Slashdot Mirror
FBI File Notes Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field
Hugh Pickens writes "Bloomberg reports that the FBI has released a decades-old file it kept on Steve Jobs, the deceased Apple co-founder, after a background check for a possible appointment by former President George H. W. Bush conducting interviews with unnamed associates of Jobs to judge his character, drug use and potential prejudices. 'Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs' honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals,' according to the materials. Several people commented 'concerning past drug use on the part of Mr. Jobs,' according to the file including marijuana, hashish and LSD during the period 1970 – 1974. The file also noted that Jobs was not a member of the communist party."
Most people (we are not all paragons of virtue) do that. The difference was that Jobs was apparently good at it.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Wondering if the FBI does background checks on Senate, Congress and Presidential candidates? Pretty sure 99.9% would have the same issues with "dishonesty". My favourite line from the TFA is "Others mentioned that Jobs couldn’t be trusted and that he was able to create a reality-distortion field." Wondering how strong this force field was and was it able to warp the time-space continuum?? :P
Tons and tons of people have used a bit of hash and LSD in their past, but few will admit it to their employers if they work in the professional world.
It's not that these activities actually make a person of bad or suspicious - it's that many people _believe_ that they do. This turns casual and innocent drug users into liars because they have to protect themselves from the horribly ill-informed and paranoid power structure.
to achieve his goals.
The man outright stated he was willing to bankrupt the company he was in charge of making a profit for in order to avenge a perceived theft.
I would say the guy has reality, vengeance, and anger issues that rivals that of women I've let into my life.
Seriously, the guy had a very elegant approach to things, that's why Apple is very popular among those who don't mind having choices made for them, because despite the premium they're good solid choices as long as you don't have anything outside the box to accomplish. There's no doubt in my mind the guy had control issues, the fit he threw when the iPhone boot-loader was cracked, the fact he won't let you deal with multi-media data on external USB/FireWire drives on Mac OS X, the FUD he had the company spread about OGG/Vorbis, and the face Apple officially doesn't even acknowledge Linux exist even though it counts MS/Windows as a bonus feature combined with temper and obsessiveness stories that leaked about his first term as CEO tells me Jobs was likely a sociopath.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
[redacted] concluded the interview by stating that even though he does not consider Mr. Jobs to be a friend, he (Mr. Jobs) possesses the qualities to assume a high level political position. It was [redacted]'s opinion that honest and integrity are not required qualities to hold such a position. [redacted] recommended him for a position of trust and confidence with the government.
That quote alone is awesome on so many levels I can't even begin to describe the joy and mirth I experienced while reading it.
Is it me, or is it the more we learn about the inner workings of our government via WikiLeaks, social media, and other channels that it becomes clear the last thing on earth any reasonably intelligent person should ever do is give their trust or dollars to the government or big corporations?
As a young man I had an impression of at least certain departments of the government as being competent, such as the FBI, CIA, and State Department. The first of those to fall was the CIA, with whom I had personal contact in the late 90's; calling them room temperature IQ's would be an effusive compliment. Then the FBI botched investigation after investigation throughout their lab screw-ups. And their modus operandus seemed to increasingly be to frame their suspects and violate the basic constitutional rights of innocent Americans. The State Department's sign-off on yellow-cake uranium was the first big blow to my confidence in that bunch; the next big strike against them was breezing through their application process only to wonder why it was no people of color made it; and the nail in the coffin was Cablegate.
Now, maybe DARPA has mettle left. The SEALs seem to prove themselves again and again. Apple and Google appear to be effective. But why do we cede so much to all the rest, given how shot through with corruption, collusion, and incompetence they are, and at such horrific cost?
We are, many of us, so much brighter and better and deserving of more to have our collective potential so utterly frustrated by such dross. It's not an information problem so much anymore. We have any one of dozens of channels to chose from to communicate. Is it a question of will or organization? As refugees from the system of ritual abuse constituted by the status quo, are we constitutionally unable to work with others cohesively or deeply afraid of bullies who will walk up and punch us?
I struggle with this because I see the deep intelligence of so many of my colleagues and of the general community on /., and I wonder what challenges we could not surmount if we could break free of our learned social inhibitions. We have all grown up in a world ruled by salesmen, thugs, and psychopaths, but that's not the world I'd like to leave to my kids. I'd like them to live in a world led by artists, engineers, scientists, and humanitarians.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
I'm baffled by America's continuing war on stamping out communists.
Sure, this is a democracy, we want to stay a democracy. We had enemies who were communists; however, the witch hunt against communism, which is still going on to a lesser degree is baffling.
When I applied for my green card, and later my citizenship (as recent as 2 years ago)- I had to fill in a form saying I hadn't overthrown any governments, wasn't a communist, etc, etc, etc. ... and no, I'm not a communist- although I joined a joke "communist party" in university that parodied the Republican and democrat clubs (I'm actually very centrist)- surprise they didn't find that and block my citizenship... :)
To me it seems to be "undemocratic" to try and stamp out an individual party or belief like that. Sure- if they try to over-throw the country- or do terrorist acts- or represent a foreign nation- but to try to keep people out because of their belief. Obviously the made a point- even as late as the 80's to make sure Jobs wasn't a commie... this was after the worst of the cold war- and after McCarthyism was en vogue.
Even MLK was demonized by the FBI- they spread false rumours about him trying to discredit him because he had communist friends and they FBI was worried he too might be a communist trying to spread communism.
I dunno- but even as someone who is opposed to communism - I find the attack on communism by the government to be kinda creepy- it feels as if some rights are being violated somehow. If I did want to be a commie- should I not be allowed to? Should I not be allowed to have a political opinion that is not main stream? What if a Republican government later decides to attack and out law the green party, or the democrats?
Am I the only one who finds this wrong? I know we're supposed to hate the commies- but we're also supposed to let people believe whatever they want and only arrest them if the commit a crime or conspire to do so.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch