跳至主要内容

Jobs Talks About His Rise and Fall

In the wake of his resignation from Apple Computer last week, cofounder Steve Jobs spent three and a half hours talking about his ordeal, as well as his past and future, with NEWSWEEK's Gerald C. Lubenow and Michael Rogers. Excerpts:

Q. Was there a point at which Apple stopped being fun?
A. Well, Apple was about as pure of a Silicon Valley company as you could imagine. We started in a garage. Woz (co-founder Stephen Wozniak) and I both grew up in Silicon Valley. Our role model was Hewlett-Packard (the electronics company). And so I guess that's what we went into it thinking. Hewlett-Packard, you know, Jobs and Wozniak. And, as you recall, it was a very small company for a long time. But the industry started to grow very rapidly in the 1979-80 time frame. The Macintosh team was what is commonly known now as intrapreneurship—only a few years before the term was coined—a group of people going in essence back to the garage, but in a large company. But again, that was a core team of 50 people. So that attracted a lot of people that really did want to work at a small company, in a way.

Q. But were things generally going as you wanted them to for Apple and for Steve Jobs?
A. Well, if I look at myself and ask, "What am I best at and what do I enjoy most doing?" I think what I'm best at is creating sort of new innovative products. That's what I enjoy doing. I enjoy, and I'm best working with, a small team of talented people. That's what I did with the Apple II, and that's what I did with the Macintosh.

And, you know, over the summer, I've obviously had a lot of time to think about things. I had a piece of paper one day and I was writing down what were the things that I cared most about, that I was most proud of personally, about my 10 years at Apple. There's obviously the creation of the products Apple II and Macintosh. But other than that, the thing that I really cared about was helping to set up the Apple Education Foundation. I came up with this crazy idea that turned into a program called "The Kids Can't Wait," where we tried to give a computer to every school in America and ended up giving one to every school in California, about 10,000 computers. So if I put those two together, working with small teams of really talented people to create breakthrough products, and education, that's where the idea for doing what I'm doing now came from.

Q. Once John Sculley came in and took over, how did your role change? Was there somepoint when you thought, "I'm not having a lot of fun running this giant corporation?"
A. I was very happy in the early days of Macintosh. Really, up until very near the end. I don't think that my role in life is to run big organizations and do incremental improvements. Well, you know, I think that John felt that after the reorganization, it was important for me to not be at Apple for him to accomplish what he wanted to accomplish. And, as you know, he issued that public statement that there was no role for me there then or in the future, or in the foreseeable future. And that was about as black-and-white as you need to make things. Probably a little more black-and-white than it needed to be. And I, you know, I respect his right to make that decision.

Q. How did you react when you heard the board's decision? These were people that you knew and worked with for a long time.
A. Oh, yeah. I mean in my wildest imagination, I couldn't have come up with such a wild ending to all of this. I had hoped that my life would take on the quality of an interesting tapestry where I would have weaved in and out of Apple: I would have been there a period of time, and maybe I would have gone off and done something else to contribute, but connected with Apple, and then maybe come back and stay for a lengthy time period and then go off and do something else. But it's just not going to work out that way. So I had 10 of the best years of my life, you know. And I don't regret much of anything.

Q. Is there an inevitable break between being an entrepreneur and a businessman? Arethe people who get things going different?
A. I don't know. You look back at the personal-computer industry, IBM and DEC and Hewlett-Packard weren't the people that invented the personal computer. It took a bunch of rambunctious upstarts, working with very little resources but a certain amount of vision and commitment, to do it. And Apple has clearly now joined that status and the ranks of those other companies. It probably is true that the people who have been able to come up with the innovations in many industries are maybe not the people that either are best skilled at, or, frankly, enjoy running a large enterprise where they lose contact with the day-to-day workings of that innovative process. Dr. Land at Polaroid, he's a perfect example.

I personally, man, I want to build things. I'm 30. I'm not ready to be an industry pundit. I got three offers to be a professor during this summer, and I told all of the universities that I thought I would be an awful professor. What I'm best at doing is finding a group of talented people and making things with them. I respect the direction that Apple is going in. But for me personally, you know, I want to make things. And if there's no place for me to make things there, then I'll do what I did twice before. I'll make my own place. You know, I did it in the garage when Apple started, and I did it in the metaphorical garage when Mac started.

