I really miss him in today’s world. I fantasize how he would have had the intellectual ability to dissect the craziness we’re seeing and putting it into perspective with some smart words.
I think he'd be lined up with the other tech leaders just doing what's needed to gain power. He wasn't a saint, he was just a bit of a visionary with the greed to succeed.
Personally, I hold him in somewhat high regard. At the same time, he made billions while conspiring to deprive many HN users of their just rewards. This should not be forgotten, or forgiven.
I guess if you harbour skills that exceed those rewards you could start on your own taking your own risks. There are some tradeoffs and simple marxism does not take into account all the variables
Yeah, I escaped communism as a child, so please excuse my potential bias. While I think that pure libertarians are just as silly as pure socialists, I do believe in the benefits of a well regulated market economy.
If the market economy indicates that a dev with particular skills can be paid even 10M per year, then heck yes. Good for them. If the companies who hire these devs could not pay that, then the market for them would not exist. They could, and conspired not to. This is why they settled the case.
I don't get this, why? Because I exist I deserve equal money as everyone else?
If I do succeed I will definitely buy toys (fast cars) but yeah I will help, as there is a cap to minimum needs. Also I don't like being a target eg. stealth wealth they say that I'm currently far from.
Alright then, if you absolutely must have a society were people get paid 10M a year, then let's agree to pay all cleaning staff, hospital staff, garbage collectors etc etc 10M and the rest gets enough to live a decent life. How about that?
Why, it's merit. A CEO can affect 20,000 people's lives/jobs.
Anyway I'm not trying to argue this. I do believe billions is excessive in money to have and also understand it's not liquid. But yeah I think I gotta get there, maybe I too will be an aho with that much money.
Even the small amount in comparison that I give away I have this feeling of "mine", why should I? (I have given away at least $70K to my own siblings)
Edit: I'm a mediocre person mentally so I doubt I'll get too high but I can get my fun cars they're under a million the ones I want. I have started to want land more than a car though, you can hit 200mph under $100K
Edit: I'm also a nice/meek person maybe that is why I'm poor ha
There just aren't that many countries that ever claimed to be communist.
You speak like a privileged person, so you're probably born somewhere in the western world. Judging from the current time, I'd say Europe. My guess is your parents left socialist (i.e. not communist) Eastern Germany when you were little and you keep telling people that this was your great escape from communism ever since.
Let us avoid the personal, and entirely inaccurate personal attacks on myself.
Instead, let's focus on openly provable facts:
> There just aren't that many countries that ever claimed to be communist.
Are you denying the agency of Russia, Cuba, China, and Vietnam as a few examples?
Are you telling me that these countries did not at one point, and most even today, declare themselves as "communist?" It's amazing how privileged you are to deny factual history. [0]
To be honest, I feel that you are agreeing with me that "communism" is just some theoretical panacea, as is "libertarianism." Both theoretical concepts which only ever existed in minds of true-believers, and nowhere else.
> Are you telling me that these countries did not at one point, and most even today, declare themselves as "communist?" It's amazing how privileged you are to deny factual history.
Many nations "declare" to be something they're not. North Korea is officially "Democratic People's Republic of Korea", for example.
Are we now going to evaluate how viable democracy is as a concept by looking at North Korea, simply because they call themselves democratic, or are we first going to analyze their actual political system to determine whether they're actually democratic?
I understand what you are getting at, however, your argument appears to fall into a logical fallacy under the category of "tu-quoque," sub-category "whataboutism." [0]
Instead of arguing against my point, you have raised another slightly related issue, as a deflection. Please address my initial argument.
While we ponder these significant issues, let's watch and listen to the most freedom-loving opening ceremony in modern Olympic history. This was a prescient broadcast to the entire world. (2024) [1]
That's not what whataboutism is. I don't care about democracy in North Korea for the sake of this argument, I'm just using it as an obvious example to illustrate the flaw in your own reasoning process, which boils down to: Just because a state claims to be communist, democratic, or something else, doesn't mean that it actually is.
It's even more disingenuous to try to use these inaccurate self-assigned labels as a way to discredit ideas those labels represent, but that's getting off topic.
Ok then. Let's get back to the original statement.
I accept that countries can call themselves whatever, and it's not accurate.
In that case, has there ever been a communist country? Is communism anything aside from a theoretical panacea, just like "free market" libertarianism? Has any country ever been either pure extreme? If not, what would you call them? Give me a few examples please.
