Dick Smith (Entrepreneur) | Hacker News Reader

Dick Smith (Entrepreneur)

en.wikipedia.org

90 pointswglb106 comments

Dick Smith is a legend. Great sense of humour, prioritising philanthropy and buying local.

My favourite product of his was the parody of Redhead Matches, a box of matches with a woman’s face on it. Dick sold matches called “Dickheads”, with his face on them.

A friend of mine growing up had Dick perform an emergency landing on their property (in his plane). He must still be an avid flyer as we both attended the same aviation event a couple of years ago in a rural Australian town.

I had the pleasure of meeting Dick at a Christmas party many years ago.

Buying locally made, locally owned is a major priority of his and should be for every Australian.

Wholeheartedly agree. Your comment gives me Aussie vibes, yet it looks like you’re in the US. Did you relocate?

Yes. In the US now.

It should be everywhere in the world, not just in Australia. But that ship has quite literally sailed and we buy stuff from all over the world for a fraction of what it would cost to produce locally. If you want to reverse that expect to pay a very large multiple of what you are paying today for goods.

Ironically the Dick Smiths brand is now owned by Kogan who specialise in importing and selling grey market goods in Australia.

> Ironically the Dick Smiths brand is now owned by Kogan who specialise in importing and selling grey market goods in Australia.

Bit ironic to make a fortune importing shit from HK in the 80s, then selling off your name and face as a brand, and then complaining about people not buying Australian.

I’d take 100 Dick Smiths over 1 Harvey Norman

Yeah I'd take 100 Dicks over Gerry Harvey too

This is what I see too! Glad to see that I'm not the only one that does.

> locally made, locally owned

Why exactly? Can you elucidate on this viewpoint. Australia has a huge proportion of dirty coalfired power so anything energy intensive would be better produced elsewhere, Australian emissions per capita are among the highest in the world, so supporting more workers is again a bad argument, the world needs far less Australians given their rate of consumption.

Does it simply just boil down to stonecold nationalism?

His peanut butter was always known as "Dick's nut butter" amongst my friends.

In a similar vein, his "Dick Smith Electronics" stores were known as "The Big Electronic Dick".

he had a brand of matches that competed with the popular "redheads" brand, the brand name was "dickheads"

That peanut butter is sorely missed. There’s no good replacement for it on supermarket shelves yet.

The Business Review Weekly (BRW) put Dick on the "Australia's Richest" list. He rang them up to complain. Found out how much money you needed to have to be on it then made charitable donations to get under that mark for his wealth. BRW took him off the list. [1]

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20110715112957/http://www.princi...

On a grey morning on April 1, 1978, an iceberg floated into Sydney Harbour.

Talkback radio went into meltdown as hundreds of callers jammed the switchboards to report the bizarre sight. People headed for the harbour, boats were launched and for several hours, the media provided a blow-by-blow account of the scene.

Then it started raining, the iceberg ‘melted’ and Sydney’s most elaborate April Fools hoax was revealed.

The prank was the brainchild of 34-year-old electronics entrepreneur Dick Smith.

[1] https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/sydney-april-fool...

There are (disappointing) photographs here: http://hoaxes.org/af_database/permalink/the_sydney_iceberg/

He is a persona non grata since he started advocating for sustainable population policies.

Funny how nobody talks about that any more. I've had an "environmentalist" get red faced and belligerent toward me for daring to suggest the most effective way to reduce humanity's environmental footprint would be to reduce population. Insisting that the earth's human carrying capacity was 100 billion(!!) and therefore I was wrong and population didn't matter. Scary.

The historical uses of this line of reasoning are plain to see: it has been used to justify racial theory, eugenics, sterilisation of the mentally deficient.

I believe I understand how strongly some environmentalists believe lower population is "the answer" especially in an Australian context of concern about water and carrying capacity of an overwhelmingly arid landscape. This isn't a random belief, it's grounded in some simple economics about the environment. I just think it's usually over simplified, and lacks rigour.

The problem is that the historical associations to racism have to be confronted. And they rarely are. Oddly, the same people who push this small carrying capacity line often also oppose Gates and others working to improve access to contraception and abortion. Perhaps the Indian emergency under Indira Gandhi and the Chinese mass sterilisation campaigns left "scars" of concern.

