News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @03:44AM (#34229303)
You're suggesting an unreal scenario, so the thought experiment isn't going to do much good, IMO. Each employee gets to make that call themselves, "do I want to be treated badly?"

Fresh graduates may not realise they are being treated badly, lacking a frame of reference. Immigrants may be on a visa where they have no choice but to put up with it or leave the country.

Locals who've been around a bit, who know their discipline, the proven (local) best of the best? They don't stay on teams led by bullies.

Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by mshake2 on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @03:57AM (#34229388)
It's not an unreal scenario at all. It's entirely plausible that a company falls apart when lacking the specific motivators and pressures that Jobs brought, and therefore never really exists in the first place. What's unreal about that?
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @04:41AM (#34229630)
The unreal part is there being only two options. Most dichotomies are false.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by mshake2 on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @04:44AM (#34229655)
I addressed why the hypothetical is limited to two options, and taking a subset of plausible scenarios does not reduce the plausibility of the selected scenarios.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @04:56AM (#34229714)
P(a) = 0.1, P(b) = 0.1, P(c) = 0.8, "Oh, let's only look at cases a and b".
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by mshake2 on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @05:00AM (#34229741)
Yes, because a and b represent a specific combination I said I was interested in exploring. What you've shown doesn't lower the plausibility of those scenarios. Are you being intentionally contrarian or is there a reason why you are trying to muddy a simple thought experiment?
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @05:22AM (#34229852)
That makes it unreal. It changed the environment too much to exclude it. Ignoring it breaks stuff. I'm not saying thought experiments are bad — do them often myself — I'm saying my response to get thought experiment itself is: it can't work like that (riffing of an unrelated but recent comment from yesterday where I'm the one doing the thought experiment as an existence proof, it's a "spherical cow in a vacuum" model).
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by mshake2 on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @05:31AM (#34229891)
It's not a nonsensical "spherical cow in vacuum" thought experiment to say "Pixar exists but some employees are treated bad" vs "Pixar doesn't exist". If you think that it becomes impossible for a rational mind to weigh those two choices, then there's no point in me continuing this discussion with you.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @05:43AM (#34229953)
If Pixar didn't exist, the same people would do the same (or close enough) work under a different brand. Quite possibly with each other. That's as distinct as two identical dice placed in no specific order, i.e. not. Ergo, not a realistic scenario.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ericd on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @08:55AM (#34231293)
No, not at all. Environment and the group of people they’re working with plays an enormous role in the work people do.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by spoonjim on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @04:23AM (#34229534)
Are you claiming that only new grads and immigrants fearful of deportation worked at Pixar?
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by ben_w on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @04:41AM (#34229639)
Depends on how much of Jobs' current reputation is accurate vs. mythologising.
Re:Sergey Brin: “Irate Call from Steve Jobs” by spoonjim on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @10:18PM (#34241595)
Jobs was a well-known sociopath but also people of the highest talent level fought to work for him because he was a great executive