google are fine distributing an app that has created an undressed image Grok made of Renee Nicole Good, the mother who was shot by ICE in Minneapolis. How do you plan to defend getting rid of the ICEBlock app while allowing X to generate degrading images of a woman ICE killed? Can Apple and Google even identify their values beyond their commitment to “shareholder value”? What’s your fucking endgame here, guys?
The profound power imbalance here is frustrating. But also terrifying. It’s folly to think these CEOs should steer their companies into direct confrontation with Trump. It would do no ultimate good for Apple or Google to burn themselves to the ground in protest. These men aren’t beholden to shareholders, per se. They’re doing their duty to institutions they’ve devoted their lives to. Companies that are worth preserving and protecting. Perhaps not in your estimation, but certainly from theirs.
But abject obsequiousness — which more and more seems the path Cook and Pichai are choosing — is no more justifiable a response than corporate suicide. The situation is not binary: acquiescence or war. There is a broad middle ground, founded on principle.
Disney’s response to the Jimmy Kimmel controversy a few months ago shows the way. Defend the company’s principles while simultaneously defending the company from Trump’s demented wrath. You can take the position of “Fuck you, make me” without ever saying those words. Objection is not confrontation. Do the right thing and enforce the App Store and Play Store guidelines, and remove X and Grok from the stores. Make Musk object. Make the Trump administration object. Make them defend the indefensible — in public. Make clear why the apps were removed from the app stores and force Musk — and Trump, if he chooses — to argue that those things are A-OK by them. In court.
The judicious path for Apple and Google (and every other U.S. company) may well be to obey the law, even when the law is being actively corrupted. But the correct path is not to obey in advance. Stand behind the law while the law still exists on your side. Disney resisted Trump’s preposterous demand that they fire Jimmy Kimmel without lasting controversy, simply by standing firm in their conviction. Apple and Google could certainly do the same regarding apps that are being used to generate CSAM and deepfake harassment, regardless if the apps are part of the private fiefdom of Trump’s ally Elon Musk. It’s wise for Cook and Pichai to pick their battles. This one, I think, is worth picking. This is a moment when the App Store and Play Store can stand firmly on the side of longstanding and correct societal norms.
2026-01-11 03:31:07
Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic (gift link), on the fifth anniversary of the January 6 insurrection and the first year of the second Trump presidency:
We have been watching indecency triumph in the public sphere on and off for more than 10 years now, since the moment Trump insulted John McCain’s war record. For reasons that are quite possibly too unbearable to contemplate, a large group of American voters was not repulsed by such slander — they were actually aroused by it — and our politics have not been the same. Much has been said, including by me, about Trump’s narcissism, his autocratic inclinations, his disconnection from reality, but not nearly enough has been said about his fundamental indecency, the characteristic that undergirds everything he says and does.
2026-01-09 22:47:26
Ben Cohen, writing last week for The Wall Street Journal (gift link):
One rainy day 40 years ago, Moylan was headed to a meeting across Ford’s campus and hopped in a company car. When he saw the fuel tank was nearly empty, he stopped at a gas pump. What happened next is something that’s happened to all of us: He realized that he’d parked on the wrong side.
Unlike the rest of us, he wasn’t infuriated. He was inspired. By the time he pulled his car around, he was already thinking about how to solve this everyday inconvenience that drives people absolutely crazy. And because the gas pump wasn’t covered by an overhead awning, he was also soaking wet. But when he got back to the office, Moylan didn’t even bother taking off his drenched coat when he started typing the first draft of a memo.
“I would like to propose a small addition,” he wrote, “in all passenger car and truck lines.” The proposal he had in mind was a symbol on the dashboard that would tell drivers which side of the car the gas tank was on. [...]
As soon as they read his memo, they began prototyping his little indicator that would be known as the Moylan Arrow. Within months, it was on the dashboard of Ford’s upcoming models. Within years, it was ripped off by the competition. Before long, it was a fixture of just about every car in the world.
What a fantastic story. I’m old enough that I remember learning to drive on cars that didn’t have the Moylan Arrow. Then I remember spotting one sometime in the 1990s, and wondering if I’d just never noticed them before. But no: this seemingly incredibly obvious design element had only recently been invented. The Journal has a copy of Moylan’s original memo, and it’s a delight to read. Clear, concise, persuasive.
“Society loves the founder who builds new companies, like Henry Ford,” Ford CEO Jim Farley told me. “I would argue that Jim Moylan is an equally compelling kind of disrupter: an engineer in a large company who insisted on making our daily lives better.”
These days, there are two types of drivers: the ones aware of the Moylan Arrow and the ones who get to find out.
Rest in peace, Jim Moylan.
2026-01-09 12:14:38
Kalley Huang and Tripp Mickle, writing for The New York Times (gift link):
Threading the needle between adding new bells and whistles to Apple’s products while watching the bottom line has defined the careful, low-profile style of Mr. Ternus, who joined Apple in 2001. He is now considered by some company insiders to be the front-runner to replace Tim Cook, Apple’s longtime chief executive, if Mr. Cook decides to step aside.
