Zuckerbot 3000 goes to Washington

As expected, the Zuckerbot 3000 performed admirably at the senate hearings on internet privacy today.

The emotion protocol was clearly disabled, rendering the 3000 calm and collected under questioning that no doubt would've crashed last year's model. Clearly the Phase II testing, preparation and recently improved controller module integration paid off.

Far less composed and knowledgable were many of the senators questioning the 3000. They were throwing around terms they thought would make them sound tech savvy, like banner ads, personal information, instant messaging, apps and so on. It's a good thing the humor architecture build isn't too nuanced, otherwise the 3000 might've broken into a human-sounding chuckle.

Setting Zuckerbot chat in sleep mode for a bit, here's the thing: I rarely have any sympathy for Zuckerberg. While I understand and appreciate his monumental accomplishment, to me he's alway seemed like a Steve Jobs wanna-be, trading black turtlenecks for gray t-shirts, hoodies and a monotone. But watching these unfocused senators asking questions that were all over the board, from Cambridge Analytica to Russian election tampering to privacy protection, revealed how little they actually know about the very technology they're conducting hearings on.

And Zuckerberg, by contrast, knows everything. Certainly about Facebook, maybe even technology. He was far more articulate, knowledgable and impressive than the self-serving senators posturing while they made their five-minute speeches and interrupted him.

Granted being more impressive than the current crop of senators isn't exactly hard work, but still.

There was a lot of speculation about how these hearings would go, but the most dead on description was the one Bob Hoffman wrote for his blog, the Ad Contrarian. You'll find it here.

At the end of the day (yes, I said it), I'm not sure how to feel about it all. Anyone who knows me knows I'm a strong, long-time advocate of personal privacy. It took me years to use online banking. I fiercely guard my social security number. I rarely post pictures of myself or my family. And I even wear a wig and disguise when I go out in public.

No I don't. But if I did, I'd have one that used a lot of black and was very slimming.

If I seem uncharacteristically ambivalent here, it's because I understand Facebook isn't using some techno-hypnotizing-whammy-jammy to extract any information from me I don't want to give them. Everything Facebook knows about me has been volunteered. It's how they use and who they share the information with that's the issue. But again, in the name of personal responsibility and reading the small print, once I've surrendered it, it's out there.

I think the lesson for us all is if you don't want information about yourself out in the world, don't post it online. That's why I never post about my breakup with Scarlett Johansson.

It's nobody's business.

Send fries in lieu of flowers

Michael James Delligatti deserved more.

He is after all the man who invented a uniquely American culinary icon. Made literally billions for the company he worked with and for. And his invention was a very happy meal indeed.

Delligatti should've died last week at the age of 98 (maybe Big Macs aren't so bad for you) with an estate worth billions to leave his heirs. But all he got from McDonald's for his creation that's responsible for over 25% of their profits is a plaque.

Some people might argue that's more than Moe Green got (Godfather reference, look it up). But for my McMoney, it wasn't enough.

Delligatti was a franchisee who told McDonald's they should offer a double-patty burger. McDonald's, having the foresight and keen intuition for trends that they demonstrate even to this day, told him no. So, as the NY Times said, Delligatti went rogue. He ordered a larger, sesame-seed bun from a local baker, split it in three and made his own double-patty burger.

To everyone's surprise but his, sales skyrocketed. Funny thing. Once that happened, suddenly McDonald's was interested in offering what later became the Big Mac.

There seems to be a tradition of companies who make money off of these innovative ideas by screwing the people who come up with them.

One of the more famous instances was Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster who created a little character with a red cape you might've heard of - Superman. There were a slew of lawsuits, settlements and more lawsuits with the two families about ownership, and they still continue to this day (too much to go into here, but if you want to read more about it you'll find it here).

Ronald Wayne, the third founder of Apple along with Jobs and Wozniak. Wayne quit a few days into the partnership, scared the boys didn't know what they were doing and he'd be on the hook financially. If he'd held onto his stock, which he sold for $800, it would've been worth over $32 billion today. He took himself out of the equation, but still it would've been good karma for Jobs to reward him with a stipend for getting the company on its feet.

