Live data from Hacker News

Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

cnbc.com

161–170 of 175 posts

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#161
post #2

What really set Steve Jobs apart is that he never should have gotten to where he did. I don't mean he didn't deserve it or anything but based on that structures that exist to filter people who attain the positions that he did. By luck, or accident, or raw determination, he became a person in the drivers seat that no one would have chose to put there. He was so much not the person they would have chosen that they kick…

> treated people in ways they felt uncomfortable with

He was outright abusive in many of his relationships and interactions, professional and personal. We shouldn't tip-toe around that fact.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#162
post #33
post #2

What really set Steve Jobs apart is that he never should have gotten to where he did. I don't mean he didn't deserve it or anything but based on that structures that exist to filter people who attain the positions that he did. By luck, or accident, or raw determination, he became a person in the drivers seat that no one would have chose to put there. He was so much not the person they would have chosen that they kick…

I disagree, Steve Jobs didn't luck out. Instead, he never went through the filters. Had he tried to become an Aircraft Engineer or a Doctor, he might get filtered out but he and Woz ventured into an unestablished field that was about to boom. There were no filters to keep him out and though he lacked a scholar formation he was exceptionally brilliant and managed to walk the path better than the most. Peter Thiel says…

100%, and his understanding early on that as computing power increased we would increasingly trade computing power for ease of use. This is the fundamental realization that allowed mass adoption of personal computing and continues to drive our personal computing progression. We currently have access to personal computers that are more than plenty powerful, the limiting factor is software and its ease/speed of use now.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#163
post #33
post #2

What really set Steve Jobs apart is that he never should have gotten to where he did. I don't mean he didn't deserve it or anything but based on that structures that exist to filter people who attain the positions that he did. By luck, or accident, or raw determination, he became a person in the drivers seat that no one would have chose to put there. He was so much not the person they would have chosen that they kick…

I disagree, Steve Jobs didn't luck out. Instead, he never went through the filters. Had he tried to become an Aircraft Engineer or a Doctor, he might get filtered out but he and Woz ventured into an unestablished field that was about to boom. There were no filters to keep him out and though he lacked a scholar formation he was exceptionally brilliant and managed to walk the path better than the most. Peter Thiel says…

> instead of making better phone than Nokia he would make something that no one at Nokia or anywhere else even dreamed of.

This oversells what Apple did and undersells just how much Nokia dropped the ball. Nokia wasn’t blindsided by the iPhone or touch screen interfaces. They knew about touchscreen interfaces and actively chose not to persue it. “Because people want tactile keyboards” essentially they Listened to much to their own engineers who were in love with blackberries. While Apple mindlessly perused a vision that notably had already failed them once in the Newton, and which every business major would say was a suicide mission “because the iPhone will canibalice the iPod market”.

The reason Nokia failed was because management was just horribly bad. Not only did they have 500 different models of phones with every team competing internally, the were proud of it.

Apple went out with “we have one phone and one phone only” at that time. And Nokia engineers laughed them off saying “how the hell will they ever complete with us, they have just one phone!?”, and of cause they also laughed at the price point, saying that trying to sell expensive phones in North America was concept that was dead at birth. No, to them true market dominance was to sell cheap phones in India and China.

On the engineering side, that point in time was also when Nokia had extremely shitty software, again this wasn’t a mistake, they were proud of it. The N95 had like 4 different menu systems to reach the same screens. The iPhone didn’t do much before it had the web and apps, but it was simple, people intuitively understood it. But Nokia didn’t care. They didn’t even consider Apple a competitor even after iPhone started to gain popularity. They didn’t care about the high end market segment and only cared about Google as a competitor.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#164
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> instead of making better phone than Nokia he would make something that no one at Nokia or anywhere else even dreamed of. The interesting thing about the iPhone is that people assume that was always the vision when in fact it was an idea that evolved and matured through the R&D process. Just as Android started out as a camera OS and pivoted to smart phones, the iPhone started out as a tablet, which was already a mar…

Magic is a lot of never seen work, followed by a reveal.

But we have seen the the work. Anyone who was paying any attention to the direction phones were going could see this work happening. And what’s more Apple have since shown their prototypes that lead to the first iPhone.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#165
post #33
post #2

What really set Steve Jobs apart is that he never should have gotten to where he did. I don't mean he didn't deserve it or anything but based on that structures that exist to filter people who attain the positions that he did. By luck, or accident, or raw determination, he became a person in the drivers seat that no one would have chose to put there. He was so much not the person they would have chosen that they kick…

I disagree, Steve Jobs didn't luck out. Instead, he never went through the filters. Had he tried to become an Aircraft Engineer or a Doctor, he might get filtered out but he and Woz ventured into an unestablished field that was about to boom. There were no filters to keep him out and though he lacked a scholar formation he was exceptionally brilliant and managed to walk the path better than the most. Peter Thiel says…