Q. That leads to the next question. . .
A. And in 10 years will I be faced with the same dilemma again? Maybe, maybe I will.

Q. Have you set aside in your own mind any desire to do another Apple?
A. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. I helped shepherd Apple from a garage to a billion-and-a-half-dollar company. I'm probably not the best person in the world to shepherd it to a five- or ten-billion-dollar company, which I think is probably its destiny. And so I haven't got any sort of odd chip on my shoulder about proving anything to myself or anybody else. And remember, though the outside world looks at success from a numerical point of view, my yardstick might be quite different than that. My yardstick may be how every computer that's designed from here on out will have to be at least as good as a Macintosh.

Q. Are you saying in there that you could have run the giant Apple?
A. If I had felt that I was the person to run Apple in 1983, then I would have thrown my own name into the hat for the job, which I did not. So it was a conscious decision on my part to find John Sculley.

Q. Were you surprised how that all turned out?
A. If my vote had counted for everything at Apple, I certainly would not have told Steve Jobs that there was no place for him at Apple. But my vote was just one vote. So...

Q. In the end it did get down to who would run the company.
A. I think, more importantly, it was which philosophy and perspective, more than an individual person. You know, my philosophy is—it's always been very simple. And it has its flaws, which I'll go into. My philosophy is that everything starts with a great product. So, you know, I obviously believed in listening to customers, but customers can't tell you about the next breakthrough that's going to happen next year that's going to change the whole industry. So you have to listen very carefully. But then you have to go and sort of stow away—you have to go hide away with people that really understand the technology, but also really care about the customers, and dream up this next breakthrough. And that's my perspective, that everything starts with a great product. And that has its flaws. Ihave certainly been accused of not listening to the customers enough. And I think there is probably a certain amount of that that's valid.

Q. Can you describe a little bit your role at Apple after the reorganization?
A. My calendar had some commitments on it that obviously were slightly more long-term than I could adjust immediately. Those included a trip to the Soviet Union; it included a trip to introduce the Macintosh office products in Europe. Given the state of mind I was in, I think I did a pretty good job for the company with that. But I was, you know, asked to move out of my office. They leased a little building across the street from most of the other Apple buildings. I, we nicknamed it Siberia.

Q. How were you told about that?
A. My associate was told about it. Yeah, she said, "They want you to get out in two weeks."

Q. How did you feel?
A. Well, given the background of the other feelings I was feeling at the time, this was nothing out of the ordinary. So I moved across the street, and I made sure that all of the executive staff had my home phone number. I knew that John had it, and I called the rest of them personally and made sure they had it and told them that I wanted to be useful in any way i could, and to please call me if I could help on anything. And they all had a, you know, a cordial phrase, but none of them ever called back. And so I used to go into work, I'd get there and I would have one or two phone calls to perform, a little bit of mail to look at. But ... this was in June, July ... most of the corporate-management reports stopped flowing by my desk. A few people might see my car in the parking lot and come over and commiserate. And I would get depressed and go home in three or four hours, really depressed. I did that a few times and I decided that was mentally unhealthy. So I just stopped going in. You know, there was nobody really there to miss me.

Q. Do you feel that they have taken your company away from you?
A. To me, Apple exists in the spirit of the people that work there, and the sort of philosophies and purpose by which they go about their business. So if Apple just becomes a place where computers are a commodity item and where the romance is gone, and where people forget that computers are the most incredible invention that man has ever invented, then I'll feel I have lost Apple. But if I'm a million miles away and all those people still feel those things and they're still working to make the next great personal computer, then I will feel that my genes are still in there.

Q. Does it still have that spirit now?
A. Well, I think you got a good ... I'm not the one to ask that. You're putting me in a tough spot.

Q. When you were going into Apple during the summer, were you already thinking about alternatives?
A. No.

Q. You still thought there was a chance they'd make an R&D group for Steve to run?
A. The hardest, one of the five most difficult days was that day John said at the analysts meeting about there not being a role for me in the future, and he said it again in another analysts meeting a week later. He didn't say it to me directly, he said it to the press. You've probably had somebody punch you in the stomach and it knocks the wind out of you and you can't breathe. If you relax you'll start breathing again. That's how I felt all summer long. The thing I had to do was try to relax. It was hard. But I went for a lot of long walks in the woods and didn't really talk to a lot of people.