Philo T. Farnsworth, the farm boy who actually invented television at fourteen-years old and got screwed out of the patent by RCA.

John Walker, inventor of the self-igniting friction sticks, or as we call them in my country, matches.

How about Gary Kildall, inventor of the operating system you're probably using a version of right now. He got royally hosed by a nerdy billionaire from Seattle who usually gets the credit.

Of course, there's a saying my therapist taught me. I know what you're saying to yourself "But Jeff, you seem so well-adjusted, why would you have a therapist?" You have no idea.

Anyway, what she always says is there are no victims, only volunteers.

Many of these people didn't patent their ideas in spite of being urged to. Or some signed a contract without reading it. However they lost hold of their brain work, it seems ashame they weren't able to benefit from the rewards of it.

Even if a company owned their ideas fair and square, there's more than enough money to go around. Giving the creators some of it just seems like the right thing to do. Although I realize we're living in a post right-thing-to-do era.

Anyway, rest in peace Mr. Delligatti. I've enjoyed your creation many times over the years, and still indulge the occasional craving for it. Only now I take out the middle slice of bread.

It's a lot healthier that way.

Out of the closet

Mark Zuckerberg has had a couple of really good ideas in his young life.

One of them you might have heard about was creating this little social networking platform, where people you haven't heard from in 25 years can stalk you online, look at your personal pictures and make comments you don't care about and don't want to hear. It also lets friends in your outer, outer, outer circle remind you when their birthday is.

On the bright side, it lets you slam Donald Trump endlessly day and night, for which I'm deeply grateful.

His other great idea was his singular approach to his daily wardrobe. With the exception of weddings (his own), funerals (Steve Jobs) and dinners at the White House (Obama), Zuckerberg wears the same exact outfit every day of his life. The gray t-shirt, blue jeans, sneakers and dark gray sweatshirt with hoodie.

What Mark—may I call you Mark?—and I both love about this method is it removes the decision-making process about what to wear everyday, freeing up valuable brain space to ponder the more important choices in life.

For example, glazed or sprinkles.

Sartorially speaking, Zuckerberg's not the first person to stick to what works for him.

Steve Jobs was famous for his black turtlenecks, blue jeans and sneakers.

Albert Einstein had several versions of the same gray suit so he could think about more important matters relative to what he was going to wear (see what I did there?).

Jeff Goldblum's character Seth Brundle in The Fly also had a closet full of one outfit for the same reason (lot of good it did him after that little transporter incident).

I don't have a closet full of the same outfit, but I do have a lot of clothes working off the same color palette: black. Looking in my closet is like peering into a black hole, except mine is cedar-lined and filled with wire hangars and an overflowing bag of Damp Rid.

I know I've told this story before in a post, but it bears repeating here. The wife and I were in Seattle a few years ago and having dinner with an old boss of mine. We were running behind, and she called him to say we'd be a little late. To which he said, "What's the matter? Is Jeff having trouble deciding which black shirt to wear with which black pants?"

If I could wear the same black outfit every day I would. But I don't because I think it'd creep people out. They wouldn't know if I had a lot of the same outfit, or if I was actually wearing the same damn one every day.

The irony is Mark Zuckerberg can afford to buy all the clothes he wants, even have them custom made. He could buy 365 Armani suits to look sharp all year long. That's what I'd do.

I even know the color I'd get them in.

Bad apple

I just finished reading Steve Jobs biography, and I have two thoughts: what an incredible person to work for. And I thank my lucky stars I never worked for him.

Visionary? Of course. Innovative? Without question. Son of a bitch? Absolutely.

What's revealed in the book is perhaps the worst secret in the tech community: Steve Jobs was just a miserable person to be around. Abusive to colleagues and family, his lifetime of bitterness seemed to come from the fact his birth parents put him up for adoption.