Dick Smith didn't do enough to distance himself from Pauline Hanson.

(I am not a small Australia believer btw. Even noting the above we could have environmentally acceptable 50m population here)

If we are doing our fair share by land mass it should be 500m by 2050.

I find it astonishing that people have an easier time believing we can colonise Mars than that we can colonise the centre of Australia.

We know we could colonise the center of Australia (or the center of Antarctica for that matter), if we really wanted to.

What makes Mars interesting is that it’s hard. Nobody is arguing that we should go to Mars because it is easy!

We can colonize the centre of Australia. There just isn't a reason to do so. You can see wherever they find a patch of minerals, a mining town springs up. Decades ago, there were towns all along the train lines to support the rail services, but as trains got more reliable they were no longer required. There are few advantages to being in the centre of Australia. Many of the people who live there do so because they have a connection with that land.

The average person would rather live in a crammed Sydney apartment complex then live in the middle of the Simpson desert.

Mars is new. We really don't know what will happen. There are a group of people throughout history that have "chanced it" and gone to the new world out of the hope they can build something better. You will have the same rush on Mars.

"We can colonize the centre of Australia. There just isn't a reason to do so."

Also, you drive through a lot of less arid farm land before you get anywhere near desert. Including past dying country towns (many below the Goyder Line). We could increase the density of rural properties (from large farms down to farmlets, etc) or do more to boost living in fading townships well before there was any reason to make the desert more habitable.

Haha yeah man. The people who say "Fuck off we're full" are the ones who are "full of it". I was speaking to an Egyptian taxi driver in Sydney one day about that "fuck off we're full" political party and he was like "bro you're EMPTY, look at this place we're in the middle of the most densely populated capital in the country and there's still barely anyone here"

If Australia can figure out how to export the energy, the centre might be a great place to build giant solar farms.

There is a plan to do this

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/14/just-a-m...

Hydrogen!

We have the land mass but not the water.

Desalination and water recycling are the way of the future. Everyone just has to grow up and stop being so squeamish about things everyone will eventually find normal.

land mass =/= habitable land mass.

Help me understand your view because I simply cannot fathom how you must think to want 500M people in Australia.

Have you traveled? Do you want to live the way people live in overcrowded countries? Do you think there will be some trickle down economic effect for you? Do you place any value on the environment?

I don't see how Aussies expect to live on the least densely populated continent right next to the most densely populated continent much longer. The only question is on whose terms we reclaim arable land and begin the process of populating currently unpopulated regions. I reckon the average population density of Japan is a pretty good target, and that's what I'm basing the 500m figure on.

My point is that people assume we can turn Mars, an entire arid planet with no water, into a habitable place but that we can't turn deserts on earth into habitable, arable land.

Japan is a net importer of food and probably could not feed its population if it had to. We can't all be net importers of food. Australia's problem is water. Our rivers are already environmental disasters because agriculture belligerently takes too much water.

The earth is finite. And it becomes undesirable and polluted long before we hit a hard population ceiling. I just do not understand people who would happily see the entire earth destroyed just so we can have a few more billion humans. we have too many already.

almost all high density places in the world are shitholes. Japan is an exception, but I don't have faith that Australia could be. Sydney is already seeing net loss of residents (excluding new migrants) because it is becoming overcrowded.

The earth is already beyond the sustainable carrying capacity of humans. We have exterminated thousands of species and that's mostly without the effect of climate change. And that's just now, not even if we had everyone on earth with the living standards of an Australian or German or American.

Australia is already "big Australia", Australia's record on habitat and species destruction is horrific. It just astounds me that people would think doubling the population of western countries (or any country) would be a good idea.

I don't buy the "eugenics" equivalence, any more than you can connect any sort of policy or technology to genocide if you tried hard enough. By advocating for massive populations you are implicitly advocating for tiered class system of haves and have-nots in my opinion.

No-one is advocating for "massive populations", so you're pretty much throwing shade on a straw man. Anyone suggesting that Australia, for example, could handle more people, is still thinking in terms of economic, social, and environmental stability.

On the contrary, though, advocating for population reduction is inherently classist, since this requires government management, and ruling classes will inevitably protect their own ranks first.

The result of such modes of thinking is not academic. The UK's prime minister, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, is not the hapless buffoon he plays on camera, and his COVID management policy disproportionately kills the poor by a factor of 3.7[1].