And gradually my spirits started to come back little by little. And you know, just a few weeks ago, this education thing popped out. I had been reading some biochemistry, recombinant DNA literature. (I had recently met) Paul Berg, the inventor of some of the recombinant techniques. I called him up and I said, "You remember me, I'm ignorant about this stuff, but I've got a bunch of questions about how it works, and I'd love to have lunch with you." So we had lunch at Stanford. He was showing me how they were doing gene repairing. Actually, it's straightforward, it's kind of neat. It smells a lot like some of the concepts you find in computer science. So he was explaining how he does experiments in a wet laboratory and they take a week or two or three to run. I asked him, "Why don't you simulate these on a computer? Not only will it allow you to run your experiments faster, but someday every freshman microbiology student in the country can play with the Paul Berg recombinant software." So his eyes lit up.

And that was sort of a landmark lunch. Because that's when I started to really think about this stuff, and get my wheels turning again. I was real excited. It's not to get rich. I don't care about getting rich anymore. One of the things I've thought about a lot is I'm 30, and I can look back on the last 10 years of my life and I feel pretty good about it. I'd like to do something again where I personally, when I'm 40, will look back and say, "You know, I spent my 30s well."

Q. Why don't you tell us some of the details of how this new thing came together?
A. The interesting thing about the group is that we've all known each other for four years. And we have an immense amount of confidence in each others' abilities and genuinely like each other. And all have a desire to have a small company where we can influence its destiny and have a really fun place to work. We talked about this enterprise, you know, for the first time less than two weeks before I told the board that I wanted to start this company. And we have no business plan. We haven't done anything. Now, you might say we're all crazy. We have a general direction. We want to find out what higher education needs. We plan to go visit a lot of colleges in October and just listen. Then we want to build it for them, whatever it is. Courseware, whatever.

Q. You've talked about being tough to get along with, having a rough-edge personality. Did you contribute in some way to your own downfall?
A. You know, I'm not a 62-year-old statesman that's traveled around the world all his life. So I'm sure that there was a situation when I was 25 that if I could go back, knowing what I know now, I could have handled much better. And I'm sure I'll be able to say the same thing when I'm 35 about the situation in 1985. I can be very intense in my convictions. And I don't know; all in all, I kind of like myself and I'm not that anxious to change.

Q. But has this experience changed you?
A. Oh, this has—yeah, I think I am growing from this, and I think I'm learning a lot from it. I'm not sure how or what yet. But yes, I feel that way. (But) I'm not bitter. I'm not bitter.

Q. Can you talk a little about how your relationship with John Sculley has changed?
A. Well, given the fact that I've spoken to him only three times since (May)—that says something about the degree of communication we've had—I don't know what will happen with my relationship with John.

Q. What did you learn from it so far?
A. If John Sculley calls me on the phone, I'll answer it.

Q. We wanted to talk about you personally.
A. What have we been talking about?

Q. We mean apart from Apple.
A. Oh.

Q. There's been a lot in the press about your interest in Buddhism, vegetarianism.
A. As we descend into the isms.

Q. The isms. Are you still interested in those things?
A. Well, I don't know what to say. I mean I don't eat meat, and I don't go to church every Sunday.

Q. They said at some point you had thought of going to Japan and sitting in a monastery.
A. Yeah, yeah. I'm glad I didn't do that. I know this is going to sound really, really corny. But I feel like I'm an American, and I was born here. And the fate of the world is in America's hands right now. I really feel that. And you know I'm going to live my life here and do what I can to help.

Q. A lot of people, given your sort of iconic existence, think about politics.
A. Well, I have thought about it some. People from both parties have called and chatted about it. But now I think the best use that society can put me to is to really do what I know how to do. I've got too much hair left for politics.

Q. Now that you're 30 and an estate owner, do you see a settled life for yourself, a family, big Silicon Valley parties, furniture?
A. Actually, I bought a few Eames chairs so I have a place to sit down and read a book, other than the floor. No, I gotta tell you, the thing I want to do more than anything now is get to work. I, we've got to go rent a building, we've got to decide on a name, we've got to file incorporation papers. It sounds like drudgery, but I long for it right now. So yeah, I'd like to have some kids one day. But...

