Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Apple Politics

FBI File Notes Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field 337

Posted by timothy
from the are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been dept.
Hugh Pickens writes "Bloomberg reports that the FBI has released a decades-old file it kept on Steve Jobs, the deceased Apple co-founder, after a background check for a possible appointment by former President George H. W. Bush conducting interviews with unnamed associates of Jobs to judge his character, drug use and potential prejudices. 'Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs' honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals,' according to the materials. Several people commented 'concerning past drug use on the part of Mr. Jobs,' according to the file including marijuana, hashish and LSD during the period 1970 – 1974. The file also noted that Jobs was not a member of the communist party."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FBI File Notes Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field

Comments Filter:
  • by X0563511 (793323) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:02PM (#38984473) Homepage Journal

    Most people (we are not all paragons of virtue) do that. The difference was that Jobs was apparently good at it.

    • by Colonel Korn (1258968) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:28PM (#38984939)

      Most people (we are not all paragons of virtue) do that. The difference was that Jobs was apparently good at it.

      The difference between SJ and most people, not referenced in his report but available from anyone who ever worked closely with him, was that SJ was addicted to backstabbing even when it would hurt him as well. Do a favor for SJ? Either disappear immediately or count on him going out of his way to hurt you.

      • by CODiNE (27417)

        That's a known ADD trait, self-destructiveness and antagonizing those in relationships with them. I'm surprised it never seemed to show up in his business dealings, that is doing something suicidal to the company and wrecking things from the inside out.

        Or maybe he just got lucky and his suicide moves turned out to be market successes.

        • by jamstar7 (694492) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @05:14PM (#38987951)
          Why do you think they fired him from Apple? They brought him back when they bought up NeXT when it went under. SJ was a sometime marketting genius. Problem was, like most geniuses, his talent was erratic as hell. They never could count on him to figure out the next new thing correctly. (Can anyone say 'Lisa'? 'Cube'?)
          • by CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @07:16PM (#38989573)

            Some of those failures did end up being the next big thing. Lisa became the Mac, NeXT OS became OSX, the cube was part of a new of thinking that (re)valued design in computers. Jobs did have flight of fancy though, like his state of the art factories [youtube.com] where he obsessed over how to make the process beautiful. Ironically abandoning those white elephants and going to China like everyone else is now a major point of criticism for Apple.

          • by BasilBrush (643681) on Friday February 10, 2012 @02:23AM (#38992541)

            They never could count on him to figure out the next new thing correctly. (Can anyone say 'Lisa'? 'Cube'?)

            What? Your expectation is for every single product to work out? A hen that lays golden eggs? Dream on, it doesn't exist. Jobs had more products that were milestones in computer evolution than he had failures. That's a pretty unique success rate.

            Why do slashdotters hate success so much? Does it make them feel inadequate?

      • by Nixoloco (675549)

        The difference between SJ and most people, not referenced in his report but available from anyone who ever worked closely with him, was that SJ was addicted to backstabbing even when it would hurt him as well. Do a favor for SJ? Either disappear immediately or count on him going out of his way to hurt you.

        Have you met everyone who worked closely with him? What is the reference for this? Do you have a personal anecdote? I'm curious where you derive this assessment of him. To say that "anyone who ever worked closely with him" would basically call him a vindictive backstabbing SOB seems extremely hyperbolical or like you just have your own axe to grind.

    • by ackthpt (218170) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:34PM (#38985085) Homepage Journal

      Most people (we are not all paragons of virtue) do that. The difference was that Jobs was apparently good at it.

      With his wealth, at the end, as a yardstick, he wasn't merely good at it, he wrote the book, the preface, table of contents and the index, plus did a bang-up job for the cover art.

  • by losttoy (558557) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:05PM (#38984505)
    Wondering if the FBI does background checks on Senate, Congress and Presidential candidates? Pretty sure 99.9% would have the same issues with "dishonesty". My favourite line from the TFA is "Others mentioned that Jobs couldn’t be trusted and that he was able to create a reality-distortion field." Wondering how strong this force field was and was it able to warp the time-space continuum?? :P
    • by Qzukk (229616) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:07PM (#38984561) Journal

      Wondering if the FBI does background checks on Senate, Congress and Presidential candidates?

      Of course not, that would be a waste of taxpayer dollars.

