I think it's convenient to give a leader all of the credit for what is a massive effort by a massive organization. I think it's convenient to say that a massiv

I think it's convenient to give a leader all of the credit for what is a massive effort by a massive organization. I think it's convenient to say that a massive organization is doing well only because of that leader and not, at least occasionally, despite that leader. Moreover, a lot of educated people understand that graphs have incredibly complex behavior and can't be well understood from the "first" node a stimulus enters through and yet we are quick to laud Jobs for all of the successes of his network; it's like this insane pyramid scheme of credit attribution.