I love Wozniak, but is track record of founding companies after Apple hasn't exactly been stellar. Anybody else here remember WoZ? Woz-U? That VC fund he co-founded? Entrepreneurship clearly isn't his strong suit.
I was at an event where Joe Lonsdale spoke a couple months ago.
He took questions after giving a short speech.
One person asked what he thinks about blockchain-based businesses.
Joe basically said "These days, in Silicon Valley, if anyone brings up a business idea that involves blockchain, that's how you know that team doesn't know what they're doing."
Basically, to paraphrase, people trying to throw blockchain into business concepts is like throwing like spaghetti against walls. Investors, according to Joe Lonsdale, do not typically find such ideas respectable-- in fact, the opposite: they seem to find them comical and gimmicky.
I talked to Joe briefly on the phone about ten years ago. He has a very sharp mind for financial related startups and his insights truly impressed me. If he said this, it says something to me.
Blockchain scammers just love to latch onto celebrities with a cause, and feed off of their reputations. It's a pity it's happened to Woz again.
Who remembers how Imogen Heap's blockchain based "Creative Passport" would solve all the music industry's efficiency and fairness problems? Her mi.mu gloves are pretty cool though, but they don't need blockchain.
Imogen Heap: Mycelia's Creative Passport and reimagining the music industry
Multi award winning artist Imogen Heap shares how she's creating a fairer music industry with Mycelia's Creative Passport and demonstrates how to make music with her wearable tech mi.mu gloves.
>Heap developed the Mi.Mu Gloves, a line of musical gloves, as well as a blockchain-based music-sharing program, Mycelia. She also composed the music for the West End/Broadway play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Over the course of her career, she has received two Grammy Awards, one Ivor Novello Award, and one Drama Desk Award. In July 2019, Heap was awarded an honorary doctorate from Berklee College of Music.
Imogen Heap's Mycelia: An Artists' Approach for a Fair Trade Music Business, Inspired by Blockchain
>“It sounds a bit far fetched maybe right now, but I really believe it’s attainable,” Heap adds. “We just need musicians to put their foot forward and sign up for something that isn’t really there yet. There’s no ecosystem there, there’s no marketplace there. Will you put the flag in the ground showing that you’re here?”
That sounds awfully reductive. While it's obviously true that many blockchain-based businesses are/were just trying to cash in on hype alone, that doesn't mean that ALL ideas involving a blockchain are bad.
Just that all people involving a blockchain are bad, who will fuck up even the few good ideas involving a blockchain, in their quest to get rich quick without actually doing any difficult work or providing any useful services.
I'm sure there exist a few rusty metal sewage snakes in need of lubrication, but that's not what most people are selling snake oil for.
So you actually think these scammers who have latched onto Woz are legitimate??! Have you sent them your money yet? How's that going, are you at the top of the pyramid? How much are you in for? Are you rich quick yet?
The situation is bad enough that anyone with an idea that isn't bad would do best to rename or obscure the "blockchain" connection.
Not only does attaching to it act as a fairly reliable indicator of fraud or cluelessness, but it also means that you'll be constantly wasting your time deflecting suggestions to copy practices which are illegal, unethical, or just technically unsound from the majority of other 'blockchain' based ventures.
One thing Joe mentioned was the potential for illicit activity within the encrypted data inherent in blockchain.
He brought up an example whereby some user could hide something very illegal within the encrypted data.
To be honest, I don't know enough about block chain or the blockchain economy, but the idea of hiding data/URLs related to very illicit content definitely makes me think it could be abused. Especially since decryption would be necessary to uncover the abusive usage (i.e. the concealing of illicit content/URLs to illicit content)
What's charming about Wozniak is that pretty early in his life, he made enough money to follow whatever whimsical idea struck him, and he never worried too much about failure anymore.
The less charming aspect is that I don't think he really had much skin in the game in any of his post-Apple efforts, and some people who went along with them probably could not afford their failure as easily as he could (although I've never heard first hand testimony to that effect).
And this particular company seems downright snake oil, with Wozniak serving as a figurehead. John McAfee with less sex, drugs, and harm to whales.
The guy is nerding out. In his interviews it never seems like he cares about the business side just the tech side. I kinda hope that some day I can just create companies to nerd out.
where people argue whether Wozniak really qualifies as a successful entrepreneur or not
OK, I'll bite.
First of all nobody is denying that he/Apple was extremely successful. The argument is if entrepreneurship was his strong point, and I think most people would agree that it isn't. Nobody is denying that he was probably one of the greatest programmers of his generation and that is engineering genius was fundamental to kickstarting one of the most successful tech companies in the world.
You can absolutely found an extremely successful company without being a great entrepreneur if other things align, like having a co-founder who is a great entrepreneur and having a truly groundbreaking product.
A a successful entrepreneur is someone who founds a profitable corporation. Whatever skills are required to do that is completely arguable and also completely irrelevant, if the corporation is indeed successful.
Entrepreneurship is not being good at sales. It's not being a good leader. It's also not being a good coder and it's not being good at whatever metric you might feel is important. It's about founding an (eventually) profitable company.
sounds like a case of the good old arguing over the definition of words. You seem to interpret "successful" as "technically successful", that is having achieved success at one point, whereas others might be more inclined to interpret it as "skilled" or "consistently successful"
(which is to say, there isn't actually a real disagreement here, except over how language is parsed)
i think he definitely contributed to the success of apple in a big way, and it's hard to argue otherwise, but not really due to his entrepreneurial expertise
The Woz is a legendary engineer, no one doubts that.
He's a worse-than-average entrepreneur, and I'd wager that without the other Steve, the Apple I would have been one of the many promising microcomputers which fizzled out.
Really? This will sound petty, but there is no redeeming quality about Jobs, he surely seems to have been an awful person. All his strong points: "Taste", ruthlessness,"reality distortion field" are more the traits of a sociopath than anything else. Great if he is managing a company you have stocks in, but you could say the same if he were managing your "plantation".