I am not being snarky. I really want us all to get on the same page.
Apple II: Very similar to contemporary products. Interesting improvements added by Wozniak.
Lisa: Stolen from Xerox (and made worse). Jobs' contribution: cosmetics, mostly.
Mac: Oops, the Lisa was too good.
Next: A somewhat better Xerox ripoff with a mix-in of other common stuff.
Newton: OK, somewhat innovative.
iPod: Stolen from a whole bunch of people
iPhone: Nothing but a PDA with a phone integrated in it. Obvious next step.
As for "developing to perfection", well, if a smooth, candy-colored shell around a deliberately limited device is perfection, then yeah. I guess you can credit Jobs with a willingness to break from standards, but not with unusually good judgement about when to do it.
His vision for PC based world even far surpassed of Gates with the Next platform in which two important technology underpinning the online world were invented using the platform namely the WWW by Berners-Lee and the Doom by Carmack. Not to say that now most of the Apple devices from smartphone, laptop, PC, tablet, smartwatch, etc, are currently using Next derived system as their operating systems.
He also envisioned one of the ultimate aim of computers is creating an experience where we can resurrect Aristotle intelligence and interact with him to receive his wisdom, not unlike something like LLM that we have today.
He’s by and large responsible for mobile phone/social media addiction, which is bad enough on its own, but also enables divisive propaganda, and you think he could offer perspective?
That’s like Henry Ford is by and large responsible for most traffic related deaths since 1910s. Technically correct, I suppose. Entirely meaningless, though…
Social media was already taking off long before the iPhone was on the scene. Facebook was open to the public in 2006, MySpace had already taken off like a rocket at that time, receiving more visitors than Google and Yahoo in the US. Twitter launched in 2006 as well.
The iPhone wasn't the first smartphone - not even close in fact. It was just "the best" in terms of user experience, and caused a rapid acceleration of development for Android, which had started to shift to mobile phone development in 2004 anyway, but really hit overdrive when the iPhone was debuted.
Windows Mobile 6 was out at this time - 2008 - and it was straight trash. I had a T-Mobile Wing that I got in 2006, I believe it had Windows Mobile 5.1. It's usability was a joke compared to the iPhone. This pushed Microsoft to create a mobile OS, and eventually they had something that could have been a real contender, because Windows Phone had a really fantastic interface that actually was a lot more usable than iOS or Android, but Microsoft made fuckup after fuckup in a series of events that almost defies belief.
I'm pretty sure he'd have fell in line to the fascist insanity just like all other billionaires. He lived at the time of the height of neoliberal ideology, when most people believed in the conjured public images that the tech bro CEOs gave out in PR. Behind the scenes, things were quite different. Jobs has been reported to be petty, insulting and belittling of his employees
Most of the world doesn't put fluoride in tap water. I appreciate that you've been raised to believe it's a "no-brainer and only idiots would oppose it", but there are actual tangible downsides to doing it and now that fluoride toothpaste is widespread there might not even be any upside to fluoride in water anymore.
You don’t need it in the water when you can get it from many other sources. I find it strange that there would be additives to something basic like water. And as I recall there are studies that show too much can be bad too. It’s hard to know your dosage if random things incorporate it as an additive unexpectedly.
If 'hippies' here refers to the original hippies back in the 1960s, they ran the whole range from far pipebombs-in-the-name-of-communism left, to centrist.
Papen wasn’t even remotely left wing or even “moderate”. Hindenburg also hated democracy and wanted to destroy it.
There were barely any liberals left in the Reichstag when it voted for the enabling act (progressive liberalism as we’d understand it hardly existed in Germany back then anyway). Closest would be the moderate-conservative Catholic “Center” party who usually were historically part of the Socialist-Liberal coalition.
Anyway you cut it far-right parties had the majority of seats in 1933. Of course everyone else could have actually tried doing something instead fighting with each other or just tagging along with the nazis “since it can’t be that bad”.
I'm pretty sure he'd have fell in line to the fascist insanity just like all other billionaires.
That's a take that seems based on some kind of ideology more than thinking about the actual person. The actual person was a man with a massive ego, and pretensions of being an artist and intellectual. It's a real stretch to envision Jobs being deferential to Musk or Trump, both of whom, without a doubt, still fantasize about being Steve Jobs.
