6 ms·

For one, Woz is still alive.

scarface74 6y ago
Not speaking about Woz vs Jobs specifically of course. But, having a longer life is not necessarily better than having a shorter successful life. I would rather die at 60 with no regrets than live to be 90 with a lifetime of regrets.
- dragonsky67 6y ago
  Spoken like a person who is nowhere near 60 years old.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Is 46 close enough?
- Konohamaru 6y ago
  When you're alive you can change and grow but when you're dead it's final. 90 with a lifetime of regrets is a closure blow out sale bargain.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Let’s say I really wanted to compete in a triathlon, have kids and see them grow up and have families of their own, be a surgeon, etc. How many of those could I do starting at 60? There are lots of life choices it’s easy to make at 25 that are not easy to make 65. Even something as simple as 3 month cross country road trip. My parents retired at 55 and did that twice. My parents are still independent, but with their eyesight and hearing going they couldn’t decide at 75 to hop in their car and spend three months on the road.
    - emteycz 6y ago
      Healthspan and lifespan of people is continuously improving, and I am hopeful the science has just started. Maybe in 2100 people will be as able at 70 as they're at 30 now. Maybe many people will grow old and unable, but then scientific development will let them cure themselves, and have a second life of sorts. I donate to Lifespan.io in the hope of this.
    - Konohamaru 6y ago
      Changing your mind, repentance, and learning are extremely important and possible for all 90-year-olds except for the severely demented. I've known one 89-year-old who changed her mind on a very important (negative) core value she had her whole life.
      - scarface74 6y ago
        So how does “changing your mind” lead to a better quality of life and having all of the options in your 90s that you have in your 30s.
        Konohamaru 6y ago
        Virtue is a better quality of life in itself.
    - spfzero 6y ago
      Kind of cherry-picked there from the set of things 60 is too old to start. What about having 30 more years to fix a wrong you once committed, repay a debt, help give some worthy person or cause a boost?
      - scarface74 6y ago
        At 60 years old, unless I stayed in shape, I doubt I would be able to run half marathons in a decent time, enjoy a decade of being a fitness instructor, fail miserably at real estate and marriage and recover from both (reset my career, get remarried, and still have enough time to rebuild my net worth), etc. I lost a large part of my net worth between those two things - but I had the income to both enjoy life and to recover. Everything I mentioned above happened between the time I was 25-35. Some good, some bad but I don’t regret any of it. I wouldn’t take nearly the risks in my 60s that I did in my 30s. If I broke a bone in my 20s while doing some of the crazy stuff I did, I could heel. Not so much in my 60s. I got a chance to start over with a new family making better choices in my 30s. I was still young enough at 35 to run with my sons, take them to the gym with me. At 85 not so much. Are we really arguing that there are opportunities you have between 30-50 that you can’t make up for between 70-90? Would you rather have been Steve Jobs or Ronald Wayne?
- keiferski 6y ago
  Let him who crawls enamour'd of decay, Cling to his couch, and sicken years away: Heave his thick breath, and shake his palsied head; Ours - the fresh turf; and not the feverish bed. While gasp by gasp he falters forth his soul, Ours with one pang - one bound - escapes control. - Byron, The Corsair
- TheRealNGenius 6y ago
  People here seem to be very close minded with regards to this. But I agree, living longer is not necessarily better. They didn’t even say that it was always the case, just that it might not be. Geez. “Death is very likely the single best invention of life” Steve said that. You don’t have to agree. But you can’t deny that these people who might not have lived very long have changed things: Alan Turing, Albert Einstein, John von Neumann, and Steve Jobs. To definitively declare that you must live long to live a fulfilling life is insulting to those who haven’t the opportunity.
29athrowaway 6y ago
One unpopular opinion about Jobs is: he pursued absurd, unsustainable and likely unhealthy diets. One of his diets was a poorly designed "fruitarian" diet consisting of eating one kind of fruit for weeks, or drinking excessive amounts of fruit juice like Odwalla carrot juice... or sometimes, just fasting for long periods of time. Very few people live like this, so there is not much medical literature about the implications of this lifestyle. I think this could have contributed to his health decline.
- grugagag 6y ago
  Pancreatic cancer could be genetic but we basically don’t know what causes it. The diet theory is a bit speculative imo
  - 29athrowaway 6y ago
    Steve Jobs' diet and eating habits were extremely unusual and we simply do not know if they were viable or not.
    - ampdepolymerase 6y ago
      Only fasting currently has any scientific support as a method to inhibit cancer growth. https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-resources/cancer-and-nutrition/faq/cancer-and-fasting-calorie-restriction https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-res...
  - sswezey 6y ago
    Jobs attempted to defeat his cancer initially through diet alone. His cancer was operable and potentially curable, but he wasted too much time chasing fringe diets and it cost him his life: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/10/24/steve-jobs-cancer-treatment-regrets/#7dae60797d2e https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/10/24/steve-j...
    - alasdair_ 6y ago