      • by masternerdguy (2468142) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:09PM (#38984601)
        Also, there are these really cool things called 'elections' in which you get the chance to periodically vote for a candidate you like. The majority rules and the candidate that pleases the most people is elected. Did you know that you can even run for election?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by nschubach (922175)

          You can run, but you won't win... People keep crying out that they want to curb career politicians, but when you have Joe Nobody on the ballot vs. someone you've seen on the TV, people will vote for the one they saw on TV.

          • by masternerdguy (2468142) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:20PM (#38984817)
            This is the 21st century. Traditional TV is going away and its becoming easier to get followers without taking out millions of dollars in commercials. We are approaching a critical point where the little guy can get as much exposure as the big guy if they use the medium intelligently.
            • by nschubach (922175) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:39PM (#38985163) Journal

              You can try (and by all means, I support any efforts) but there's a membrane (glass ceiling?) that has to be broken through for people to even seriously consider someone running via Youtube, etc. You'll never be invited to any debates, people will not do research on their own to find out what you support and they will continue to vote for the person with "experience". You pretty much have to start from the city/local government at a young age and work your way up to be considered for spots that are intended to be filled by common citizens, but you're not going to be a common citizen if you work up the ladder and you have to dedicate your life to it unless you have a ton of money to spend on ramping up that campaign.

              • by kenrblan (1388237)

                You're right about the barrier to entry for serious contention. Look at how many GOP debates have invited Buddy Roemer during this presidential primary cycle. That guy is a former governor and also served as a member of the US House of Representatives, and he can't get in the room for a debate. His only presence has been on the internet, twitter, and random TV interviews that generally have him comment on the other candidates.

                BTW, I'm not advocating the guy in any manner. He just seems like a really good ex

            • by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:32PM (#38986159)

              Our problem isn't that the people are stupidly voting crooks in. Our problem is that we never fire them. Imagine what would have happened last summer during all that budget nonsense if several of the people in that room had to deal with the threat of being recalled.

            • by backwardsposter (2034404) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @04:59PM (#38987695)

              The problem is (usually) the kind of person who wants to run for this office isn't the kind of person you want to hold it.

    • And what would do they do if they did find something? There is nothing in the constitution allowing someone to be kicked out or denied office for failing a background check. Unless they find a crime they can prosecute, the best the FBI could do is go public and let the voters decide.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by losttoy (558557)
        So anyone holding a government job, working on a government project or deemed a person of public trust is required to go through a FBI background check, except the political masters at the very top. Boy! that sure makes sense to me :-D Because we all know the masters at the top are beyond blackmail and corruption! Right.
        • by bws111 (1216812)

          I guess the lack of FBI background checks for candidates is why we never, ever hear about things that might make a candidate open to blackmail and corruption. We never hear about candidates extra-marital affairs. We never hear about sexual harassment. We never hear about past actions or statements that appear to be in conflict with what they are now saying. We never hear about drug use, or school performance. We have no idea where a candidate gets his income, or what companies/industries he has ties t

        • Makes perfect sense, though. Would you trust the FBI to run background checks on politicians? I imagine that if they did, you would find any that promise to increase FBI funding get a cursory skim through their history, while any that threaten to reduce funding have every detail of their lives examined under the microscope to find any excuse to keep them out of office... and *no-one* is completly without some dirt that could be used against them.
      • by dkleinsc (563838)

        Well, here's something I think they could do if they found something:

        "Senator Blowhard, we acquired a very interesting audio recording made in the hotel room next to the one you were staying in on April 14, 2006, with a certain Miss Dupre saying something about how much she liked a 'Mr Hotdog'. Now, it would be a real shame if a public servant such as yourself were so demeaned by this happening to find its way into the hands of a reporter for a major TV network. By the way, how were you thinking of voting i

        • by tragedy (27079)

          J. Edgar Hoover, the founding leader of the FBI is generally believed to have operated in just such a manner. I've heard it referred to as "tyranny by index cards".

    • by Guidii (686867) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:17PM (#38984751) Homepage
      Interesting snippet:

      [Retracted] concluded the interview by stating that even though he does not consider Mr. Jobs to be a friend, he (Mr. Jobs) possesses the qualities to assume a high level political position. It was [retracted]'s opinion that honesty and integerity are not required qualities to hold such a position."