Musk has massive ego too, and he's drinking the fascist kool aid, perhaps even more than Trump himself. Massive ego is more susceptible to fascist thinking, not less.
Musk is easily on the level of Jobs and arguably beyond him, not just financially, but on the scale of what they've done for Humanity as a whole.
SpaceX and Starlink just by themselves are enough to catapult him beyond Jobs, but you add on Tesla, which pretty much single-handedly pushed electric cars into mainstream culture, and he's easily there.
This isn't even really a subjective perspective, you could objectively argue it.
The personal computer revolution (kicked off in 1977 by the Apple II), and the smart phone era (kicked off in 2007 by iPhone), have done at least as much for humanity.
I'm not even a Jobs fanboy but let's give him the benefit of the doubt. He at least believed in things, which is more than I can say for the tech giants that are bending the knee right now.
His own health choices are a private matter as far as I'm concerned. He held off too long on modern medicine and paid the price for it. Bringing it up here is irrelevant and distracting.
Are you suggesting Apple was not innovative, or that he did not have a role in Apple's innovation?
We can pretend all day that the Apple II, the Mac, iMac, macbook, iPod, iPhone, and iPad would have been exactly the same without Jobs. But in the reality we currently inhabit, he was the person overseeing them all.
Steve Jobs is one of the founders and the long-time CEO of Apple Computers, which makes products that are widely regarded as some of the most innovative in tech. If you're familiar with the original Mac, for example -- that was Apple. The iPhone went against the grain of the time and introduced the touch-only interface (with multi-gesture). There's lots of other examples.
If we aren't producing the penny, why continue to make $1 coins? Almost nobody uses them in the US. I don't think I see a single one in the wild most years, and the only time I get them is change from some train ticket machines.
Because as inflation continues, there's a risk of all those quarters in your pocket collapsing into a black hole? And the dollar bills crumbling to dust?
Admittedly, I haven't really used coins (or bills) on a day to day basis for years. I live in Canada but doubt the US is that different.
„The last one CEO who cared about the product quality”
No updates taking 2 years to finish, no melting connectors, no overheating new phones. And firing people who proactively work against company they are hired by.
The faulty keyboards of 2016-19 [0] were IMO the most egregious of Apple's hardware faults. Apple worsened it by taking forever to admit fault.
Trying to chat, code (or do anything quickly and precisely) with a keyboard that didn't do what your fingers told it to got extremely frustrating extremely quickly.
I recall public faux pas due to mistyped public chat messages, and CI runs failing due to two characters being where one should have been.
When you get $1 change, Apple takes $0.30.
> When you get $1 change, Apple takes $0.30.
This $0.30 is the innovation.
I really miss him in today’s world. I fantasize how he would have had the intellectual ability to dissect the craziness we’re seeing and putting it into perspective with some smart words.
I think he'd be lined up with the other tech leaders just doing what's needed to gain power. He wasn't a saint, he was just a bit of a visionary with the greed to succeed.
Personally, I hold him in somewhat high regard. At the same time, he made billions while conspiring to deprive many HN users of their just rewards. This should not be forgotten, or forgiven.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/24/306592297...
https://old.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/y9eyxq/til_d...
> just rewards
* liberalised labour market rewards
unless you think there is inherent moral justice in being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to write software
Seems more moral than their employer conspiring to deprive them of that
true
I guess if you harbour skills that exceed those rewards you could start on your own taking your own risks. There are some tradeoffs and simple marxism does not take into account all the variables
Yeah, I escaped communism as a child, so please excuse my potential bias. While I think that pure libertarians are just as silly as pure socialists, I do believe in the benefits of a well regulated market economy.
If the market economy indicates that a dev with particular skills can be paid even 10M per year, then heck yes. Good for them. If the companies who hire these devs could not pay that, then the market for them would not exist. They could, and conspired not to. This is why they settled the case.
[flagged]
> no single person should even own...
I don't get this, why? Because I exist I deserve equal money as everyone else?
If I do succeed I will definitely buy toys (fast cars) but yeah I will help, as there is a cap to minimum needs. Also I don't like being a target eg. stealth wealth they say that I'm currently far from.
Alright then, if you absolutely must have a society were people get paid 10M a year, then let's agree to pay all cleaning staff, hospital staff, garbage collectors etc etc 10M and the rest gets enough to live a decent life. How about that?
Why, it's merit. A CEO can affect 20,000 people's lives/jobs.