Not speaking about Woz vs Jobs specifically of course. But, having a longer life is not necessarily better than having a shorter successful life. I would rather die at 60 with no regrets than live to be 90 with a lifetime of regrets.

dragonsky67 6y ago
Spoken like a person who is nowhere near 60 years old.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Is 46 close enough?
Konohamaru 6y ago
When you're alive you can change and grow but when you're dead it's final. 90 with a lifetime of regrets is a closure blow out sale bargain.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Let’s say I really wanted to compete in a triathlon, have kids and see them grow up and have families of their own, be a surgeon, etc. How many of those could I do starting at 60? There are lots of life choices it’s easy to make at 25 that are not easy to make 65. Even something as simple as 3 month cross country road trip. My parents retired at 55 and did that twice. My parents are still independent, but with their eyesight and hearing going they couldn’t decide at 75 to hop in their car and spend three months on the road.
  - emteycz 6y ago
    Healthspan and lifespan of people is continuously improving, and I am hopeful the science has just started. Maybe in 2100 people will be as able at 70 as they're at 30 now. Maybe many people will grow old and unable, but then scientific development will let them cure themselves, and have a second life of sorts. I donate to Lifespan.io in the hope of this.
  - Konohamaru 6y ago
    Changing your mind, repentance, and learning are extremely important and possible for all 90-year-olds except for the severely demented. I've known one 89-year-old who changed her mind on a very important (negative) core value she had her whole life.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      So how does “changing your mind” lead to a better quality of life and having all of the options in your 90s that you have in your 30s.
      - Konohamaru 6y ago
        Virtue is a better quality of life in itself.
  - spfzero 6y ago
    Kind of cherry-picked there from the set of things 60 is too old to start. What about having 30 more years to fix a wrong you once committed, repay a debt, help give some worthy person or cause a boost?
    - scarface74 6y ago
      At 60 years old, unless I stayed in shape, I doubt I would be able to run half marathons in a decent time, enjoy a decade of being a fitness instructor, fail miserably at real estate and marriage and recover from both (reset my career, get remarried, and still have enough time to rebuild my net worth), etc. I lost a large part of my net worth between those two things - but I had the income to both enjoy life and to recover. Everything I mentioned above happened between the time I was 25-35. Some good, some bad but I don’t regret any of it. I wouldn’t take nearly the risks in my 60s that I did in my 30s. If I broke a bone in my 20s while doing some of the crazy stuff I did, I could heel. Not so much in my 60s. I got a chance to start over with a new family making better choices in my 30s. I was still young enough at 35 to run with my sons, take them to the gym with me. At 85 not so much. Are we really arguing that there are opportunities you have between 30-50 that you can’t make up for between 70-90? Would you rather have been Steve Jobs or Ronald Wayne?
keiferski 6y ago
Let him who crawls enamour'd of decay, Cling to his couch, and sicken years away: Heave his thick breath, and shake his palsied head; Ours - the fresh turf; and not the feverish bed. While gasp by gasp he falters forth his soul, Ours with one pang - one bound - escapes control. - Byron, The Corsair
TheRealNGenius 6y ago
People here seem to be very close minded with regards to this. But I agree, living longer is not necessarily better. They didn’t even say that it was always the case, just that it might not be. Geez. “Death is very likely the single best invention of life” Steve said that. You don’t have to agree. But you can’t deny that these people who might not have lived very long have changed things: Alan Turing, Albert Einstein, John von Neumann, and Steve Jobs. To definitively declare that you must live long to live a fulfilling life is insulting to those who haven’t the opportunity.

29athrowaway 6y ago

One unpopular opinion about Jobs is: he pursued absurd, unsustainable and likely unhealthy diets. One of his diets was a poorly designed "fruitarian" diet consisting of eating one kind of fruit for weeks, or drinking excessive amounts of fruit juice like Odwalla carrot juice... or sometimes, just fasting for long periods of time. Very few people live like this, so there is not much medical literature about the implications of this lifestyle. I think this could have contributed to his health decline.

grugagag 6y ago
Pancreatic cancer could be genetic but we basically don’t know what causes it. The diet theory is a bit speculative imo
- 29athrowaway 6y ago
  Steve Jobs' diet and eating habits were extremely unusual and we simply do not know if they were viable or not.
  - ampdepolymerase 6y ago
    Only fasting currently has any scientific support as a method to inhibit cancer growth. https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-resources/cancer-and-nutrition/faq/cancer-and-fasting-calorie-restriction https://osher.ucsf.edu/patient-care/integrative-medicine-res...
- sswezey 6y ago
  Jobs attempted to defeat his cancer initially through diet alone. His cancer was operable and potentially curable, but he wasted too much time chasing fringe diets and it cost him his life: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/10/24/steve-jobs-cancer-treatment-regrets/#7dae60797d2e https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/10/24/steve-j...
  - alasdair_ 6y ago