      • Please allow me to post (yet another) quote from a favourite TV show of mine:

        [discussing a financial scandal]
        Sir Desmond Glazebrook: They've broken the rules.
        Sir Humphrey: What, you mean the insider trading regulations?
        Sir Desmond Glazebrook: No.
        Sir Humphrey: Oh. Well, that's one relief.
        Sir Desmond Glazebrook: I mean of course they've broken those, but they've broken the basic, the basic rule of the City.
        Sir Humphrey: I didn't know there were any.
        Sir Desmond Glazebrook: Just the one.
        If you're

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:37PM (#38985117)

      My favorite paragraph was this one:

      _______concluded the interview by stating that even though he does not consider Mr. Jobs to be a friend, he (Mr. Jobs) possesses the qualities to assume a high level political position. It was ______ opinion that honesty and integrity are not required qualities to hold such a position. _____ recommended him for a position of trust and confidence with the Government.

      He said this after the beginning of his/her interview where he characterized Jobs as a "deceptive individual and not completely forthright and honest," and then mentions the usual reality distortion field stuff.

      Good enough for CEO work, good enough for Government work, lol.

    • by youngone (975102)
      Most of the CEO's I've worked for either create or attempt to create exactly the same reality distortion field. Their success or failure in this determined their length of service.
  • Job Requirements? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    >> Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals,

    Sounds like a politician to me!

    • They figured he wasn't as good as Karl Rove though.

      • Re:Job Requirements? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Attila Dimedici (1036002) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:23PM (#38984857)
        I am not sure what Karl Rove has to do with the consideration of Steve Jobs for a posible appointment by President George H.W. Bush. Karl Rove was an advisor to George W. Bush, who had yet to run for governor of Texas when this took place.
        • Fair enough, I missed the "H."

        • by HBI (604924)

          Rove worked for the elder Bush as well. His 1978 and 1980 campaigns were primarily Rove's work. Rove was engaged in Texas to shepherd Bush's son and keep him out of trouble after the elder Bush went to Washington as the Vice-President.

          • Rove worked for the elder Bush as well. His 1978 and 1980 campaigns were primarily Rove's work. Rove was engaged in Texas to shepherd Bush's son and keep him out of trouble after the elder Bush went to Washington as the Vice-President.

            That is not true. Karl Rove first worked with George W. Bush on his failed Congressional campaign in 1978, before George H.W. Bush became Vice President. While Karl Rove worked on George H. W. Bush's 1980 Presidential campaign, he was not its chief architect. Additionally, George H.W. Bush did not run for any office in 1978.

  • Drugs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:10PM (#38984613)

    Tons and tons of people have used a bit of hash and LSD in their past, but few will admit it to their employers if they work in the professional world.

    It's not that these activities actually make a person of bad or suspicious - it's that many people _believe_ that they do. This turns casual and innocent drug users into liars because they have to protect themselves from the horribly ill-informed and paranoid power structure.

    • Re:Drugs (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tsingi (870990) <graham.rick@gmaDALIil.com minus painter> on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:48PM (#38986479)

      ... turns casual and innocent drug users into liars because they have to protect themselves from the horribly ill-informed and paranoid power structure.

      This is what bad laws do, turn everyone into a criminal. Once you're a criminal, deservedly or not, you lose at least some level of respect for the law. It's somewhat self defeating.

      But then, what do I know, I don't like Star Wars much.

  • wrong (Score:4, Funny)

    by circletimessquare (444983) <circletimessquare@NoSpaM.gmail.com> on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:10PM (#38984619) Homepage Journal

    with the amount of business Steve sent to China, he should be an honorary member of the Chinese Communist Party

    • by roman_mir (125474)

      Ok, but then you have to complete the deal and really present "Communist" China for what it is - the freest market on this planet.

    • by hercubus (755805)

      ... he should be an honorary member of the Chinese Communist Party

      Right, because Apple is the only company that found it had to move manufacturing to China. Apple was actually pretty late to the party in China, I believe they kept manufacturing in America longer than a lot of companies did. (party pun intended)

      Whatever we do, let us not wonder what it is about our national character (I want stuff cheap) or our national trends (cutting local labor _always_ boosts stock price) or national policies (yes we subsidize moving jobs overseas) that creates a situation where a w

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Communist China is communist like Roman Meal bread is from Rome.