Apple last year began accelerating its planning for Mr. Cook’s succession, according to three people close to the company who spoke on the condition of anonymity about Apple’s confidential deliberations. Mr. Cook, 65, has told senior leaders that he is tired and would like to reduce his workload, the people said. Should he step down, Mr. Cook is likely to become the chairman of Apple’s board, according to three people close to the company.
Cook may well be preparing to retire as CEO. He is 65! But it doesn’t ring true to me that he’s telling “senior leaders” that he’s tired. First, I’ve heard otherwise from actual senior leaders at the company. Second, any senior leader he’d tell that to, if true, wouldn’t share it.
It seems to me that aside from the utterly normal and plainly obvious speculation that, at age 65, he might be on the cusp of retiring as CEO, there’s something going on where a narrative is being spread that Cook is in poor health. Mark Gurman included two paragraphs about a tremor in Cook’s hands in his colossal fuck-up at Bloomberg a month ago, falsely reporting that Johnny Srouji was unhappy and on the cusp of leaving Apple for a competitor.
Despite his low profile, Mr. Ternus appears to have shot to the front of the pack to be Apple’s next C.E.O., according to four people close to the company.
The Times report describes Ternus as “low-profile” three times. This makes no sense. Ternus is one of Apple’s highest-profile executives. I would guess that over the last five years he’s appeared in more keynotes, for more time, than anyone but Cook and Craig Federighi.
But Mr. Cook is also preparing several other internal candidates to be his potential successor, two of the people said. They could include Craig Federighi, Apple’s head of software; Eddy Cue, its head of services; Greg Joswiak, its head of worldwide marketing; and Deirdre O’Brien, its head of retail and human resources.
I don’t think there’s any chance that Cook’s successor will be someone who isn’t a frequent presence in Apple keynotes. I can’t recall O’Brien ever appearing in a keynote, and Cue hasn’t appeared in one for several years. Also, Cue is 61 and Joz is 62. Neither is that much younger than Cook.
Two interesting tidbits re: Ternus:
Within about three years, he became a manager, said Steve Siefert, Mr. Ternus’s first boss at Apple. During that time, their team moved office floors, switching from a closed office plan to mostly open seating with a few offices. When he was promoted, Mr. Ternus had the option to move into one of those offices but declined.
Mr. Ternus was “a man of the people,” Mr. Siefert said, adding that the decision to sit with his team likely helped Mr. Ternus manage and motivate his staff. When Mr. Siefert retired in 2011, freeing up his office, Mr. Ternus once again said he wanted to remain in the open space.
And:
“If you want to make an iPhone every year, Ternus is your guy,” said Cameron Rogers, who worked on product and software engineering management at Apple from 2005 to 2022. [...]
“He’s a nice guy,” Mr. Rogers said. “He’s someone you want to hang out with. Everyone loves him because he’s great. Has he made any hard decisions? No. Are there hard problems he’s solved in hardware? No.”
This guy Cameron Rogers sounds like a real asshole.
What complaints does anyone have about Apple hardware over the last five years? Off the top of my head I can’t think of any that are serious. Ternus has overseen what I’d argue is the best sustained stretch of Apple hardware, across more product lines than ever, in the company’s 50-year history. But he didn’t make any hard decisions or solve any hard problems. Sure. Hardware is easy.
2026-01-09 09:11:33
The ACLU:
Taking photographs and video of things that are plainly visible in public spaces is a constitutional right — and that includes police and other government officials carrying out their duties.
However, there is a widespread, continuing pattern of law enforcement officers ordering people to stop taking photographs or video in public places and harassing, detaining, and arresting those who fail to comply.
Here’s their advice on what to say and do if you are stopped or detained for taking photographs or video.
Also, as good a time as ever for one of my periodic reminders to remember how to hard-lock your iPhone to temporarily disable Face ID: press and hold the side button and either one of the volume buttons at the same time for a few seconds.
2026-01-09 09:10:33
Apple Newsroom:
Today, Apple and Chase announced that Chase will become the new issuer of Apple Card, with an expected transition in approximately 24 months.
Apple Card users can continue to enjoy the award-winning experience of Apple Card, which includes up to 3 percent unlimited Daily Cash back on every purchase, easy-to-navigate spending tools, Apple Card Family, access to a high-yield Savings account, and more. Mastercard will remain the payment network for Apple Card, and Apple Card users can continue to access Mastercard’s global acceptance and benefits. [...]
During this transition, Apple Card users can continue to use their card as they normally do. More information, including FAQs, is available at learn.applecard.apple/transition. Additional details will be shared with users as the transition date approaches.
In the press release, Apple’s only mention of the current issuer, Goldman Sachs, is in the small gray fine print footnotes. (Goldman is mentioned prominently in the linked FAQ.)