Q. Have you seen Silicon Valley change, other than in its property values?
A. Sure it's changed. First of all, the valley has gotten to be a much larger place, it's contributing quite a bit now to the gross national product. And the entrepreneurship has gotten much more sophisticated. I mean if you want to start a company now, there are companies that help you start a company. What I hope they don't get stuck on is thinking that Apple is the yardstick of success. Silicon Valley still is a mecca that attracts amazing amounts of technical talent and I'm real excited about the next 10 years. Software is what will distinguish products in the next 10 years. And I think the technology for software is just starting to come into its own.

Q. Are some of the nice things about the valley gone for good?
A. Hewlett and Packard, the first generation, handed over leadership to the second; they made a smooth transition. But it's not Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard there. Intel is partially owned by IBM. Rolm has been merged into IBM. So you have people that have a very different culture now who help to run some of the companies in the valley. I think it is fair to say that the people running Apple are not from the valley at this point in time. I think that some of that is inevitable. I honestly don't know what it is going to mean. If the culture of the valley and some of the principles and practices of the valley are truncated, then I think it is pretty likely that the innovation will stop.

My hope is that there are a lot more Hewletts and Packards in this valley right now writing business plans to start companies. I was very influenced by Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard. I used to go there to Hewlett-Packard every Tuesday night when I was a freshman and sophomore in high school. They would invite about 20 of us in, students that were really interested in electronics, and they would have an expert there give a lecture on something they just invented. I think it is fair to say there wouldn't have been an Apple if there hadn't been a Hewlett-Packard.

Q. Might Apple executives be worried that in a year from now your departure will be an embarrassment? You may have built an incredible new work station and it's going to be so terrific and so cheap that the shareholders will say, "What, you let him do that?" Could that be in the back of their minds?
A. I wasn't aware that Apple owned me, you know. I don't think they do. I think that I own me. And for me not to be able to practice my craft ever again in my life seems odd. We're not going to take any technology, any proprietary ideas out of Apple. We're willing to put that in writing. It is the law, anyway. There is nothing, by the way, that says Apple can't compete with us if they think what we're doing is such a great idea. It is hard to think that a $2 billion company with 4,300-plus people couldn't compete with six people in blue jeans.

 

 

Popular posts from 产品随想的博客

BG投资十问(Baillie Gifford)

  1,公司是否能正面推动经济、社会或者文化发 展? 如果做不到,BG可能就不会再往下看了。比如军火、赌博类公司再便宜,BG不会去看。 2,公司销售额在5年之内能否翻倍? 为什么要讨论销售额?因为BG关注公司成长,销售额是比较简单直观的指标,而利润可有一些方法调节。所以,BG主要先关注销售额,再看现金流。 3,公司5年之后会怎么样? 这是未来5到10年或者5到15年的中间维度,一是看公司的成长空间究竟还有多大,二是考虑5年之后,公司的短期估值会不会下降,会不会变得成熟。 4,公司的竞争优势到底是什么?随着时间会变 强还是变弱? BG认为,如果公司的竞争优势是不断变弱的,将来在更远期挣回现金流的可能性就更低了。 5,公司是否有非常独特的文化?文化是否能够进化? 毕竟要投资这么长时间,对创始人和公司管理文化是非常关注的。特别喜欢创始人领导的公司,而不是说创始人什么都不干,创始人在做房地产,找了一些人在做新公司,要尽量避免这样的公司。 谈到进化在BG看来,大部分公司都会有大公司病,需要看它怎么能维持比较灵活的管理,变大之后还能够保持非常快速的成长,比如亚马逊的day one文化(注:就是始终处在 创业启动状态,充满迷茫和压力,但是充满创造力和颠覆思想 )。 6,公司过去的回报率怎么样? 一方面是考虑到公司的ROE(净资产收益率),二是考虑公司的Margins(利润),看它的过去是不是值得投资,如果每年ROE都不到10个点,可能长期来看也没什么意思。 7,ROE能不能随着时间增长? 有些公司一开始没有盈利,一直在烧钱,5年之后说不定ROE会到20%或者更高,它是一个动态过程。这样的公司BG也会投资,包括一些早期项目,很多公司都是没有盈利的。 8,公司怎么分配资本? 资本现金流无非就是5种方法:再投资、收购、还债、分红、回购股份,要看公司在某个阶段的资本分配是不是最优的。 如果公司明明可以发展更多,结果乱分红了;或者是明明到了特别成熟的时候,还不愿意分红,都是错误的分配资本。 9,公司怎样才能长成5倍? BG关注的是怎样,而不是能不能。这会强迫BG每个人去设想一些未来的可能性,包括公司现在的底层架构能不能够延伸到更多的业务。 比如,早期的亚马逊或者是阿里,连一个概念都没有,BG会考虑这个公司有没有这种机遇,以后去扩展到可触及的市场。 10,市场对公司有哪些误解,哪些事...