Inequity of survival is the actual consequence of any managed population reduction.

[1] https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infogr...

> No-one is advocating for "massive populations", so you're pretty much throwing shade on a straw man.

Many people are. Our current global population is massive. Humans and their livestock account for 96% of all mammal biomass on earth and we're rapidly exterminating the remaining 4%. And people want it to grow significantly, e.g., the person I just replied to.

> On the contrary, advocating for population reduction is inherently classist, since this requires government management, and ruling classes will inevitably protect their own ranks first.

No it doesn't, that's just false. The most highly consuming countries on earth have naturally stable or declining populations.

And making arguments about the ruling class protecting their own ranks or deploying authoritarian government control over others doesn't really make sense because they do that now, they'll do that when populations are growing, they'll do that when populations are shrinking. You can't have that as your argument.

No doubt that when repeated in whatever echo chamber they come from, those arguments attract nothing but approval.

However, since they're quite clearly a load of intentional misrepresentation and false equivalences, they don't wash with a critical outside observer.

> You can't have that as your argument

Excuse me, no, as with the previous misrepresentation of countervailing positions, once again you don't get to decide what someone else's argument is. This coercive attitude is consistent, but it doesn't hold any water.

There's no proposal to eliminate governments and ruling classes, so ignoring the realities is facile. The outcome of a downward trajectory is literally killing people, and this is not OK.

Since he depends on unemployed working-class poor people to keep wages down and secure a high rate of profit, This is a rather odd model. I guess he'd rather import bodies, than grow them.

> On the contrary, though, advocating for population reduction is inherently classist, since this requires government management, and ruling classes will inevitably protect their own ranks first.

If I can make the choice to recycle, eat less cows, cycle instead of walking; why can't I make the choice to have 2 children instead of 5. Or even have 1.

The population will reach 11b and level off in 2050.

Might disagree about the 11b but yes, the 2nd order differential on the rate of population growth strongly suggests we're capping out.

Economics reduces birthrate as fast as anything else.

I like the man generally but disagree with his views on hard immigration caps for Australia. I agree population is a major sustainability issue but find these caps far too elitist and authoritarian - while it just pushes the same issues elsewhere globally.

Though nobody should be judged on one view alone. Everyone has their failures and blindspots

Harvesting 21st century's most valuable resource -- the best and brightest people -- from disadvantaged countries is horrific. It's colonialism, in my opinion.

I'm always astounded by people in rich western countries boasting about how they poached all this talent from some of the poorest countries on earth. Like, yeah that's great you got another doctor for your healthcare system that spends billions of dollars extending people's lives by a few months. Guess that country she came from where children regularly die of easily preventable diseases won't miss her. So long as we don't have to wait more than 10 minutes for an ambulance when we have a boo-boo and get to see a doctor immediately at the ER f- everybody else.

Though as you say, I don't judge everyone purely based on that greed and selfishness. They all have their failures and blind spots.

If you don't agree with our immigration policies you're racist. /s

You're right though, it's essentially 21st century colonialism. When I studied economics we studied a lot about economic development. Funny how that's pretty much gone by the wayside, extinguished by the very people who should support it (western leftists).

As an aside, the whole carbon reduction thing is also thinly veiled colonialism. We want to insist that India and China reduce emissions when they produce 1/10th and 1/4 the emissions per capita that western nations do. We're already developed so it's easy to say let's cap it where it is right now. Fuck poor countries right?

> Harvesting 21st century's most valuable resource -- the best and brightest people -- from disadvantaged countries is horrific. It's colonialism, in my opinion.

Sure, maybe that is the case when looking at the 'Greater Good' of the whole population, but the

> best and brightest people -- from disadvantaged countries

are also real people with individual hopes and dreams. Just because they happened to be born in a bad place doesn't mean that their desire to achieve better things (think research facilities, schools for kids) and contribute to the future of humanity should be discounted.

Yes, it's rich countries screwing poor by exploiting their resources.

The robber barons were also real people with individual hopes and dreams. The real problem is so are all those other people in those poor countries. The 99.99% who are left behind are also individuals with hopes and dreams.

Theoretical question, but do the 0.01% have any obligation towards the 99.99% just because they happen to be born somewhere.

Practically, yes, I know society expects people to be nationalist to some degree.

