Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

reprints.longform.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#111

Post by WalterBright »

hellofunk wrote: post #90
marktangotango wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI he's applying logical operations to sentences as logical propositions, which is valid and precise. Not hand wavey, and condescending like you are doing.

Looks like all three of us are being a bit condescending here. Here is the actual logic: if people are not inherently bad at teaching, that means they are mostly effective at it, right? Were most of the teachers you've had in your life effective at teaching? Mine certainly were not. Perhaps you were having problems with the use of my word "nothing" instead of "mostly," which is just a colloquialism. Idioms of languag…

You changed your wording from "highly effective" to "mostly effective". It's a crucial change, and so I infer you accepted my point :-)

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#112

Post by hellofunk »

WalterBright wrote: post #111
hellofunk wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like all three of us are being a bit condescending here. Here is the actual logic: if people are not inherently bad at teaching, that means they are mostly effective at it, right? Were most of the teachers you've had in your life effective at teaching? Mine certainly were not. Perhaps you were having problems with the use of my word "nothing" instead of "mostly," which is just a colloquialism. Idioms of languag…

You changed your wording from "highly effective" to "mostly effective". It's a crucial change, and so I infer you accepted my point :-)

No I didn't? It still says "highly."

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#113

Post by WalterBright »

hellofunk wrote: post #112
WalterBright wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You changed your wording from "highly effective" to "mostly effective". It's a crucial change, and so I infer you accepted my point :-)

No I didn't? It still says "highly."

Look at your post I just replied to. It does not say "highly".

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#114

Post by hellofunk »

WalterBright wrote: post #113
hellofunk wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I didn't? It still says "highly."

Look at your post I just replied to. It does not say "highly".

I thought you meant I edited my original post that spawned your objections, which I haven't.

I'll admit to being surprised at such a reaction over the choice of either of these words over the other. My meaning was clear in either case.

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#115

Post by jasonwelk »

hellofunk wrote: post #114
WalterBright wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at your post I just replied to. It does not say "highly".

I thought you meant I edited my original post that spawned your objections, which I haven't. I'll admit to being surprised at such a reaction over the choice of either of these words over the other. My meaning was clear in either case.

Don't be too surprised. Hackers tend to treat natural language like a programming language, unfortunately. Challenge them on it, and get ridiculed.

Your point has been lost in all the nonsense, but I agree with it.

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#116

Post by dezzeus »

> Jobs: [...] there’s been virtually zero innovation since IBM got dominant control of that market place 15 years ago. They are going to do the same thing in every other sector of the computer market place if they can get away with it. The IBM PC fundamentally brought no new technology to the industry at all. It was just repackaging and slight extension of Apple II technology, and they want it all. They absolutely want it all.

> This market place is coming down to the two of us, whether we like it or not. I don’t particularly like it, but it’s coming down to Apple and IBM.

> [...]

> Playboy: It’s not all competition [...]: You buy your disk drives from Sony, for instance.

> Jobs: We buy many of our components from [...]. We save a ton of energy not having to make and design floppy-disk drives or microprocessors that we can spend on software.

So, nowadays Apple is the new IBM and "needs" serious competition...

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#117

Post by mehrdada »

> You know, Dr. Edwin Land was a troublemaker. He dropped out of Harvard and founded Polaroid. Not only was he one of the great inventors of our time but, more important, he saw the intersection of art and science and business and built an organization to reflect that. Polaroid did that for some years, but eventually Dr. Land, one of those brilliant troublemakers, was asked to leave his own company—which is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of. So Land, at 75, went off to spend the remainder of his life doing pure science, trying to crack the code of color vision. The man is a national treasure. I don’t understand why people like that can’t be held up as models: This is the most incredible thing to be—not an astronaut, not a football player—but this.

Wow. Little did he know it would happen to himself not long after.

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#118

Post by barrkel »

louprado wrote: post #107
barrkel wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The petrochemical revolution is more than the market cap of an oil company. The petrochemical revolution guides the way we've built our cities for the past 100+ years, how we ship our goods and how we travel the world. The entire transport system - cars, trucks, ships, planes - almost all petrochemical. And the negative side too. Vast fields of tarmac (petrochemical) parking lots (petrochemical) for strip malls. Urba…

> The petrochemical revolution guides the way we've conducted foreign policy should have received top billing. Unless you were intentionally excluding items not in both sets.

Petrochemicals also enabled mechanized warfare. That's a bigger impact on killing power than any squabbles in the Middle East. I expect deaths in Levantine squabbles are also dwarfed by road accidents.

Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)

#119

Post by code_duck »

agumonkey wrote: post #110
code_duck wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware that people doubted the intelligence or acumen of Steve Jobs.

It's hard to be sure. As I said, he has no woz proof of work, at best they made blue bloxes and he was hired at Atari (or HP can't recall) but left early. Now his explanation says a lot about is inner thinking.

Hmmm, also he had some noteable achievements afterwards, such as transforming Apple into one of the most successful companies ever, again.
Post reply on HN