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

The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

muckrock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–179 of 179 posts

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#171

Post by furyofantares »

philwelch wrote: post #165
DrJokepu wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curiously enough it's more difficult than you'd think. According to Sports Illustrated, within five years of retirement 60% of NBA players go bankrupt (although I'm not sure how reliable the source is).

When you have a hundred extended relatives reaching out for help, combined with scam artists trying to talk you into "investments", it's easy to go broke.

It's also damn easy to waste money at any scale simply due to your own financial demeanor. I waste a lot of money on $50-$500 gadgets because that amount of money doesn't mean much to me. I'm not very financially responsible, though I'm not irresponsible either.

If I made ten times what I do, I'd probably be buying $500-$5000 gadgets just as frequently. If $100k didn't mean much to me then I'd probably buy a Tesla. If $20M didn't mean much to me then I might become a space tourist.

A more financially responsible person than myself would be likely to remain more responsible as they scale up, and a less responsible person would likely remain less responsible.

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#172

Post by JonnieCache »

smackfu wrote: post #132
quux wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch The Wire. Most realistic portrayal of police work I've ever seen. Lots of watching suspects and gathering string, putting the pieces of the puzzle together slowly over a season of television, dealing with disfunctional organizations and a realistically low number of gunfights. One of the best TV shows ever made IMO.

Is it really realistic though? The Wire seems to portray only cases that are relevant to the big picture plot, and they always seem to solve them in the end.

The guy was embedded with the real baltimore homicide squad for two years or something in the 80s. Read his book, Homicide, for a more realistic depiction of the monotonous life of a police department.

The wire is still realistic, because it specifically follows a team doing a large drug investigation, rather than the general work of the dept. In the book, there are a lot more misc. trails that go cold, like you describe.

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#173

Post by yardie »

dman wrote: post #169
yardie wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No he was put in charge of the advanced research division. They basically stripped him of all managerial duties without firing him. When presented with his new position and title he was like, "F it, I'm outta here!" Firing a company founder is probably the last thing any publicly traded would do. It's just not done. You'd have sympathetic stockholders rioting, the neutral ones now pissed at you, and every last member…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Greene

I didn't mean to imply its never done, just that when a founder is fired it tends to be for criminal reasons (ie, John Delorean). In this case, it looks like a pure power play. Tucci had the board backing him and Greene had the senior executives. In the end Tucci won.

"When Ms. Greene’s firing was announced to investors the next morning, VMware’s shares plunged 24 percent, and the high-flying company was thrown into a tailspin from which it has yet to recover."[1]

Since her departure it looks like VMWare has changed from an engineering driven company to acquisitions driven.

[1]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/technology/09vmware.html

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#174

Post by yardie »

blario wrote: post #63
shimon_e wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't he fired?

it may have technically been a resignation. you know; that old political game... the interviews show that everyone that knew and worked with him thought he resigned. only when they interviewed jobs did HE say he was fired.

According to Sculley, he was quite sincere that he wanted Jobs to run the advanced research division. He interpreted it as a demotion, quit, then told the interviewers he was fired.

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#175

Post by joshaidan »

joshaidan wrote: post #50

My favourite snippet: "Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs' honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist and distort reality in order to achieve his goals."

Now that Jobs has died, I feel disappointed that I'll never have the chance to get to know him and fall victim to his reality distortion field.

...then reality sinks in, and just maybe... maybe there was some other force at work in all those keynote presentations. :)

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#177

Post by jarek »

jonknee wrote: post #109
Mvandenbergh wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cap is based on the maximum income that is subject to the payroll tax (up to $106,800). Income over that amount does not incur payroll tax and also doesn't contribute to payable social security benefits.

And since he was making $1 a year, he probably wasn't contributing too much anyway.

And since he's dead, he's probably not eligible for much anymore.

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#178

Post by shimon_e »

yardie wrote: post #174
blario wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it may have technically been a resignation. you know; that old political game... the interviews show that everyone that knew and worked with him thought he resigned. only when they interviewed jobs did HE say he was fired.

According to Sculley, he was quite sincere that he wanted Jobs to run the advanced research division. He interpreted it as a demotion, quit, then told the interviewers he was fired.

So, it makes sense that he actually quit and then distorted the story to make himself look more special.

Re: The FBI's files on Steve Jobs

#179

Post by caublestone »

FrojoS wrote: post #137
caublestone wrote: post #104

"2.65 GPA on a 4.0 scale" at Homestead High School . What a boss.

How did he get into Reed? SAT?

I think the world was so different then. One of my mentors barely graduated and went straight to Stanford MBA back in the 60's. Sure he had lots of campus leadership. But it seems like ambition got you a lot farther back in the day.
Post reply on HN