Anyway I'm not trying to argue this. I do believe billions is excessive in money to have and also understand it's not liquid. But yeah I think I gotta get there, maybe I too will be an aho with that much money.
Even the small amount in comparison that I give away I have this feeling of "mine", why should I? (I have given away at least $70K to my own siblings)
Edit: I'm a mediocre person mentally so I doubt I'll get too high but I can get my fun cars they're under a million the ones I want. I have started to want land more than a car though, you can hit 200mph under $100K
Edit: I'm also a nice/meek person maybe that is why I'm poor ha
> and it probably wasn't even communism.
Please, tell me more! In your opinion, has "commumism" ever really existed/been implemented properly at scale? If so, please give me an example.
There just aren't that many countries that ever claimed to be communist.
You speak like a privileged person, so you're probably born somewhere in the western world. Judging from the current time, I'd say Europe. My guess is your parents left socialist (i.e. not communist) Eastern Germany when you were little and you keep telling people that this was your great escape from communism ever since.
Let us avoid the personal, and entirely inaccurate personal attacks on myself.
Instead, let's focus on openly provable facts:
> There just aren't that many countries that ever claimed to be communist.
Are you denying the agency of Russia, Cuba, China, and Vietnam as a few examples?
Are you telling me that these countries did not at one point, and most even today, declare themselves as "communist?" It's amazing how privileged you are to deny factual history. [0]
To be honest, I feel that you are agreeing with me that "communism" is just some theoretical panacea, as is "libertarianism." Both theoretical concepts which only ever existed in minds of true-believers, and nowhere else.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
> Are you telling me that these countries did not at one point, and most even today, declare themselves as "communist?" It's amazing how privileged you are to deny factual history.
Many nations "declare" to be something they're not. North Korea is officially "Democratic People's Republic of Korea", for example.
Are we now going to evaluate how viable democracy is as a concept by looking at North Korea, simply because they call themselves democratic, or are we first going to analyze their actual political system to determine whether they're actually democratic?
I understand what you are getting at, however, your argument appears to fall into a logical fallacy under the category of "tu-quoque," sub-category "whataboutism." [0]
Instead of arguing against my point, you have raised another slightly related issue, as a deflection. Please address my initial argument.
While we ponder these significant issues, let's watch and listen to the most freedom-loving opening ceremony in modern Olympic history. This was a prescient broadcast to the entire world. (2024) [1]
Vive la démocratie!
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hTMYk7orHw
That's not what whataboutism is. I don't care about democracy in North Korea for the sake of this argument, I'm just using it as an obvious example to illustrate the flaw in your own reasoning process, which boils down to: Just because a state claims to be communist, democratic, or something else, doesn't mean that it actually is.
It's even more disingenuous to try to use these inaccurate self-assigned labels as a way to discredit ideas those labels represent, but that's getting off topic.
Ok then. Let's get back to the original statement.
I accept that countries can call themselves whatever, and it's not accurate.
In that case, has there ever been a communist country? Is communism anything aside from a theoretical panacea, just like "free market" libertarianism? Has any country ever been either pure extreme? If not, what would you call them? Give me a few examples please.
I am not being snarky. I really want us all to get on the same page.
> You speak like a privileged person, so you're probably born somewhere in the western world
ah, the good old "I can't attack your argument so I'll try and discredit you on a personal level"
that's not how a discussion is to be held. if you cannot argue against their point then please refrain from posting at all.
this is supposed to be a place for intellectually honest discussion.
okay britta - are there people starving in uganda too?
He was a criminal who literally conspired to steal billions.
It wasn’t just deprivation; it was stealing.
I don't think anyone has claimed he was a saint...
He had a genius for dreaming up products the world didn't know it needed yet, and for developing those products to perfection.
Several of those products were quantum leaps that the world would not have figured out for several years, if ever, without Jobs.
Um, bullshit.
Apple II: Very similar to contemporary products. Interesting improvements added by Wozniak.
Lisa: Stolen from Xerox (and made worse). Jobs' contribution: cosmetics, mostly.
Mac: Oops, the Lisa was too good.
Next: A somewhat better Xerox ripoff with a mix-in of other common stuff.
Newton: OK, somewhat innovative.
iPod: Stolen from a whole bunch of people
iPhone: Nothing but a PDA with a phone integrated in it. Obvious next step.
