Someone here correctly commented how this post showed Reddit level discussion and team based upmanship. You cannot trace the level of influence in a one-dimensi

Someone here correctly commented how this post showed Reddit level discussion and team based upmanship. You cannot trace the level of influence in a one-dimensional number line, of any two successful people or companies. Who has had more influence, Facebook, Twitter or even Friendster? pg or avc? Such questions are stupid, just like Erdos-Bacon numbers. They are good for friendly banter, but don't have any real meaning. I replied to nirvana about how the word inventing does not mean anything. And yet he and you kept on debating on minutiae. Many techie people from India look up to MS and Google as opposed to say Apple or Amazon, partly because their influence is more apparent, so I understand your affinity for them. But attributing invention or success to something which can be attributed to random events and network effects, is a bit off by standards here. I did not down vote anyone, just making a general comment. Things are never so black and white, grab a good book, read some scientific (non-CS) papers, you will probably have a broader perspective. I would recommend starting with the massive bibliography at the back of The Black Swan (Taleb).