产品随想 | 周刊 第127期:晨光只开一刻钟,但比千年松,并无甚不同

Cherry Studio   https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio Cherry Studio is a desktop client that supports for multiple LLM providers. Support deepseek-r1 Aalto Repository beta   https://repo.aalto.fi/ Images, sounds and videos from Aalto University 这个系列,价值极高 Nokia Design Archive   https://nokiadesignarchive.aalto.fi/ 芬兰这个国家很了不起 对话影石刘靖康:两代未出现划时代的产品,就会沦为平庸的品牌   https://www.geekpark.net/news/308996 还挺喜欢这个创始人的,有一种海盗的内涵 从哈佛、明星创业者到酷家乐副总裁,苏奇的传奇   https://app.modaiyun.com/mdy/article/3FO4K4W0M259 WHO关于猫狗咬伤、抓伤的处理建议 动物咬伤: https://www.who.int/zh/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/animal-bites 狂犬病: https://www.who.int/zh/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/rabies 关于狂犬病的10个事实: https://www.who.int/zh/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/rabies INDIGO 新年直播(2025)   https://www.youtube.com/live/ZIgPvSDGAfY 对2024年AI发展的回顾部分特别好 Artab   https://github.com/get-artab/artab Get Inspired by the World's Greatest Artworks Every Time You Open a New Tab. Extension Available for Chrome, Edge, and...

产品随想 | 周刊 第126期:Think of your life as a rainbow arcing across the horizon of this world

FolderPaint   https://github.com/MichaelTr7/FolderPaint Folder colour changing application for macOS. 乔布斯说:“对于我和苹果公司的许多人来说,索尼的盛田昭夫是最大的灵感来源之一。我希望我们今天的所想所为能让他会心一笑。” 乔布斯甚至从索尼挖走了一位顶级设计师。哈特穆特·艾斯林格被苹果挖走前,已在 100 多种索尼产品的创造中发挥了重要作用。 供职于索尼时,艾斯林格所在的设计工作室与管理办公室和工厂车间享有同等地位。他说,这样有助于促进公司生产和设计团队之间在一定程度上达成团结,这正是乔布斯试图重建的团结。 艾斯林格指出:“乔布斯有能力洞察事物的好坏,却不知道如何实现以及如何通过组织去构建。因此,我们向苹果提出的第一个建议是,赋予设计师一定的话语权。” 斯卡利表示,乔布斯和盛田之间的深厚友谊和相互敬重可以归结为对于设计的共同热忱。 “他们以非常积极的方式产生了共鸣”,斯卡利说,“两位来自不同文化背景的创始人共聚一堂,这是非常难能可贵的。他们讨论设计原则,却从不谈及商业模式。” “Think of your life as a rainbow arcing across the horizon of this world. You appear, have a chance to blaze in the sky, then you disappear.” City Lights Bookstore   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Lights_Bookstore?useskin=vector 旧金山的城市之光独立书店 Vesuvio Cafe   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesuvio_Cafe?useskin=vector 好奇怪,这家Cafe居然没有太多的介绍 “One of the things that I was fortunate of was to see and understand the context of San Francisco through the eyes of Steve Jobs,” Mr. Ive said. “He kn...

