Hacker News Reader

Comment by vailripper | Hacker News Reader

The 60 minutes interview gave an anecdote where employees with options were giving some of their own options out to other founding employees without after they went public. When one of the first employees, and a close friend of jobs asked for some options, another founding employee told Jobs that they should help him out, and offered to give out some options if Jobs would match him. Jobs declined, and never gave out any of his options.

While it's certainly his decision to make, I think it's entirely reasonable for people to say he doesn't deserve the worship he's been receiving.

View on HN

I'm perfectly willing to believe Steve Jobs had a mean streak or whatever, but you can't call it evil when someone refuses to do something no one else does either. Steve Wozniak giving away some of his stock to other Apple employees at the time of the IPO is the only instance I know of that happening. What this story shows is that Wozniak is a saint, not that Jobs is evil.

Or that Wozniak was empathetic while Jobs was apathetic towards his coworkers' concerns in this certain instance. Generalizing either of the two as saints or satans based on this instance alone would be quite shallow...in this certain instance.

I may be very wrong, but I have a feeling Jobs was the "dad" and Woz was more like "mom" of the employees. I think this difference was Apple's greatest asset in their first year.

I have run some two-headed departments and it's my preferred way to manage.

Tangent: there is a lot of evidence out there for Woz being a saint.

Woz, a decent human being, likely. But saint? Are any of us perfect? What does perfect even mean? Is it even possible? We shouldn't tag humans with supernatural labels.

> but you can't call it evil when someone refuses to do something no one else does either.

So is not evil if a person in germany during the Second World War discriminated jews rigth?

Yes, jumping right to WWII might be a bit hyperbolic, and the grammar here is a bit shaky, but I'm not sure why this is being downvoted. 'Everybody's doing it' is never an acceptable excuse for bad behavior.

If everyone is evil, then evilness isn't a disqualifying factor from being a role model. A role model has to be emulable.

No, it is not "evil".

An act can be "bad", or "injust", but describing it as evil is bullshit. Evil, for one, is a theological term, that doesn't explain anything. It's like saying "the satan made me do it".

Like, it wasn't because of being "evil" when people in the US discriminated (and exterminated) Indians and enslaved blacks.

They didn't do it because they were "evil people", they did it because their societal norms and prevailing ideology permitted it and even encouraged it. And the norms got such because of catering to various collective interests (like, taking away the indian land, exploiting cheap labor).

Downvoted? Really? People believe in the theological notion of "evil" around these here parts?

The article isn't making an argument that he is evil. The argument is that he shouldn't necessarily be put on a pedestal as a person to model your behavour on.

Half way through the biography and there are plenty of more sinister examples of behaviour (e.g. denying paternity).

However, I believe the term is "flawed genius". The world is a better place when a few of them succeed! Of course, an unsuccessful flawed genius is better known as an "unbearable asshole".

If Steve Jobs isn't a role model, then who is?

The writer of this piece, Gary Stix, seems to assume that in order for one to be a role model they must be perfect.

Using this logic the very notion of a role model is foolish.

I'd define a role model as someone who helps the world in a repeatable way, i.e. if a lot of people were like the person, the world would be significantly improved.

I think the article, whether successfully or not, tries to show a definition more like that, no "perfection" involved.

A role model is someone who is a model for a role the follower wants to fill. The world doesn't really enter into it, unless the follower is looking to make the world better, as opposed to looking to become fabulously wealthy or inwardly peaceful or remembered for generations or experienced in everything or privy to a secret no one else would know or one of many other possible life goals.

I don't understand why anyone would think they should model themselves after Steve Jobs.

Only Steve Jobs could live the life of Steve Jobs, for better or worse. We can learn volumes from his life and work, but wisdom is learning how these lessons apply differently to each of us.

Steve: “Yeah I'll match it, I'll give 0 and you'll give 0."

http://goo.gl/tkcQX

Yeah, that kind of blows a hole in pg's argument -- that really was a cruel thing to say.

@vailripper, People love Jobs because he was not perfect. You are so quick to judge him I bet you've done things that are far worse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com