Thank you - that just hit the "insight" button for me - explaining like a time traveller.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think about this a lot from the point of view of economic fairness and wealth inequality. You have a higher probability of being rich if your ancestors "owned the land" first. Similarly, you have a higher probability of being rich if you "created" the market. Owners deserve some piece of the pie for stewarding the land well, and innovators deserve some piece of the pie for playing a difficult role in the march of t…

You'd be interested in Progress and Poverty, a seminal work by late 19th century economist Henry George that tackles these issues of monopoly (of land, ideas, network effects) and their economic consequences. Full text here: https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/george-progress-and-povert... Blurbs from famous people who enjoyed it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_and_Poverty#Notable_r... edit to add because…

I am absilutely fascinated by these questions and will dive into your book recommentation.

One can think of an organisation as 'development' on top of land (the market). So Apple has organised (against the 2nd law of thermodynamics) a collection of companies that moves chips and aluminum and glass into a box in a store near me.

That is a form of development / improvement of the 'land' (laws of physics, existence of GSM networks?). There is certainly nothing 'natural' about the capital structure of companies in the USA that ensures some people become billionaires, nor even that for profit companies are the right way to organise. Although I might be a fish trying to explain away water there.

I get the feeling that if Swardley maps might be useful in laying out a taxation policy we are going down the wrong route however, as I seem to be arguing that each 'layer' from land to transport netowrks to digital networks needs to be accounted for to get the fair level of taxation.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Wasn't the C64's 1541 disk drive notoriously rubbish?" Not that I can remember my 1541 being rubbish. "Not sure I'd use it as an example of something "magic"." It had a 6502 CPU in it and when we run code on the 1541 and detached the cable and it did still run, it felt magic to me. Because it was forty years ago, I can't remember all the details but I think there was a copy program on two drives that run without the…

Apparently the 1541 disk drive is notoriously slow. https://ilesj.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/1541-why-so-complicat...

Well I found it perfectly fine and such a relief after using tapes (speed, direct access, delete files,...). And I guess the reason is "Many commercial games had their built-in fast loading routines that often doubled as a copy protection. "

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#168
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

gorilla arms are a thing you cannot dream your way out of. While a display projected 'in air' is cool a standing gesture based ui is very much not.

Brain-computer link bypasses the gorilla arm problem entirely.

What if we think those displays as VR headset alternative? I feel it could be hugely helpful doing surgeries/repairs don't you think? Direct brain connection means too many cmd-z's for me.

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be interested in Progress and Poverty, a seminal work by late 19th century economist Henry George that tackles these issues of monopoly (of land, ideas, network effects) and their economic consequences. Full text here: https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/george-progress-and-povert... Blurbs from famous people who enjoyed it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_and_Poverty#Notable_r... edit to add because…

I am absilutely fascinated by these questions and will dive into your book recommentation. One can think of an organisation as 'development' on top of land (the market). So Apple has organised (against the 2nd law of thermodynamics) a collection of companies that moves chips and aluminum and glass into a box in a store near me. That is a form of development / improvement of the 'land' (laws of physics, existence of G…

I'm glad you're interested.

> So Apple has organised (against the 2nd law of thermodynamics) a collection of companies that moves chips and aluminum and glass into a box in a store near me. [...] That is a form of development / improvement of the 'land'

Exactly right. Which is why none of those improvements should be taxed. They are the product of human labor, to which the laborer has full rights. It is only the common natural resources which an organization monopolizes at the exclusion of others that should be taxed. A tax on such limited resources is in effect a fee that they pay for the private utilization of a public good. Ownership of high value locations is one example, intellectual patents are another. If you squint, a carbon tax is another example.

It doesn't have to get as complicated as Wardley maps. You don't need to account for every layer of improvement in the network of modern business, because no improvement should be taxed. You only need to answer "is this the product of human ingenuity and labor, or is this a natural common good that is owned to the exclusion of anyone else?"

This is the polar opposite of a VAT. You don't want to tax "value add", you want to tax "natural resource use"!

Re: Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs wasn’t a natural-born leader

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently the 1541 disk drive is notoriously slow. https://ilesj.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/1541-why-so-complicat...

Well I found it perfectly fine and such a relief after using tapes (speed, direct access, delete files,...). And I guess the reason is "Many commercial games had their built-in fast loading routines that often doubled as a copy protection. "

The 1541 was slow because the VIC-20 shipped with faulty hardware that couldn't move data on the serial port at full speed, so they patched their software to get it working at a much slower speed. The C64 didn't come with faulty hardware but still retained the same software routines for backwards-compatibility. Those fast loaders then replaced these slow compatible routines with full speed ones.
Post reply on HN