Nvidia's board meets on Huang, and the Supreme Court makes banks pay for digital arrest scams

Nvidia's board reportedly met as soon as November 11, 2026 to decide whether Jensen Huang stays CEO, after he admitted an affair with a woman US intelligence flagged as a possible Chinese spy. Then the New York Times reported a second affair, this one with an Nvidia executive who reports to him. The stock fell about 8% after hours and is down 11% over five days. This was always the risk of building the most important company in AI around one founder with 60 direct reports and no real bench. Nobody plans succession until they're forced to.

The Supreme Court has told banks that if their own lack of due diligence lets a digital arrest scam payment through, they owe the victim the full amount back, no questions asked. Justice Bagchi called it strict liability. The order, passed October 29 and uploaded November 7, 2026, lists three safeguards banks must follow: hold transactions that don't match an account's history, alert the nearest police station, and physically verify flagged payments. WhatsApp and other platforms now have to submit their own fraud-prevention plans too, the first time a court has gone straight to a platform instead of routing through the government. Everyone's been telling victims to be careful for two years. This is the first order that makes someone else's carelessness cost them money.

Most people block a scam call or fraud SMS and move on. There's a government tool that actually does something about it. Go to sancharsaathi.gov.in, open Chakshu under Citizen Centric Services. Screenshot the message, pick the fraud category, describe what happened, verify your number with an OTP, and submit. It acts on the number itself through the Department of Telecommunications. It won't get your money back if you've already lost it, that still goes through cybercrime.gov.in or the 1930 helpline, a completely different process. Takes about two minutes and most people have genuinely never opened it.

Myth going around: if an order quotes a case number and a judgment, it's real law. Not automatically, not anymore. The Bombay High Court quashed a Customs Commissioner's order in Quanta Logistics vs Commissioner of Customs because the "Supreme Court judgments" it relied on simply don't exist, almost certainly fabricated by an AI tool and never checked before the order was signed. This is at least the second time in 2026 that an Indian court has caught official paperwork leaning on invented case law. The AI didn't write the policy. The person who skipped verifying its citations did.

Small setting, real difference. Most banks default your UPI daily limit to one or two lakh rupees. Unless you're actually moving that much money daily, that's just extra headroom for a scammer who gets your PIN once. Open your bank's app or GPay or PhonePe, find UPI or transaction limits, and set your own cap closer to what you actually spend. If someone does get in anyway, a lower ceiling caps the damage before you even notice something's wrong.