    • Re:wrong (Score:4, Insightful)

      by yurtinus (1590157) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:51PM (#38985413)
      Everybody is quick to blame business - but look at the environment that led to it: Americans love their cheap widgets. You have an American made widget on the shelf next to a Chinese made widget, your American widget is usually 20-30% more expensive. What do you suppose people are going to buy? We've created an economy around disposable goods where competition is primarily on price. If a business tries to stay American made, they will fail to their competitors that import. *ALL* Americans have been happily exporting our economy to China. Now it's starting to bite us back and of course we are playing the blame game.
  • What kind of computer system were they using in 1991? By 1991 it wasn't very common anymore for users of email, Usenet, or FidoNet to do everything in all caps.

    • What kind of computer system were they using in 1991? By 1991 it wasn't very common anymore for users of email, Usenet, or FidoNet to do everything in all caps.

      The FBI likes yelling.

    • by number6x (626555)

      1991 was the year windows 3.1 came out, but the windows socket API did not appear until 1992.

      email was almost exclusively a Unix thing and a little on the mainframe. Mac had a pretty good stack for email but everything else was hit or miss. A lot of Mainframe and some Mid-frame (Honeywell, Unisys) systems defaulted to all caps.

      Windows, Apple II, and others usually did email through BBS's or BBS-like providers like Prodigy and Delphi.

      And we had to walk to and from school through 6 feet of snow, uphill

    • by Mr Z (6791) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:02PM (#38985615) Homepage Journal

      When I hired into a high tech company in 1996, they were still using a home-grown electronic mail system running on a mainframe, using a tn3270 emulator to access it. Most people had transitioned to SMTP mail for most purposes (they quaintly called it "Internet mail"), but there was still an important segment of mail traffic that went over the old system.

      The older, proprietary message system did allow mixed case, and most people used it that way. But, there were still a handful of people (mostly in HR) that had been there 20+ years, and still sent all their messages in ALL CAPS. (One person I remember specifically had their tn3270 emulator set to force CAPS mode.)

      That proprietary system got retired about 2 years after I hired in. I wasn't sad to see it go.

      My point, anyway, is that old habits die hard. Mixed case may have been supported or may not have been, but ALL CAPS was slow to die out in certain corners. Heck, aren't NWS alerts still in ALL CAPS?

      • by RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) <taiki@cUMLAUTox.net minus punct> on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:08PM (#38985729)

        To be fair to the NWS, if they're issuing alerts, they should probably be shouted.

        What's more appropriate?

        "200 inches of rain expected. You are urged to evacuate." ...or...
        "200 INCHES OF RAIN EXPECTED YOU ARE URGED TO EVACUATE"

        ?

  • by thesandtiger (819476) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:15PM (#38984715)

    None of those things are surprising or unexpected. None of those things, or even just the combination of those things, are unique or special to Jobs, or uncommon among humanity at all, let alone people of his generation and initial environment. Hell, the fact that he had an FBI file isn't even surprising or unexpected - I'm sure quite a few /.ers have FBI files just by virtue of where they've worked etc.

    This is "news" in the same way that saying Mr. Jobs was a carbon based life form would been news.

    Jobs was who most people expected he was, even when they had vastly differing opinions as to his worth as a human being.

    I'm not trying to say that /, shouldn't report this stuff, but rather that I'm just surprised the guy's file was so mundane - you'd hope for *something* juicy.

  • Apple just filed a patent for methods of creating a "Reality Distortion Field". They are calling it iLie.
  • by pecosdave (536896) * on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:20PM (#38984835) Homepage Journal

    to achieve his goals.

    The man outright stated he was willing to bankrupt the company he was in charge of making a profit for in order to avenge a perceived theft.

    I would say the guy has reality, vengeance, and anger issues that rivals that of women I've let into my life.

    Seriously, the guy had a very elegant approach to things, that's why Apple is very popular among those who don't mind having choices made for them, because despite the premium they're good solid choices as long as you don't have anything outside the box to accomplish. There's no doubt in my mind the guy had control issues, the fit he threw when the iPhone boot-loader was cracked, the fact he won't let you deal with multi-media data on external USB/FireWire drives on Mac OS X, the FUD he had the company spread about OGG/Vorbis, and the face Apple officially doesn't even acknowledge Linux exist even though it counts MS/Windows as a bonus feature combined with temper and obsessiveness stories that leaked about his first term as CEO tells me Jobs was likely a sociopath.