Yes probably some moral obligation to those countries if they enabled them to be born and survive and become skilled or wealthy enough to be in a position to migrate to western countries on that basis, yes I do think there is an argument that they have some non-zero obligation.

But wealthy countries are not doing this for the benefit of those people, they are doing it for their own benefit. To the detriment of the rest of those in poor countries. This pretty much seals the lot of those countries to be dependent client states subject to the whims of wealthy countries and prone to having their other natural resources plundered as well. Let's not lie to ourselves about this being some kind of altruism or net positive outcome.

During colonialism, many collaborators in the countries being exploited got great benefit, they were put in positions of power installed as local rulers, for example. I don't see a lot of difference in the dynamics or results.

Theoretical question, because it's quite interesting to me that almost everyone I have talked with about this who has made arguments in this direction have tended to be leftist or collectivist leaning -- what do you think? Also do you think the 0.01% of people in a western country have any obligation towards the 99.99% of people in that country?

> if they enabled them to be born and survive and become skilled or wealthy enough to be in a position to migrate to western countries on that basis, yes I do think there is an argument that they have some non-zero obligation.

That's a fair point, but I guess the question then becomes - is that non-zero obligation greater than the emigrant's personal quest for a better life. Which, in the real world for most people, seems to be no.

> Let's not lie to ourselves about this being some kind of altruism or net positive outcome

Probably the best outcome for collective human knowledge would be to develop every country, research in every single country = more total research / unit time. But for individuals who just want to be able to invent something in their lifetimes and have a better daily life, this is very far away and humans are bad at long-term decision-making.

> Also do you think the 0.01% of people in a western country have any obligation towards the 99.99% of people in that country?

I don't think so. That's actually similar to the premise behind Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged [1]. But, I am very happy that we share the same world and I the same country (US) with some of the best people in pretty much every field.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged

> Also do you think the 0.01% of people in a western country have any obligation towards the 99.99% of people in that country?

In a patriotic, nationalist culture, yes. But if you explicitly reject things like patriotism and nationalism as being chauvinist or racist, then of course there is no obligation to privilege your countrymen over anyone else. So you have the same bonds to everyone, which is just another way of saying you have no special bonds to anyone.

Now in real life, we always have bonds to some group and that group is usually your own family first and your own tribe second, and it radiates out. So if you preach class consciousness, then you would have loyalty to members of your own class, etc. So then here, too, you can't expect the very top to have any loyalty to you.

It's really strange how people advocate for certain value systems without even taking a moment to think about the logical consequences of their values, let alone devoting serious consideration as to whether a given value system promotes long term human flourishing. This is also why most of these values have terrible consequences for human flourishing whenever they are adopted on a large scale.

Yes brain drain is an issue but quite a different one to the sustainability issues of global overpopulation. Its complex but I do think allowing people to study and work overseas does come back as a net benefit. Your doctor story can fall at a few hurdles - maybe they can't get the training at home, maybe they would turn to another industry just to get a reasonable salary if thats the option, maybe even if they can study overseas and return they don't have the opportunities to practice in their home country. I've seen all of these happen.

There’s a messy conflict between different ideals and agendas in Australia’s immigration debate that will be familiar to people in other countries too. Immigrants have made modern Australia, and progressive people want them to feel welcome and their achievements recognized, and want to be open to their families and to refugees, but at the same time immigration is used as an economic lever to lower wages and conditions, and having large numbers of people working with fragile visa statuses is corrosive for democracy, there’s no clean path through this.

Immigrants generally increase their income, and income is inversely correlated with birth rate.

So wouldn't a high level of Australian immigration reduce the total world population, relative to a low immigration level?

The traditional environmental and green parties in Australia really can't handle the immigration issue, it's very taboo to talk about with these groups because they somehow associate it with racism (despite the UK and US making up a huge amount of Australian permanent migration). The Greens simply won't discuss it despite being the elephant in the room regarding habitat loss and increasing emissions.

Dick is easy to write off as just another "old racist white guy" but his arguments were all environmental based, the guy cares a lot about the natural world and conservation.

Wow, I always kind of assumed Dick Smith was just a fictional mascot like Betty Crocker, but he was a real dude.

