9 ms·
It's not naive to try and be good and not exploit every situation to the best outcome for yourself, that's the whole point. How can people believe him to be so
by vasco 1y ago
It's not naive to try and be good and not exploit every situation to the best outcome for yourself, that's the whole point. How can people believe him to be so brilliant but also naive? Don't they see it? It doesn't take a smart man to see an apple and take it all for himself.
- moolcool 1y ago"If you’re so smart, why aren’t you kind?"
- glitchc 1y agoBecause people take advantage of your kindness and leave you feeling used.
- jameson 1y agoIt's the sad reality of the society we live in. Money matters the most. Nothing else. Kind people always get taken advantage of at work. Others take credit and then left abandoned once there's no more value to the company. I guess that's just capitalism.
- albumen 1y agoYou need to move into a different industry/society. These things are not ubiquitous.
- bonestamp2 1y agoAgreed. We call those people assholes. We try our best to avoid hiring those people and we weed them out of our company as fast as possible if they're discovered. We also try to have as flat a structure as possible so nobody is taking credit for anyone else's work and ideally many of us are working together so we all share the glory or frustration when something goes well or not.
- tharkun__ 1y agoI do think the flat hierarchy thing is commendable for many reasons. That said, don't think that just because you (try to) have few bosses that there isn't some form of hierarchy in which people don't take credit for other people's work. Sure, maybe there's no boss by title that people suck up to and take credit for stuff to look good to them. But there very definitely will be the "alphas" in the group that everyone looks up to and wants to look good to and the taking credit for stuff will be done to impress those people. So, if you weed out this kind of stuff successfully well enough, again, I commend you. But I doubt it's as complete as you may want to think. It's just a different looking game of favours and sucking up to with less easily visible (can't just look at title to figure out who to suck up to) lines. For some people this will be positive as they're good at figuring out who to suck up to in that situation while others may need the title to figure that out. I bet many socially awkward / socially less aware people find it easier to navigate titles they can read in an org chart than sniffing these out of the "sociosphere".
- WalterBright 1y agoThere is no society where this doesn't happen.
- distances 1y agoNever has a colleague taken credit for the work I've done. On the contrary, often in demos and other presentations they've thanked or acknowledged my support even when they didn't need to if they were the driver. I know the world can be harsh but my work life experience gives me no reason at all to be cynical.
- szundi 1y ago[dead]
- moolcool 1y agoI think this is a cynical take-- you can be kind without being a doormat.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- kulahan 1y agoIt's a very difficult balance to strike imo. People do take niceness and humor as signs that you're not quite as "professional". Of course, other people don't make this mistake, but we don't live in a vacuum - sometimes the jellybrains have control over our promotions.
- turtlebro 1y agoThat's because niceness and humor are often just a mask for being unsure, inconcise, or at worst plain unkind. Being kind is much harder, it requires thoroughly judging the situation, including considering own interests, and then responding in a genuine manner.
- BobbyJo 1y agoThe difficulty is why it requires intelligence to achieve. It is easy to be mean, and easy to be kind to your own detriment. Being kind while still thriving yourself takes thought.
- swat535 1y agoI think people are confusing what kindness means here. It’s not about not protecting yourself against abuse but rather not taking advantage of people. Being kind doesn’t mean you can’t compete or strategize but rather don’t cheat if you do. Compassion and acts of charity is kindness.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- lokimedes 1y agoIt requires ones own mind to fell “taken advantage of” - if one is smart enough to be kind, one most remember to be kind to oneself as well, and not care about what the sad critters gets from the leftovers. Stoicism promote exactly this virtue of understanding that you are in control of interpreting your own feelings.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- whatevertrevor 1y agoOn the other hand, your feelings don't exist in a vacuum, disconnected from your external state. If you genuinely feel taken advantage of, no amount of self-delusion is going to make you truly over it, until you acknowledge the source of it, and take steps to protect yourself against it in the future. Very easy to over-extend stoicism to your own detriment, physically and mentally.
- antonymoose 1y agoI really hate that you’re downvoted here - it’s a sad truth, too many in this world are here to “get the bag” and will do this to you. Over and over.
- QuantumFunnel 1y agoEspecially people in this forum. Tech is a magnet for these types.
- jibal 1y agoI'm pleased that such a cynical rationalization for not being a good person was downvoted.
- bodge5000 1y agoUnfortunately it's this attitude which perpetuates those kinds of actions. Of course it never starts off that way, it starts off as just wanting to protect yourself from harm, but you can eventually justify just about anything with the argument that its necessary for your "survival" (not literal survival, of course, but you get the idea). "If I don't exploit this person's kindness now, I'll fall behind those who do and they'll use that leverage against me" gives you some idea
- glitchc 1y agoActually everyone starts off kind. That many people ends up that way speaks to the core of the human condition.
- bodge5000 1y agoSorry, by "it doesnt start off that way" I didn't mean that people don't start off kind, I meant that people don't start off excusing exploitation
- pbhjpbhj 1y agoHow so? Babies will bite their mothers trying to get food - it's instinctive, but it's not kind. Kindness needs to be taught despite any natural propensity towards it.
