Let's reduce IBM to "gain for AWS" (or whatever) because of Cringely. :'-)

I've spent 10 years of my life at IBM (until 2017) and met a bunch of smart and driven people there (yeah, not all of them); IBM invested in me and I learned lessons from my colleagues that help me to this day.

"IBMers don't believe in certifications" LOL! IBM probably invented them.
What a joy it is to realize at some client afterwards that this client doesn't have the most basic understanding of management - which you previously took for granted.

I earn my living turning business challenges into (tailored) IT solutions and thought the Red Hat acquisition was a smart one. Oh yeah, been running linux (Gentoo) on my desktop since ~2001, learned RHEL & CentOS on IBM's dime. Yeah, still running Debian for servers regardless :-) But if I were running a Fortune 500 company I'd be running RHEL no doubt about it.

How some have fallen since Triumph of the Nerds (which I loved for what it was). I guess it's easier to be yelling at the sidelines than to run a 300+K people company or deliver on a Minecraft server promise :-)

So, as a humble member of the greater IT business I call BS on this story/rant.

I've had a love/hate story with IBM for years, all the more so when I worked for them.
But guess what, in a company that size the smartest person doesn't always win, the best way forward doesn't always ends up being the on implemented but I did spend 9 of of my 10 years running Linux as my primary OS. As a tech geek that (still) counts for something. It saved both IBM and it's clients a bunch of money and I was exposed to (and allowed to fail on) a great many business related matters which I once thought weren't all that important.

So yeah, go ahead and count IBM out on the account of someone who hasn't delivered a single working solution in this lifetime - afaik ;-)

Not sure why I'm taking the time to write this - must be fond memories after all.

Right, the fact that Google pushed Chrome on it's search page didn't factor into it at all.

Not to say Mozilla didn't/doesn't make any mistakes, but at least their users aren't the product

Second that.

1. maybe law was inspired by google's testing car which did have a driver. If not, it still seams reasonable until driverless cars are considered mostly infallable
2. just a guess - why not make the driverless car owner responsible?
Plus given it's a driveless car something tells me law officers won't have to search for plate numbers anymore either.