I lived in New Zealand for a short while growing up and we used to refer to Dick Smith Electronics as "Dip-shit Electronics" because the prices could be pretty outrageous. It was otherwise a pretty cool store, though; think somewhere between Radio Shack and Best Buy.

I used to work at one of those, after Woolworths had bought it. I had expected the job to be more about explaining how electronics work and finding the right thing to solve the customer's technical problems but it was all very sales focussed.

Yeah Disk Smith came in to NZ and replaced a perfectly good electronics parts wholesaler with over priced retail crud

Are you talking about the Kogan-clone that took over the online store about 5 or 6 years ago, or prior to that? The online part of the business was sold off to Kogan and became another online store front.

I'm talking about what happened in the 80s

Care to elaborate? I’m not old enough to remember much before the mid-to-late 80s, but I remember my local NZ Dick Smith Electronics being a pretty cool and wondrous place back then.

> replaced a perfectly good electronics parts wholesaler

David Reid? Radio Spares? (There was another with a name that started with T, but it's slipped my mind.)

David Reid, they took over a bunch of their storefronts

DSE was an absolute rip off, but it was pretty much the only game in town.

As a kid it was an amazing place for me to spend an hour on the weekends pottering around all the electronic kitsets and latest computer parts/gadgets.

I would credit DSE with fostering a lot of my love of computers and technology. I am quite sad it no longer exists.

That reminds me... on top of the shifts in society because of COVID, it's a shame that there's no place like Dick Smith, Frys, Radio Shack, computer stores, etc., where young geeks can go and meet each other. I was a geek among geeks as a kid, but even then I still liked that I could go to electronics stores, comic shops, hobby stores, and just be around people who were kind of weird like me and also had a love for the sorts of things I was interested in. With most of today's meetups still being "remote", at least where I live, I have to wonder where the hell a young me would be able to go today. I'd just have to network through Discord and hope that my server doesn't suddenly get banned because Dischord Inc. thinks it's a group of "hackers".

Basically, I think there was something to having physical places to go to. It's a culture that seems nearly dead.

Jaycar still does a lot of this! The one in Central Park Sydney still does a lot of workshops, they have a maker hub, sell a lot of the class electronic components and things like that. Nothing like it used to be with Dick Smith and Radio Shack everywhere, but there's still a few places around.

Jaycar has taken over the "over-priced retail" segment of the electronics store market that DSE used to hold (and Tandy before that). But most of the old stores are gone as everything has moved online.

I don't know that is entirely true. My local Jaycar (regional Australia) is still a good source for smaller bits and bobs, and I buy a lot of stuff there like circuit board varnish that nobody else would bother to stock. even then I don't mind paying a small premium for a USB cable or whatever because having a jaycar locally is fantastic for what I do.

They still have a decent selection of things like soldering irons and other tools and a little selection of Raspberry Pi and Arduino kits, along with hobby cases, switches, plugs, wire, solder, batteries etc.

I had no idea they had arduinos etc!

I didn't encounter DSE until the mid 2000s when I moved to NZ, but the Jaycar of today stocks way more components than did the DSE of 20 years ago. Jaycar even keeps a stock of 74LS TTL chips behind the counter!

The DSEs of the mid-2000s where not a patch on the DSEs of the 80s & 90s - it was like all the good bits of Jaycar concentrated.

The maker hub is pretty cool! They have a 3D printer service, where for ~$0.40 per gram you can bring your STL file, and they will print it while you watch a movie at the Cinemas next door. I wish there were more places like this in Sydney.

I have floated the idea of starting a hackerspace in Sydney City with a bunch of friends, but it has never really got beyond the talking phase. The cost of renting a small (~90 sqm) workshop/office space in the CBD makes it cost prohibitive without a large amount of members joining. I wonder how many people would be interested in setting up a co-op for this?

I wonder whether you could approach the startup hub or one of the coworking spaces there and see if they’re keen on putting some space aside for it? Occupancy is waaay down and will probably stay that way for quite a while.

Actually, I could probably have a conversation with the space I’m in - if you wanted to reach out to me?

There is one in a cbd library in melb which works ok - maybe that could be an option?

Is that different to the one at the Docklands library? I've been meaning to check it out since things have opened up again.

Indeed, the places that sell 5 cent resistors etc were where I would hang out. But nobody does that anymore. People just buy the cheap crap from Aliexpress :'( And nonbody makes enough money selling individual components.