- NalNezumi 1y ago>Actually everyone starts off kind You only need to hang around toddlers or teens for less than a day to realize people do not start off kind. People start off egocentric. Unaware or unable to take in to account the people around them are individuals with conflicting wants to you. Also unaware that we are egocentric BUT with social instinct built in to us: if we are surrounded by miserable people, or people angry at us, we don't feel good either. So we learn that kindness, while sometimes initially painful or less opportunistic, in the long term leads to satisfaction.
- AIorNot 1y agoSee: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4Rpd72tq8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym4Rpd72tq8
- jachee 1y ago“Do not mistake my kindness for weakness.” is a handy mantra to help avoid that.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- georgeecollins 1y agoIf you are so smart, why are people taking advantage of you?
- jibal 1y agoThat's a rationalization ... a justification for being unkind. Kind people simply don't say such things.
- delusional 1y agoThere's a pretty significant difference between the statements: "You shouldn't say Woz is naive, because what Woz is ought to not be seen as naive" and "You shouldn't say Woz is naive, because most other people wouldn't understand him as naive" and it's unclear to me which of those to statements you mean. I too have been lucky enough to hear him speak, and he very much does have this naivete of youth in the way he speaks. He has this very simple and straight forward way to view his contribution, along with a very simple motivation of "it makes me happy" that does feel naive. I don't think he's nearly as naive as he comes off, but I think he wants to be seen as naive, because his personal philosophy is one that places naivete in high regard. He wants to follow happiness, and happiness can oftentimes be a little naive.
- antonvs 1y ago> along with a very simple motivation of "it makes me happy" that does feel naive. Why does that feel naive to you, though? To me, that seems like an issue with your definition of naivety.
- Swizec 1y ago> Why does that feel naive to you, though? The 3 ladders. People on the sociopaths (Elites) ladder think of everyone else – the clueless (educated gentry) and economic losers (labour) – as naive. The clueless ladder comes off as most naive. Labour knows they're losing and focuses on their own thing. Sociopaths know they're winning and focus on power accumulation. The clueless don't notice any of this and focus on bettering the world or whatever. https://alexdanco.com/2021/01/22/the-michael-scott-theory-of-social-class/ https://alexdanco.com/2021/01/22/the-michael-scott-theory-of...
- deeg 1y agoI debated with myself on whether to use "naive" but it seems the most appropriate description. I barely know Woz outside of a 3-hour lecture but it appears that Jobs took advantage of his naivete, lying to him on multiple occasions. It worked out (financially) for Woz and he seems to have a great attitude about it, one of the reasons I admire him. He seems to successfully walk the line of not caring if people take advantage of him while not getting wrecked. I think it fair to consider that a facet of being naive.
- cyanydeez 1y agoIts naive not to program defensively.
- firefax 1y agoBut what is the "best outcome" when you have your house paid off and ample savings? He got ripped off by Jobs early on, but Jobs also let him do the work he wanted -- it's rare to have someone as good as Woz was also understand marketing. Jobs is deified too much, but he did bring something to the table in their business relationship. Anyways, he seems to have protected himself well later on, was able to do good (stories of him giving stock to ppl left out early on, that kind of thing) -- people hyperfocus on one very specific thing (Jobs ripping him off in the atari days) when it's a small point in a much larger life.
- Aeolun 1y agoHe got (maybe) ripped off by Jobs, but at the end of the day, what did that get Jobs? Jobs is dead, and Woz is still here, apparently perfectly happy.
- RyanOD 1y agoThe death of anyone from a disease like cancer is tragic.
- arunabha 1y agoAgreed. I think the point was that Woz was definitely less rich than Jobs(not poor though) and seems to have had a far happier life than Jobs. In some sense, Woz had what Jobs never had. Woz was blessed with having enough.
- wkat4242 1y agoYes that's what I don't understand about most of the ultra-rich. They keep wanting more despite having enough to spend millions every day for the rest of their lives. Tesla can't stop throwing tens of billions in bonuses at Musk. But what can he do with that money that he couldn't already?
- WalterBright 1y ago
- JKCalhoun 1y agoI get what they mean by "naive". I think I would have used the word "child-like"? Even that is not right though. There is a kind of playground simplicity to his philosophy. I think Woz did though in fact bring enough for the whole class.
- mindwok 1y agoThey're different dimensions. Naivety suggests a blindness (or maybe willingness to ignore) the true nature of people, hence why naive people are often taken advantage of, or seen as idealistic. You can be technologically brilliant and at the same time not dialled in to those kind of social/people dynamics.
- mockingloris 1y ago> You can be technologically brilliant and at the same time not dialled in to those kind of social/people dynamics. I came to that realization rather late. Now, I reflect often to optimize for this. (Anyways, better late than never) I suppose it's related to game theory and I am of the opinion that it's not spoken/written about enough.
- mindwok 1y agoYeah, game theory is a great lens because fundamentally it's about understanding people's incentives. On top of that, you add in irrationality and you get behavioural economics which is basically this stuff playing out at scale.
- jajko 1y agoNo its not naive, its called not being a sociopath. Some of biggest movers if not all were and are such. Utter pieces of shit as human beings, to the last one. I dont think I need to name current big names, all of them fit this.
- trinsic2 1y agoThere is no greatness without goodness. - James Allen
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]