![]() ![]() In many respects, even as the company grew beyond all expectations, inertia carried this extraordinary characteristic forward until the Scully era." Holt states this explicitly "We were not producing commodities for the sake of profit. He did not care about such things, nor did Jobs, initially, one of the reasons he surmises Jobs was fired from Apple. One of his points of how Apple became one of the largest corporations in the world was that it did not follow the original path of capitalism - commodities for profit, alienated labor and such. ![]() His comments ( ) were on, among other things, how Apple really worked in the early days, putting aside business press (or non-business press) mythologies. On, how some of his communist ideas influenced the production at early Apple are described by the Mac team, such as that production should be from each according to ability, to each according to need ( ) With the fortune he made on Apple stock, he founded the Holt Labor Library on Geary Boulevard, among other things. He was a communist activist who helped Woz build the first Apple II, and then went on to run engineering and was later involved in the Macintosh project. This reminds me of comments made by Apple's first head of engineering, who was also one of its self-described founders, Rod Holt. After this mission, it was hashed out that mission control did have the final say, however mission control would respond if the astronauts said there was a problem. The Skylab 4 situation was also the final round in the culture clash between mission control, who believed they had the final say, and the astronaut commanders carrying on the naval/aviation tradition that the captain onboard has the final say. (And that there were lots of astronaut affecting problems with Skylab itself) In the end, official NASA histories admitted that ground control was indeed wrong, and had schedule too much each day, and made poorly thought out, last minute changes to the plan, and weren't listening to the astronaut concerns. It's bad either way - not sailing your ship will make a lot of people unhappy with you, and may be career limiting, but that's what is expected. He's going to court martial because by naval tradition, he was responsible for knowing that his officers had insufficient training because of over scheduling and should have rather kept the ship in port than sail. The officer in charge of the ship, and the officer in charge of the CiC spent that whole night leading up to the collision making one giant mistake after another, and still the commander is going to court martial. Rather than a labor/capitalist take, this goes back to the old military traditions that a captain has the final authority for the safety of his ship and crew, and that at the end of the day, he only makes the call.įor example, the recent collision between the USS Fitzgerald, which happened while the captain was asleep. The decisions made by the astronauts were made by their mission commander - a Marine Colonel.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |