« Vernietigend rapport ov-chipkaart werd afgezwakt | Home | Recent Comments | Categories | Celebrate! »
NYT asks: “Who’s Smarter: Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg?”
[Quote:]
A variety of legends have grown up around Bill Gates’ brief career at Harvard. (He dropped out halfway through and co-founded Microsoft). On Tuesday night, during an interview at the “D: All Things Digital” conference in Carlsbad, Calif., Mr. Gates regaled the audience with his strategy of not bothering to attend classes and then catching up in a single intense burst during a separate reading period at the end of the term.
On Wednesday afternoon, Facebook’s founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, himself a Harvard dropout, appeared to one-up Mr. Gates. Mr. Zuckerberg acknowledged that he had also skipped classes, in particular avoiding “Art in the Time of Augustus.”
Steve Jobs had some finance problems in college:
[Quote:]
In 1972, Jobs graduated from high school and enrolled in Reed College in Portland, Oregon. Although he dropped out after only one semester, he continued auditing classes at Reed, such as one in calligraphy. “If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts,” he said.
Guess which path I would rather follow… Dear NYT, you fail to understand…
|
Lemme see. Bill Gates built a really successful company and got rich.
Steve Jobs built a really successful company and got rich.
Mark Zuckenberg erm. well.. he got Facebook… now, not being rich is not a failure. Not building a successful company is not a failure.
And not finishing something does not give you bragging rights I think.
Why are you defining “success” or “smart” as “getting rich”?
I think you’re misquoting Roland. I’m with him in being skeptical that creating Facebook is an accomplishment of the same scale as building up Msft or Apple. But the real issue is… who gives a rodent’s rear which of these people is “smarter”? Why even dedicate electrons to it? Yaaaaaawn.
No way, I am not defining success and being smart as getting rich. I thought that writing “not being rich is not a failure” was clear on that point. I define success and being smart as “reaching your goals”.
Thing is that the newspaper defines being smart and successful this way, that’s why they put Zuckenberg there with Bill Gates and not with say Ede Teller or Stephen King or Nelson Mandela.
And if you use this as a measure, for good or bad, then Zuckenberg is nowhere near either Gates or Job. But then the measure is bad.
Plus, what does “smarter” mean? And why is it important?
okay - must have misread you… I guess I got hooked on the “got rich” bits…
I too got hooked on the “get rich” bit sometimes. Especially when I see something shiny and useless which is pricey and I absolutely don’t need it