    • by Osgeld (1900440)

      "tells me Jobs was likely a sociopath."

      or a spoiled little shit of a man child

    • "the guy has reality, vengeance, and anger issues that rivals that of women I've let into my life" -- The women are variable; the constant is you.
      • by pecosdave (536896) *

        I've only had one that went nuclear on me, I've had another go into a self harm spiral, and another that still contacts me trying to get back together despite breaking it off 17 years ago when I was in high-school. The others were parted for various other reasons. Sure I'm the constant, I'm the constant that watches others wig the hell out because they have no control over their emotions.

    • by liamevo (1358257)

      The problem with the world today is that most high profile business people, CEO's and the like all show symptoms of being a sociopath. Our society is setup to reward sociopath's who are intelligent.

    • "the fact he won't let you deal with multi-media data on external USB/FireWire drives on Mac OS X"

      What do you mean by that? I have no trouble playing multimedia files off of Firewire drives. I have no trouble saving them. I have no trouble moving my iTunes purchases to them. Can you clarify?
    • by RollTRS (894613)

      the fact he won't let you deal with multi-media data on external USB/FireWire drives on Mac OS X

      I know this is irrelevant to your point, but you've piqued my curiosity. What are you referring to here?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by thefixer(tm) (1906774)
      People who "don't mind having choices made for them"...? Um, that's like the entire population of this country. On the count of 3, everyone say "baaaaaah!"
    • I would say the guy has reality, vengeance, and anger issues that rivals that of women I've let into my life.

      Yet here you are raving and ranting because Jobs either "didn't acknowledge" your pet projects, whatever that's supposed to mean, or because of imagined slights against them. Sounds you might have some issues of your own.

  • by bmacs27 (1314285) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:23PM (#38984861)
    Steve Jobs is LSD!
  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:32PM (#38985031) Homepage

    There's a note that Jobs once held a TOP SECRET clearance while at Pixar. I wonder what Pixar was doing for the Government.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:43PM (#38985215)

      There's a note that Jobs once held a TOP SECRET clearance while at Pixar. I wonder what Pixar was doing for the Government.

      Bush was afraid Toy Story was real. He was worried his dolls were all spying on him at night.

    • by hughk (248126)

      Probably grid computing. The same tech that builds render farms can be used for code breaking.

    • Well if you were in hi-tech back then, it made sense. [wikipedia.org]

      From the link:

      "This system was aimed at high-end government imaging applications which were done by dedicated systems produced by the aerospace industry which cost a million dollars a seat

      Having been there, yes, they were that expensive!

    • by houghi (78078)

      I wonder what Pixar was doing for the Government.

      Make the politicians look less fake.

  • by johnthorensen (539527) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @02:37PM (#38985129)

    [redacted] concluded the interview by stating that even though he does not consider Mr. Jobs to be a friend, he (Mr. Jobs) possesses the qualities to assume a high level political position. It was [redacted]'s opinion that honest and integrity are not required qualities to hold such a position. [redacted] recommended him for a position of trust and confidence with the government.

    That quote alone is awesome on so many levels I can't even begin to describe the joy and mirth I experienced while reading it.

  • my co-worker is now saying I'm gonna pop.

  • by RyoShin (610051) <tukaro AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:01PM (#38985597) Homepage Journal

    I think the worst thing about this is that the public in general will see his drug use as being worse than his dishonesty/reality warping. I'm by no means excusing it, but I'd rather have a user than a liar any day.

    (It's funny that I went to actually RTFA and it was barely longer than the /. summary with no additional information.)

  • Hacks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Phoenix666 (184391) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:07PM (#38985717)

    Is it me, or is it the more we learn about the inner workings of our government via WikiLeaks, social media, and other channels that it becomes clear the last thing on earth any reasonably intelligent person should ever do is give their trust or dollars to the government or big corporations?

    As a young man I had an impression of at least certain departments of the government as being competent, such as the FBI, CIA, and State Department. The first of those to fall was the CIA, with whom I had personal contact in the late 90's; calling them room temperature IQ's would be an effusive compliment. Then the FBI botched investigation after investigation throughout their lab screw-ups. And their modus operandus seemed to increasingly be to frame their suspects and violate the basic constitutional rights of innocent Americans. The State Department's sign-off on yellow-cake uranium was the first big blow to my confidence in that bunch; the next big strike against them was breezing through their application process only to wonder why it was no people of color made it; and the nail in the coffin was Cablegate.