产品随想 | 周刊 第68期:Glory to Z-Library

Products Anna’s Archive   https://annas-archive.org/ Search engine of shadow libraries: books, papers, comics, magazines. Z-Library不会消失,只会激励更多 ReVanced Manager   https://github.com/revanced/revanced-manager The official ReVanced Manager based on Flutter. YouTube免广告 Gopeed   https://github.com/monkeyWie/gopeed High speed downloader that supports all platforms. All Platforms,非常霸气,除了iOS,确实都支持了 The Twitter archive   https://github.com/timhutton/twitter-archive-parser Python code to parse a Twitter archive and output in various ways 逃离Twitter Ideas 吴晓波|“我们这是怎么了?”   https://chinadigitaltimes.net/chinese/680826.html 我辈需保持那股企业家的精气神 Worth Moving to Sweden as Engineers?   https://hongchao.me/living-and-working-in-sweden-as-engineers/ 瑞典工作10年的华人工程师,分享自己的看法 Murray Newton Rothbard 默里·罗思巴德   https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/穆瑞·羅斯巴德 米塞斯学生,也是推崇自由主义、开放社会 个人工具箱(2022 年 11 月 16 日更新)   https://github.com/pseudoyu/yu-tools 我的个人工具箱 (设备, macOS 软件, iOS Apps...) Design 2022台北...

产品随想 | 周刊 第39期:《自由秩序原理》

Products Exodus   https://github.com/Exodus-Privacy/exodus-android-app Exodus is an Android application that let you know what trackers are embedded in apps installed on your smartphone using the εxodus plateform. It let you also know the permissions required by any apps on your smartphone. 检测你Android机子获取权限、嵌入追踪SDK的 simplewall   https://github.com/henrypp/simplewall Simple tool to configure Windows Filtering Platform (WFP) which can configure network activity on your computer. Mem Reduct Lightweight real-time memory management application to monitor and clean system memory on your computer. 内存清理工具,Windows上挺多这类小工具,很有意思 Squad303   https://1920.in/ 提供大家一个方式,告诉俄罗斯人,乌克兰在发生什么 Chameleon   https://github.com/sereneblue/chameleon WebExtension port of Random Agent Spoofer 帮助隐匿浏览器信息 CanvasBlocker   https://github.com/kkapsner/CanvasBlocker 浏览器指纹识别是丧心病狂 Alpine Linux   https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/Alpine_Linux 以安全为理念的Linux分支 Wirecutter   https://www.nytimes.com...

产品随想 | 张鸣论中国传统政治

原始文章目录 张鸣:皇权不确定性下的统治术——传统中国官场机会主义溯源   https://www.aisixiang.com/data/68897.html 张鸣:从科举制到市场经济转型——官本位的源流及滥觞   https://www.aisixiang.com/data/59273.html 张鸣:权力边界何在,实话空间几许?——论中国政治传统中的权力与真理关系   https://www.aisixiang.com/data/67054.html Insight: 中国自秦汉以来一直是官僚化的帝制结构,虽然皇帝最终要凭借官僚这个中介才能统治国家,但官员的权力来源和合法性依据都是皇权。官僚机器只是帝制的“车轮”。所以,皇帝要怎么样,官员只要迎合,就能获利。只有在皇帝明显违反常识道理、造成重大灾祸之时,官员才可能凭借儒家伦理对皇帝提出批评。理性选择的结果使得官员更多地趋向于顺从皇帝。 ——符合历史以来的感知 中国尽管有两千多年官僚制的传统,但守规矩、遵法制、走程序的现代理性官僚制度却一直都没有建立起来。考试取官的确是理性官僚制的一个重要因素,但中国古代官僚制只是万里长征走完了第一步,然后就再也不走了。隋唐科举制建立的初衷也并非建设官僚体系,而是防止贵族垄断官职,强化君权。科举制度越来越严密,选拔出来的人才也愈发精英化。但是,官僚的行为却没有程式化和规法化。官员的个人行为偏好往往直接影响一地的发展。 ——如何再往前走一步,可以看看新加坡 官员的行为模式往往以皇帝的喜好为风向标。一般来说,皇帝喜欢什么,一个朝代就兴什么。汉初皇帝喜欢黄老,臣子们就清静无为;东汉皇帝喜欢儒生,则臣子们多为经学家;唐初皇帝喜人上书言事,则多诤谏之徒;到晚唐,皇帝喜欢佛教了,则多礼佛之士;清代嘉庆之后,皇帝提倡节俭,带头穿补丁衣服,则满朝文武衣服上都打了补丁,有的补丁比衣服本身还贵。 ——Interesting 皇帝行为的不确定性,势必导致官员行为无法程序化、规范化,而皇帝行为的不确定往往是由统治术决定的,属刻意为之。多数王朝都外儒内法,崇尚权术,甚至迷信权术。秦始皇和丞相李斯之间,有过一个小故事。李斯随从车马过盛,很是招摇,皇帝看了不高兴。随行的宦官就把这事告诉了李斯,李斯于是轻车简从,低调起来。秦始皇马上知道身边有人泄密,又审不出来,于是把当时在身边的人都杀...

