3 ms·

Your making a distinction that borders on sophistry. Certainly people have to play violins for them to be melodious, and others have to appreciate music and des

Your making a distinction that borders on sophistry. Certainly people have to play violins for them to be melodious, and others have to appreciate music and design. So Stradivari was also making "products" that "people" loved and bought. If there's a real difference, it's the various technological and economic revolutions that make it possible to combine the efforts of thousands of individuals to work in concert to make things that millions if not billions can afford and use. The iPhone I'm holding isn't the product of a lone, solitary master craftsman, but hundreds of master craftsmen and engineers who honed their discipline in many different fields. This would not be possible without a organizational structure (corporation) that incentivizes them to work together.

unclebucknasty 13y ago
>Your making a distinction that borders on sophistry I disagree (obviously). I don't know the Stradivari story. But, based on your initial description, Stradivari simply loved making instruments. He sold them only to make a living so that he could continue. That's far different from a "mission" of simply "creating great products that people love", then mass producing them for sale. But, you've kind of morphed your description of Stradivari now to make him sound more like a capitalist than a guy with a hobby who simply sold some of his creations out of sheer necessity. So, whichever story you want to go with determines the "column" in which Stradivari belongs. Either way, my point is that there are two columns. However, if you think the difference is immaterial and my suggestion amounts to sophistry, then I can agree to disagree. I've pretty much given my best effort at clarifying what I believe is the distinction. >This would not be possible without a organizational structure (corporation) that incentivizes them to work together I completely disagree, but I don't see where it's relevant to the point I was trying to make which is, again, that making a product in itself is not a "mission" that distinguishes a company/person's purpose from any other profit-seeking company/person's purpose.
- argumentum 13y ago
  You are over-emphasizing the importance of Steve Jobs' quote to pmarca's (aka Marc Andreeson) point. Jobs said a lot of things, and much of what he said is publicly available. Obviously, he did not simply mean build any product people might love .. or why does Apple only build computing devices? Here's a better (and longer quote) by Jobs.. I think one of the things that really separates us from the high primates is that we’re tool builders. I read a study that measured the efficiency of locomotion for various species on the planet. The condor used the least energy to move a kilometer. And, humans came in with a rather unimpressive showing, about a third of the way down the list. It was not too proud a showing for the crown of creation. So, that didn’t look so good. But, then somebody at Scientific American had the insight to test the efficiency of locomotion for a man on a bicycle. And, a man on a bicycle, a human on a bicycle, blew the condor away, completely off the top of the charts. And that’s what a computer is to me. What a computer is to me is it’s the most remarkable tool that we’ve ever come up with, and it’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.” ~ Steve Jobs Does that not sound like a man on a mission?
  - unclebucknasty 13y ago
    You're veering way off-topic. I'm not making the case that Jobs had no mission in life. Rather, Mr. Andreessen specifically selected that quote as an example of a "mission". OK, so let's just say that was a bad example--and one that happened to undermine the very point he was trying to make.

unclebucknasty 13y ago

>Your making a distinction that borders on sophistry I disagree (obviously). I don't know the Stradivari story. But, based on your initial description, Stradivari simply loved making instruments. He sold them only to make a living so that he could continue. That's far different from a "mission" of simply "creating great products that people love", then mass producing them for sale. But, you've kind of morphed your description of Stradivari now to make him sound more like a capitalist than a guy with a hobby who simply sold some of his creations out of sheer necessity. So, whichever story you want to go with determines the "column" in which Stradivari belongs. Either way, my point is that there are two columns. However, if you think the difference is immaterial and my suggestion amounts to sophistry, then I can agree to disagree. I've pretty much given my best effort at clarifying what I believe is the distinction. >This would not be possible without a organizational structure (corporation) that incentivizes them to work together I completely disagree, but I don't see where it's relevant to the point I was trying to make which is, again, that making a product in itself is not a "mission" that distinguishes a company/person's purpose from any other profit-seeking company/person's purpose.

argumentum 13y ago
You are over-emphasizing the importance of Steve Jobs' quote to pmarca's (aka Marc Andreeson) point. Jobs said a lot of things, and much of what he said is publicly available. Obviously, he did not simply mean build any product people might love .. or why does Apple only build computing devices? Here's a better (and longer quote) by Jobs.. I think one of the things that really separates us from the high primates is that we’re tool builders. I read a study that measured the efficiency of locomotion for various species on the planet. The condor used the least energy to move a kilometer. And, humans came in with a rather unimpressive showing, about a third of the way down the list. It was not too proud a showing for the crown of creation. So, that didn’t look so good. But, then somebody at Scientific American had the insight to test the efficiency of locomotion for a man on a bicycle. And, a man on a bicycle, a human on a bicycle, blew the condor away, completely off the top of the charts. And that’s what a computer is to me. What a computer is to me is it’s the most remarkable tool that we’ve ever come up with, and it’s the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds.” ~ Steve Jobs Does that not sound like a man on a mission?
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  You're veering way off-topic. I'm not making the case that Jobs had no mission in life. Rather, Mr. Andreessen specifically selected that quote as an example of a "mission". OK, so let's just say that was a bad example--and one that happened to undermine the very point he was trying to make.