5 ms·

There was much fan fare over all the technology Bill Gates put into his house. It was interesting to read, especially in the context of home automation these d

There was much fan fare over all the technology Bill Gates put into his house. It was interesting to read, especially in the context of home automation these days. I worked with people who helped Jim Clark with some of his home automation in the early/mid 2000s. My point in general was I think the Silicon Valley elders of old, Grove, Moore, Packards (I know multiple individuals who benefitted from the Packard Children's fund w/ pre-mes. (sp?), etc. were much more community and outward focused than that which we see today. There are people here and there, but a lot of what gets glamorized or talked about tend to be more selfishly oriented individuals. Gates, early on, stated his kids weren't getting a huge part of his fortune, I consider his works on par (via the Gates Foundation) as those of the Packards. That said, the Packards have been very local vs. Gates more international (maybe it's need, size of endowment, etc).

setpatchaddress 11y ago
I think this is viewing the past with rose-tinted glasses. I recall the same exact complaints being leveled at the 1980's tech generation.
- jmspring 11y ago
  I'm being selective about comparisons, but it's a matter or proportion, and things then were way more subdued. Ellison, Jobs (mainly on the woodside mansion and not being charity oriented), Clark, etc certainly contrast with those I mentioned. I think 80s-90s had seriously strong personalities emerge that get to the core of what you mention. Yet around that was much more down to earth philanthropy, etc. I don't see that same balance today.
  - Vegard7 11y ago
    I think it depends on the route they take up the mountain. You can be brilliant or you can be brilliant at taking shortcuts. The shortcut takers are generally more insecure and that manifests in different behavior once they reach the top.
cweiss 11y ago
>My point in general was I think the Silicon Valley elders of old, Grove, Moore, Packards (I know multiple individuals who benefitted from the Packard Children's fund w/ pre-mes. (sp?), etc. were much more community and outward focused than that which we see today. That is a fascinating observation. I was alive and in the biz back then, but I've burned an awful lot of brain cells between then and now and don't have a particularly objectiv eview of things. Why do you think folks then were outward focused? Was there less competition so more focus on "doing something really cool", or leftover 60's 'free love' culture, or less shitty traffic in Silicon Valley, or...?
em500 11y ago
> That said, the Packards have been very local vs. Gates more international (maybe it's need, size of endowment, etc). Given the international needs are fare more pressing, I'd say the Gates have the right objective.

setpatchaddress 11y ago

I think this is viewing the past with rose-tinted glasses. I recall the same exact complaints being leveled at the 1980's tech generation.

jmspring 11y ago
I'm being selective about comparisons, but it's a matter or proportion, and things then were way more subdued. Ellison, Jobs (mainly on the woodside mansion and not being charity oriented), Clark, etc certainly contrast with those I mentioned. I think 80s-90s had seriously strong personalities emerge that get to the core of what you mention. Yet around that was much more down to earth philanthropy, etc. I don't see that same balance today.
- Vegard7 11y ago
  I think it depends on the route they take up the mountain. You can be brilliant or you can be brilliant at taking shortcuts. The shortcut takers are generally more insecure and that manifests in different behavior once they reach the top.

cweiss 11y ago

>My point in general was I think the Silicon Valley elders of old, Grove, Moore, Packards (I know multiple individuals who benefitted from the Packard Children's fund w/ pre-mes. (sp?), etc. were much more community and outward focused than that which we see today. That is a fascinating observation. I was alive and in the biz back then, but I've burned an awful lot of brain cells between then and now and don't have a particularly objectiv eview of things. Why do you think folks then were outward focused? Was there less competition so more focus on "doing something really cool", or leftover 60's 'free love' culture, or less shitty traffic in Silicon Valley, or...?

em500 11y ago

> That said, the Packards have been very local vs. Gates more international (maybe it's need, size of endowment, etc). Given the international needs are fare more pressing, I'd say the Gates have the right objective.