As for "developing to perfection", well, if a smooth, candy-colored shell around a deliberately limited device is perfection, then yeah. I guess you can credit Jobs with a willingness to break from standards, but not with unusually good judgement about when to do it.
“greed to succeed” is a simplistic trope. He was already wealthy by the time he went back to fix Apple.
"Already wealthy, no desire for more" is a trope as well
> he was just a bit of a visionary
Maybe he deserves "a bit" more credit than that?
I’d say he was… half as bad.
His vision for PC based world even far surpassed of Gates with the Next platform in which two important technology underpinning the online world were invented using the platform namely the WWW by Berners-Lee and the Doom by Carmack. Not to say that now most of the Apple devices from smartphone, laptop, PC, tablet, smartwatch, etc, are currently using Next derived system as their operating systems.
He also envisioned one of the ultimate aim of computers is creating an experience where we can resurrect Aristotle intelligence and interact with him to receive his wisdom, not unlike something like LLM that we have today.
Woz is still here.
He’s by and large responsible for mobile phone/social media addiction, which is bad enough on its own, but also enables divisive propaganda, and you think he could offer perspective?
That’s like Henry Ford is by and large responsible for most traffic related deaths since 1910s. Technically correct, I suppose. Entirely meaningless, though…
This is hilariously offbase and untrue.
Social media was already taking off long before the iPhone was on the scene. Facebook was open to the public in 2006, MySpace had already taken off like a rocket at that time, receiving more visitors than Google and Yahoo in the US. Twitter launched in 2006 as well.
The iPhone wasn't the first smartphone - not even close in fact. It was just "the best" in terms of user experience, and caused a rapid acceleration of development for Android, which had started to shift to mobile phone development in 2004 anyway, but really hit overdrive when the iPhone was debuted.
Windows Mobile 6 was out at this time - 2008 - and it was straight trash. I had a T-Mobile Wing that I got in 2006, I believe it had Windows Mobile 5.1. It's usability was a joke compared to the iPhone. This pushed Microsoft to create a mobile OS, and eventually they had something that could have been a real contender, because Windows Phone had a really fantastic interface that actually was a lot more usable than iOS or Android, but Microsoft made fuckup after fuckup in a series of events that almost defies belief.
Jobs didn't believe in cancer treatment https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/10/24/steve-j...
I'm pretty sure he'd have fell in line to the fascist insanity just like all other billionaires. He lived at the time of the height of neoliberal ideology, when most people believed in the conjured public images that the tech bro CEOs gave out in PR. Behind the scenes, things were quite different. Jobs has been reported to be petty, insulting and belittling of his employees
Thank you for referencing his idiot behavior leading to his own demise, I hope that will be on his coin.
Why do you say that?
Was his refusal of cancer treatment more impactful on the world than his creation of Apple Computers?
To imagine being anti-pharma, and big corporations used to be a Leftists/Hippy talking point.
Still is. Portland, OR shoots down fluoridated water every time.
Most of the world doesn't put fluoride in tap water. I appreciate that you've been raised to believe it's a "no-brainer and only idiots would oppose it", but there are actual tangible downsides to doing it and now that fluoride toothpaste is widespread there might not even be any upside to fluoride in water anymore.
You don’t need it in the water when you can get it from many other sources. I find it strange that there would be additives to something basic like water. And as I recall there are studies that show too much can be bad too. It’s hard to know your dosage if random things incorporate it as an additive unexpectedly.
Hippies were never leftists, they were liberals. And when fascists come knocking, liberals flock to fascism.
Also, being anti big pharma isn't the same as believing in conspiracy theories. You can't resist if you don't live in reality.
Left-leaning people famously tend to disagree with each other (eg: as lampooned in https://youtube.com/watch?v=WboggjN_G-4).
If 'hippies' here refers to the original hippies back in the 1960s, they ran the whole range from far pipebombs-in-the-name-of-communism left, to centrist.
> Hippies were never leftists, they were liberals. And when fascists come knocking, liberals flock to fascism.
I don’t understand this, can you explain what you meant? Maybe with examples?
Democratic party and Biden (liberals) when running against republicans (fascists): "Democracy is at stake" https://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-biden-speaks-on-stake...
Biden, when Trump arrives at White House: "Welcome home" https://www.yahoo.com/news/welcome-home-joe-biden-greets-160...