信息流的初衷是节省用户时间

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/nMZzLkEe7Cfk6Wu5560m9w 讲述信息流前世今生,讽刺的是信息流发展之初是为了让用户在短时间内找到最需要自己关注的内容,现在却成为消磨时间、捕捉用户兴趣的一个作用。

A Tribute to a Great Artist: Steve Jobs

  Steve Jobs, who died October 5 after resigning in August as CEO of Apple, the company he co-founded, had many talents. But what set him apart from other computer wizards was his artistic sense. He continually used the word “taste” in explaining what was ready to be manufactured at Apple, and what wasn’t ready yet—what he had to reject. The Apple computer, the iPhone, the iPad and the iPod are all strikingly beautiful objects; the clarity of their visual design matches the way they function. It’s clear that Steve Jobs was an artist and that his artistry worked at many levels: it was a visual sensitivity that extended outward to a way of thinking about how things worked and how different variables could interact with each other in a pleasing harmony. Where did this ability come from? Jobs gave some credit for his success to a seemingly unlikely source—a course on calligraphy that he took as an undergraduate at Reed College, a course established by a maverick profes...

巴菲特致股东信-1969年

 编者笔记: 巴菲特正式清算合伙人企业。 我把它们视为实业,而非股票,如果长期而言实业的业绩良好,那么股票也会有着同样的表现。 我不想解散一个雇佣了1100人的生意,尤其在管理层已经在努力改善公司相对整体行业的表现,而且也取得了合理结果的时候,同时该业务目前尚不需要额外的资本投入。 但是如果未来我们面临需要投入大量资本,或者该业务遭受相当程度的损失时,我将做出不同的决定。 原文: 1969 年 5 月 29 日 致合伙人: 大概在 18 个月以前,我曾经给你们致信,认为投资环境和我个人情况的变化将导致我对我 们未来业绩预期做出调整。 我当时所讨论的投资环境 ,已经变得更加的恶劣且令人沮丧 。也许我仅仅是缺乏从精神层面 进行调整的能力。(正如一位评论家对超过 40 岁的证券分析师所评价的那样:“他们知道太 多如今已不再适用的东西 。”) 虽然如此,就我看来: (1) 在过去的二十年中,对于数量(定量)分析方法所能把握的机会 之水已经逐渐干涸 ,到今天可以说是已经完全枯竭了 ;( 2 )我们的资金基数已经达到一个亿 , 也就是说不超过三百万的投资量对于我们净资产的影响几乎可以忽略不计 ,实际上我们的投 资标的的市值已经不能低于一亿美元 ;( 3 )大量地对于投资的专注已经导致市场的交易行为 变得极度追求短期的利润,市场的投机性大大增加。 在 1967 年 10 月的信中我亦提到个人境遇的变化是我调整我们未来收益预期的最重要的原 因。我表达了自己不想再在合伙公司上注入我 100% 的精力的愿望。然而在过去的 18 个月 中我完全没有做到这一点。我曾经写到 :“希望随着预期的降低,我的对此投入的个人努力 也可以随之降低 。”然而实际上完全不是这样,我发现只要我一天还在管理合伙企业,我就 完全无法让自己投入到其它与之无关的东西上去。我不想让自己成为一个永远管理着资金 , 追逐着投资收益的疯狂的兔子,而唯一让我放缓脚步的办法,就是将其停止。 所以,在年底之前,我希望所有的有限合伙人都能正式地得知我的退休愿望。 1969 年 10 月 9 日 致合伙人: 以下是接下来我认为对于我的退休将要涉及的事情: ( 1 )向你们介绍一下 Bill...