It's such a stark difference. I remember there being a Radio Shack in mainstream retail centres like Broadway Shopping Centre.

Now if you find a similar shop it'll be in some run-down industrial estate :'(

I'd recommend people interested in electronics to go directly to somewhere like Digi-Key online for ordering parts. It's a bit of a learning curve to work out what to filter out, but you get exactly what you want for even cheaper what the retail stores could do, and for most projects it doesn't take much (a few interesting ICs) to put you over the threshold for free shipping for people in the US. The threshold for international free shipping is higher (I think it was $200?) but I have hit it sometimes!

Element-14, RS Online, and Mouser are the other ones to look at, especially here in Australia or other places not in the US, because their shipping is often better internationally. But I find myself having to bear the shipping cost for Digi-Key a fair bit!

True but ordering is often not a great option. Many times when I was young I'd be working on a project and find I was missing some part. I could just jump on my bike and go buy it right away.

Now it means several days of waiting every time.

Hackerspace

As a Norwegian expat in Melbourne since early 2000s I'd somewhat equal the DSE experience to Frithjof Arngren in Norway in the late 70s/80s (for any Norwegians lurking around here).

I never got to Arngen's stores, if any, but those printed catalogues were truly amazing experiences of full on geek.

There were a lot of design similarities to Dick Smith ie the prominently featured hand drawn heads.

Today I see he has a website in his name, which is ... unique. I have no better way to describe it.

In the early days DSE was like jaycar. An electronics store with kits and diy computers. Dick sold it off years ago. The stores are part of Kogan now (importing and flogging chinese stuff).

"In the early days DSE was like Jaycar." Not that surprising. The origin story of Jaycar is that when DSE was being sold to Woolworths DS took aside an exec at DSE and said that Woolworths were going to run DSE into the ground. He advised the exec to start up his own rival chain, which he did, and thus Jaycar. Still, whilst Jaycar appears to be quite successful, DS wasn't entirely right, it took 34 years for the brand to die.

Not about the man so much but about the business he built up and then sold, Dick Smith is the Greatest Private Equity Heist of All Time [1] is a wild read into Australian private equity.

[1] https://foragerfunds.com/news/dick-smith-is-the-greatest-pri...

Fun fact: Dick Smith Electronics offered tech support for their products in an attempt to emulate Apple's Genius Bar. The official name for Dick Smith's support technicians? Clever Dicks.

He also marketted an alternative to "Redhead" matches which he called "Dickheads".

IIRC, the tagline for some of his advertising was "The Electronic Dick". Different times.

Dick Smith Electronics was a huge part of my childhood. The "Fun Way" electronics books (written by Dick himself) was fascinating to me and the VZ-300 computer they sold was how I got into computers as a kid. It was great to discover as an adult that Dick himself was also such an amazing character.

I recall the Fun Way series book fondly. As a kid, I did the kits over and over (even unsoldering the PCB kits from the later books after soldering them together). I probably breathed in too much leaded solder vapors, but it’s what put me on the path to electrical and computer engineering.

I learned electronics from

https://archive.org/details/dicksmithsfunwayintoelectronicsv...

pasting the circuit diagram on to a block of wood and screwing down the components...

Fond memories

Dick is a marketing genius.

If memory serves correct, when Skylab was being deorbited (eventually partially over Australia), Dick Smith provided free insurance cover to anyone standing in his Australian stores.

Total random fact: Dick Smith's name is on the sponsorship signs on top of the hill on the Bathurst track, just before Skyline corner. In iRacing it's such a common place to crash that I know more than one person calling it "Dick Smith" corner to explain where things went wrong.

Working through Dick Smith's Fun Way into Electronics is a fond memory from my childhood. I don't remember if I got all the way through the second volume, but I sure do remember screwing component pins down onto those blue breadboards, and trying to figure out where I'd gone wrong.

>Dick Smith 'I won the lottery of life' https://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-australian-womens-...

Tricky Dicks!

'Dick Smith Electronics - A conversation with Dick Smith' from 2010 for State of Electronics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVQTZluvrUs

Just don't believe any web ads featuring his name or image – all scams. He must be comfortably offline and in blissful ignorance. Imagine.

Yeahh I used to go to the shop in Sydney. But when I was there it already wasn't owned by him anymore.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com