Also, in Germany the Nazi Party never got more than 43,91% of the votes in free elections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party_election_results Hitler rose to power through the support of the "moderate" or "liberal" right wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_rise_to_power
Papen wasn’t even remotely left wing or even “moderate”. Hindenburg also hated democracy and wanted to destroy it.
There were barely any liberals left in the Reichstag when it voted for the enabling act (progressive liberalism as we’d understand it hardly existed in Germany back then anyway). Closest would be the moderate-conservative Catholic “Center” party who usually were historically part of the Socialist-Liberal coalition.
Anyway you cut it far-right parties had the majority of seats in 1933. Of course everyone else could have actually tried doing something instead fighting with each other or just tagging along with the nazis “since it can’t be that bad”.
Musk has massive ego too, and he's drinking the fascist kool aid, perhaps even more than Trump himself. Massive ego is more susceptible to fascist thinking, not less.
https://youtu.be/E8oEWdYfO4U [content-warning: Elon Musk]
Musk is easily on the level of Jobs and arguably beyond him, not just financially, but on the scale of what they've done for Humanity as a whole.
SpaceX and Starlink just by themselves are enough to catapult him beyond Jobs, but you add on Tesla, which pretty much single-handedly pushed electric cars into mainstream culture, and he's easily there.
This isn't even really a subjective perspective, you could objectively argue it.
The personal computer revolution (kicked off in 1977 by the Apple II), and the smart phone era (kicked off in 2007 by iPhone), have done at least as much for humanity.
I'm not even a Jobs fanboy but let's give him the benefit of the doubt. He at least believed in things, which is more than I can say for the tech giants that are bending the knee right now.
Oh they believe in things... https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/
at least judging from his products sense, what he believed in was more grounded in the real world
Well I'm just going by what's been reported in the media. It gives no indication that Jobs was an anti-fascist ready to resist.
> Jobs didn't believe in cancer treatment
His own health choices are a private matter as far as I'm concerned. He held off too long on modern medicine and paid the price for it. Bringing it up here is irrelevant and distracting.
It's not distracting, it's an important detail underlining the ridiculousness of this decision.
Maybe it's just me, but I think innovation awards are for people with scientific mindsets. Jobs obviously didn't have one.
Are you suggesting Apple was not innovative, or that he did not have a role in Apple's innovation?
We can pretend all day that the Apple II, the Mac, iMac, macbook, iPod, iPhone, and iPad would have been exactly the same without Jobs. But in the reality we currently inhabit, he was the person overseeing them all.
RFK Jr. is the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
What exactly did he invent though?
I kind of like Steve Jobs and think Bill Burr's take down is a little unfair; but it's funny and not without merit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1liOZ1fW1F8
I came here wondering if someone had posted this :)
Getting tech products that were 10*% better than the competition to the stage where you could actually buy and own them.
Steve Jobs is one of the founders and the long-time CEO of Apple Computers, which makes products that are widely regarded as some of the most innovative in tech. If you're familiar with the original Mac, for example -- that was Apple. The iPhone went against the grain of the time and introduced the touch-only interface (with multi-gesture). There's lots of other examples.
If we aren't producing the penny, why continue to make $1 coins? Almost nobody uses them in the US. I don't think I see a single one in the wild most years, and the only time I get them is change from some train ticket machines.
Because as inflation continues, there's a risk of all those quarters in your pocket collapsing into a black hole? And the dollar bills crumbling to dust?
Admittedly, I haven't really used coins (or bills) on a day to day basis for years. I live in Canada but doubt the US is that different.
woz $2 bill please
„The last one CEO who cared about the product quality”
No updates taking 2 years to finish, no melting connectors, no overheating new phones. And firing people who proactively work against company they are hired by.
The faulty keyboards of 2016-19 [0] were IMO the most egregious of Apple's hardware faults. Apple worsened it by taking forever to admit fault.
Trying to chat, code (or do anything quickly and precisely) with a keyboard that didn't do what your fingers told it to got extremely frustrating extremely quickly.
I recall public faux pas due to mistyped public chat messages, and CI runs failing due to two characters being where one should have been.
[0] https://apple.stackexchange.com/q/392126/290197
Innovation in marketing?
Wozniak would be a better choice.
I mean, that is the most obvious choice. Even if Woz was publically well known, giving it to someone who is still alive is kind of tacky.
At least they’re not giving it to Elon…
Gross.
His preferred currency was back-dated stock options.
Pathetic.
[flagged]
Traitorous eight would have been cooler