    Now, maybe DARPA has mettle left. The SEALs seem to prove themselves again and again. Apple and Google appear to be effective. But why do we cede so much to all the rest, given how shot through with corruption, collusion, and incompetence they are, and at such horrific cost?

    We are, many of us, so much brighter and better and deserving of more to have our collective potential so utterly frustrated by such dross. It's not an information problem so much anymore. We have any one of dozens of channels to chose from to communicate. Is it a question of will or organization? As refugees from the system of ritual abuse constituted by the status quo, are we constitutionally unable to work with others cohesively or deeply afraid of bullies who will walk up and punch us?

    I struggle with this because I see the deep intelligence of so many of my colleagues and of the general community on /., and I wonder what challenges we could not surmount if we could break free of our learned social inhibitions. We have all grown up in a world ruled by salesmen, thugs, and psychopaths, but that's not the world I'd like to leave to my kids. I'd like them to live in a world led by artists, engineers, scientists, and humanitarians.

    • Re:Hacks (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jockeys (753885) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:38PM (#38986251) Journal

      We have all grown up in a world ruled by salesmen, thugs, and psychopaths, but that's not the world I'd like to leave to my kids. I'd like them to live in a world led by artists, engineers, scientists, and humanitarians.

      Artists, engineers, scientists and humanitarians do not have an unquenchable, innate thirst for power.

      Salesmen, thugs and psychopaths do. So they work hard to gather, consolidate and maintain power while decent people don't. It's that simple.

  • by Oswald McWeany (2428506) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @03:40PM (#38986309)

    I'm baffled by America's continuing war on stamping out communists.

    Sure, this is a democracy, we want to stay a democracy. We had enemies who were communists; however, the witch hunt against communism, which is still going on to a lesser degree is baffling.

    When I applied for my green card, and later my citizenship (as recent as 2 years ago)- I had to fill in a form saying I hadn't overthrown any governments, wasn't a communist, etc, etc, etc. ... and no, I'm not a communist- although I joined a joke "communist party" in university that parodied the Republican and democrat clubs (I'm actually very centrist)- surprise they didn't find that and block my citizenship... :)

    To me it seems to be "undemocratic" to try and stamp out an individual party or belief like that. Sure- if they try to over-throw the country- or do terrorist acts- or represent a foreign nation- but to try to keep people out because of their belief. Obviously the made a point- even as late as the 80's to make sure Jobs wasn't a commie... this was after the worst of the cold war- and after McCarthyism was en vogue.

    Even MLK was demonized by the FBI- they spread false rumours about him trying to discredit him because he had communist friends and they FBI was worried he too might be a communist trying to spread communism.

    I dunno- but even as someone who is opposed to communism - I find the attack on communism by the government to be kinda creepy- it feels as if some rights are being violated somehow. If I did want to be a commie- should I not be allowed to? Should I not be allowed to have a political opinion that is not main stream? What if a Republican government later decides to attack and out law the green party, or the democrats?

    Am I the only one who finds this wrong? I know we're supposed to hate the commies- but we're also supposed to let people believe whatever they want and only arrest them if the commit a crime or conspire to do so.

  • by Suffering Bastard (194752) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @04:36PM (#38987343)

    ...after a background check for a possible appointment by former President George H. W. Bush...'Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs' honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals'

    In other words Steve was perfect for the job.

  • by joh (27088) on Thursday February 09, 2012 @06:02PM (#38988675)

    You may think about SJ what you want, but if you look at his presentations and speeches one thing that is much more interesting than his RDF is the pieces this RDF is made up from: He is extremely clear, logically convincing, he speaks freely without a script and everything appears to be very well thought through. You don't need to accept what he did and what he thought, but there's still much to learn from him, if you like him or not.

    For any political, public or indeed business work these are abilities that are extremely important and at the same time rare. I can fully understand that there were people wanting him badly in a political rule. And I'm actually happy that he was obviously single-minded enough to not fall for that. He never cared for anything but computers, applied technology and business. Even if you don't like the company, the software and the business he built, the way he managed to do that certainly is something to learn from.

    Only idiots refuse to learn from people they don't like. The opposite from something that is totally wrong is invariably also totally wrong.

IF I HAD A MINE SHAFT, I don't think I would just abandon it. There's got to be a better way. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Working...