Comment by emacsgifs | Hacker News Reader

Comment by emacsgifs | Hacker News Reader

This is one of the more insightful and interesting reads posted on HN.

I took issue with the statement that Apple have always cynically coopted counterculture and utopian motifs. Then I thought about it for a second.

Getting people pumped up about Apple using utopian imagery and counterculture suggestions was always cynical. It just happened to work very effectively on me in the 80s, and may very well have fuelled a lot of my early life's optimism. In particular my faith that certain tech/companies were inherently good. I was certainly a big fan of Apple for many years.

If that naivety hadn't already faded significantly, this may have been a more severe reaction, than ... Hey wait!? ... Oh right!

Obviously Steve had already exploited and cheated Woz on a number of occasions before the formative Mac 1984 Ads (which made a deep impression on me at the time.) So it's not that much of a reach to say they are somewhat cynical.

Jobs is a very interesting person, specifically because I think he bought a lot of his own bullshit. Possibly his LSD experience was something which led to deep understanding of humans and interpersonal politics, which may have led to him developing his reality distortions field... Who knows. He may also have developed the classic [1]Acid Jesus Messianic complex and as a result we have the enigma we are left with in the public memory of Jobs. Millions who believe he was an agent of change and a tech god. While many many, who look deeper at the man think he's quite the piece of (edit for politeness) work.

Speculation on this is ultimately pointless... but it's something I muse about myself.

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_complex

>Obviously Steve had already exploited and cheated Woz on a number of occasions before the formative Mac 1984 Ads (which made a deep impression on me at the time.) So it's not that much of a reach to say they are somewhat cynical.

Sure, but do you know how many bona fide members of the counterculture themselves exploited and back-stabbed others, especially for petty power politics and fame/recognition? It's not like the counterculture didn't have a fair share of BS itself, or cynical people (Leary comes to mind, or take Jerry Rubin).

A large for-profit non-private company (as opposed to some small co-op or something) with revolutionary/hippie/counter-culture mottos that otherwise operates fine within capitalism was always gonna be BS in that aspect.

>Millions who believe he was an agent of change and a tech god. While many many, who look deeper at the man think he's quite the piece of (edit for politeness) work.

Those two things are not necessarily at odds. It's some particular Americanism (or protestantism relic?) to believe agents of change, national heroes, great historic figures etc, must also be good, altruistic and warm people.

> do you know how many bona fide members of the counterculture themselves exploited and back-stabbed others, especially for petty power politics and fame/recognition?

I do, and fair point.

> It's some particular Americanism (or protestantism relic?) to believe agents of change, national heroes, great historic figures etc, must also be good, altruistic and warm people

I don't think it's a Protestant relic, it's more of a general simplistic perspective that there are through and through good people.

But still I agree it's unrealistic to think this way.

I think a discussion on Steve Jobs' morality is among the least productive uses of this excellent essay.

Yet I'll add that people are complicated. In terms of his accomplishments, it is undeniable that Jobs was a force for good. As for his motives and methods, I have no trouble believing that Jobs (and the vast majority at Apple) used the image of counterculture in good faith, even while they changed it into a sort of hollowed-out version streamlined for capitalism.

Yet there are some positive strains of this myth Apple created that have an impact on them until today: the willingness to focus on small segments of the market or to quickly abandon legacy technology come to mind. Their affinity to the arts and humanities is also still palpable, and certain political decisions, such as their willingness to invest in clean technology or to support the LGBTQ community also seem to be rooted in spirit of the revolutions in the 60s.

> I have no trouble believing that Jobs (and the vast majority at Apple) used the image of counterculture in good faith, even while they changed it into a sort of hollowed-out version streamlined for capitalism.

This is exactly as I understand it too... Except this being a fairly good example of what counterculture circles generally call, a complete sell out.

It's complicated of course, how else does one stay relevant long term without also being extremely wealthy / i.e. the ability to broadcast a message to many many nodes? Put another way. Money talks.

From what I have read, there are quite a few people (including Woz) that recognize that Steve Jobs was still a great man, despite the way how he treated people sometimes.

Steve Jobs was very charismatic and often it’s charismatic people that lead the charge.

One can be an agent of change and a tech god, while also being a piece of work. The one doesn’t exclude the other.

Einstein treated his wife quite horrible as well, but despite this, he was still a genious.

I wouldn't call a man who cheats close friends/partners and treats others badly a great man.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com