>Your appeal to his business success is a complete non-sequitur.
Sorry, but the parent wanted to downplay Jobs, not just in his technical profeciency but in general (hence the "visionary" label, which can mean "nothing at all" etc). So my reference to his business success was to counter-balance that. And it shows a kind of "10 x" Wolf type, which is what we're actually discussing, in business too. Hardly a non sequitur.
Second, if you're going down that road, the parents comments about how Jobs had "pathological narcissism" and about how he couldn't "stand him" are also non-sequiturs in a discussion about the Wolf type, and wether Jobs was one. How are his personal feelings towards Jobs revelant in this discusion?
The fact that you seem to revel with the "raging arsehole" accusation and dislike my "business success" comments, doesn't make the first any more relevant.
The parent actually has personal experience working with Steve Jobs, which isn't something a lot of people on this forum can say. That makes his views on the man much more interesting than yours or mine, whether or not you agree with him.
The 'Wolf' type we are discussing is basically a cartoon superhero outfit for aspiring engineers to wear. Lopp is adept at these kind of character sketches of fantasy nerd stereotypes (he doesn't play by anyone's rules, but he also works miracles!). The fact that no one in the thread seems to be able to agree quite what it means demonstrate what a nebulously defined concept it is.
I'd much rather sit and read some Steve Jobs stories from someone who was actually there.
>The fact that no one in the thread seems to be able to agree quite what it means demonstrate what a nebulously defined concept it is.
Isn't "agree to quite what it means" a nebulously defined concept itself?
Some disagreement you can kind in any topic, even the most objective and well established ones.
But more specifically, the Wolf base description is just what the original (T)FA says -- the variations in the comments are because people draw upon their own individual encounters with such types, which of course differ in details.
Sorry, but the parent wanted to downplay Jobs, not just in his technical profeciency but in general (hence the "visionary" label, which can mean "nothing at all" etc). So my reference to his business success was to counter-balance that. And it shows a kind of "10 x" Wolf type, which is what we're actually discussing, in business too. Hardly a non sequitur.
Second, if you're going down that road, the parents comments about how Jobs had "pathological narcissism" and about how he couldn't "stand him" are also non-sequiturs in a discussion about the Wolf type, and wether Jobs was one. How are his personal feelings towards Jobs revelant in this discusion?
The fact that you seem to revel with the "raging arsehole" accusation and dislike my "business success" comments, doesn't make the first any more relevant.