This is well-documented in courts (and also on many other websites, by the way):
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/24/apple-goo...
See:
"[...] Steve Jobs orchestrated an elaborate scheme to prevent poaching and drive down wages."
Forgetting bad actions is an essential part of the process of deification, and since ancient times, rulers who sought to be equated with gods would put their or their ancestors images on coins with a deity on the reverse side.
Several coins in the US display slave owners because they are founding fathers, and the practice of putting presidents on coins in the US only began in the early 1900s, with the Lincoln penny, and their portraits on paper money only began 50 years earlier.
In our current era of tech industrialist worship, is it surprising that we do the same for Steve Jobs?
That said, you are absolutely right to bring it up, as a push back against that deification process.
Humans are flawed. Putting humans on money -- as symbols -- is going to make us go in circles about their imperfection. From Washington as a slave owner to Steve Jobs suppressing wages.
This is not an issue if we just put the symbols on the money instead of using people as proxies. If we want a coin for innovators, but Providentia on the coin.
Sadly, with that mentality we wouldn't have celebrities or perhaps even that many leaders. Fests like this are what drive some of the most driven people, and our biology makes us want to follow and admire other people as a former pack hunting species. The best we got is thst we can't put any living person on a coin (though, guess what the rumors are trying to say?)
Purity testing has ruined liberal politics.
I was using the examples as examples. I agree with you about people who can't handle nuance and imperfection. My point is only that putting people on the money is just dumb to begin with, because it misses the point of what people are trying to do.
What could be a more fitting placement than on a dollar coin? He'll be used to pay employees using an inflating dollar currency, where he can continue to pay employees less in perpetuity.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre and several other incidents.
Probably nobody lives without ethical gaps.
and the impact of ethical gaps of someone who has been able to achieve a lot, and are more visible to judge, are likely to both be and seem to be, proportionally greater.
Could it be enough to simply honor people who, overall, have done inspiring, positive things, while not giving them a pass for their mistakes and deficiencies, assuming they are legitimately smaller in scale?
I am not a fan of “purity” viewpoints.
so much easier to be severely critical, than open oneself up for judgement.
I am a fan of realism in both accomplishments and failures. The good impact and the bad. And taking inspiration and warning, from those whose accomplishments weigh more heavily to the former.
Being realistic has another advantage.
it doesn’t strongly imply, without actual evidence, that the speaker is somehow less prone to mistakes.
That is the interesting thing about tech. So many pioneers that transformed society are still around. It's a relatively young field that exploded over the last few decades.
What he did was literally change the shape and direction of the entire human race through his ability to level up existing products (directly and indirectly) to a level that no one would have thought possible, including his own employees.
That said, he was absolute piece of shit human being and all of his successes came at great expense of himself and others. I think there are a great number of people who are far more well-rounded and, if we aren't focused on fascist ideals, we should elevate those folks instead of Jobs.
He managed to do that quite frequently. How much credit to give him for it is something I'm not quite sure of myself, but you really can't argue with the results.
Then again, that's probably what most represent America of the last 50 yearss. Selling off all its talent overseas and then trying to sell off the idea of labor afterwards.
Why are those the criteria for being on a coin? Neither Henry Ford nor John D Rockefeller are on coins.
Jobs was dismissive of concerns about US technology manufacturing jobs being offshored to China, famously saying "Those jobs aren't coming back" [1].
He was right of course, and he seems to have consciously avoided involvement in discussions about the economic impacts of the manufacturing exodus on US workers - he was a requisite globalist.
It took Obama pressing him to get him to even make the statement I referenced above.
1. https://m-economictimes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/m.economi...
Me also. What does that have to do with Jobs being represented on currency?
Why not do the same for the pharmaceutical CEOs who have set up generic drug supply chains overseas, or the leaders of apparel companies who set up overseas sweatshops to enable us to have disposable clothing?
Arguably, affordable antibiotics and underwear have made a vastly bigger positive impact on standard of living than iPhones.
> Arguably, affordable antibiotics and underwear have made a vastly bigger positive impact on standard of living than iPhones.
Maybe so, but "positive impact on standard of living" isn't the theme of this US Mint collection. The theme is "American Innovation."
But yeah it's all marketing. Who better than the marketer?
Tangent: I won't understand people hesitant to put down as much money on a phone as a desktop. Especially when considering that we know it costs more to shrink technology. If that's too much, oh well. I tend to buy 1-2 years previous when upgrading. Easily halves the price and the old flagship specs are still competitive.
Steven Paul Jobs was born in San Francisco, California, on February 24, 1955, to Joanne Carole Schieble and Abdulfattah "John" Jandali (Arabic: عبد الفتاح الجندلي)
...
His cousin Bassma Al Jandaly has claimed that Jobs' birth name (prior to adoption) was Abdul Lateef Jandali (Arabic: عبد اللطيف الجندلي).
Perhaps also a good moment to remember this Banksy art
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/11/banksy-...
(...from where we read..)
In a rare statement accompanying the work, Banksy said: “We’re often led to believe migration is a drain on the country’s resources but Steve Jobs was the son of a Syrian migrant. Apple ... only exists because they allowed in a young man from Homs.”
He singlehandedly set the anchor price of the entire industry so low that he set in motion the whole freemium/monetization/enshittification trend.
You add in a large screen and quick transactions and Asia would have hit f2p just as soon, with or without however America priced it.
If we’re not doing “deserve” then no, they should have had more money if illegal wage suppression hadn’t been happening. Else the illegal wage suppression wouldn’t have been needed.
Oh no, he only paid them $300k/year? How did they survive without selling their kidneys to the black market?
Times are hard, but don't confuse the person with a bowl of rice with the people who own thr rice factory. Even if that is a lot compared to the scraps you have.