He wound up emotionally savaging virtually everyone he came in contact with. Whether it was his use of his "reality distortion field" or "the stare", Jobs only ever wanted things one way: his. Fortunately most of the time his way was the best thing for Apple and the remarkable products they make. But when it wasn't, he wasted no time blaming someone else for the failure.

He would've made an excellent creative director.

Those around him thought that after his cancer diagnosis he might soften a bit, change his ways given the limited time he had left. What he actually did was become even feistier and more determined to control everything he came in touch with.

Near the end of both the book and his life, he writes an uncharacteristically touching letter to his wife on the occasion of their 20th anniversary. And he does acknowledge people were right to think he was an a#%&@$e.

There was some speculation that Jobs had control over the content of the book. But I think if that were true, it would've been a much prettier picture of him than it is. He obviously kept his word to Walter Isaacson about not wanting to know what was in it.

It's a great read that wants to love its subject and still be truthful about him. It's a difficult balancing act the book manages to pull off.

Oh, and one more thing.

It's very clear why there'll never be a business leader like him again in our lifetime.

Facebook feud

I think if I'm going to be honest with myself - which so rarely pays off - I have to admit that the thrill of Facebook has been gone for some time. I still have my account, but mainly as a way of linking my fabulous, intelligent, discerning and loyal readers to this blog.

Don't get me wrong: sometimes, when the mood strikes, there's just no substitute for knowing what my friends had for breakfast, how they're feeling, what they're watching, who they're with, the latest new age quote they like, seeing pictures of their dog (cat, parrot, fish, etc.), reading which team they like/don't like, linking to their blogs, reading what they think of the weather and seeing that video clip from YouTube that's been posted to my wall ten times because, let's face it, my friends have the same sense of humor as I do.

But lately the mood for all that isn't striking very often. And after the Facebook experience I had over the weekend, I imagine it will strike a lot less.

Like most people on FB, I have different circles of "friends." There's the inner circle, the next to the inner circle, whatever the next circle is and then the one after that.

Then on the very last ring, way out on the periphery, are the acquaintances. People I've met once or twice, and in a casual trying-to-be-nice way, either invited or accepted their invitation to be friends. They're not the problem. The problem is they have friends I've never met who occasionally like to chime in on one of my comments.

One of these outer ring people, a very nice person I met once, decided to post this poster on her wall. I had an issue with the use of Steve Jobs image, and the implication of his responsibility for the starving and famine-stricken children in Africa. It didn't seem fair or accurate and I said so.

A friend of my acquaintance took strong exception to what I was saying, and we proceeded to get into a fierce, fiery, name-calling back and forth on her wall about it. During the course of the "discussion", this person made the point that she had a doctorate from Johns Hopkins and was a world history teacher.

Both impressive accomplishments. But she was still wrong.

Yet late into the evening she was still writing columns about why she disagreed. I admit for a good part of the day I couldn't wait to look on FB and see what babbling rant she'd posted so I could reply. I got sucked into the ramblings of a crazy person I didn't know.

With a doctorate from Johns Hopkins.

After she started calling me a sexist because I disagreed with her, it really became clear to me what I was dealing with. I'd given more than enough effort and time I'll never get back to this person. I decided it was time to stop the insanity. I said, "Wow, you're an angry elf. I wish you nothing but the best." Then for good measure, I blocked her on my FB account, and unfriended my acquaintance.

Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.

So while I'm not done with FB entirely, I am done with getting so carried away I waste most of a weekend day waiting to respond to someone I don't know and couldn't care less what they think about the Steve Jobs poster or anything else.

I know she learned a lot at Johns Hopkins, because she told me she did. But apparently they don't teach the one bit of wisdom and advice that could've helped her avoid sounding like a raging lunatic to a complete stranger.

Shatner said it best in that famous Saturday Night Live sketch:

Get a life.

Goodbye Steve

Is it possible for a circuit board to have good intentions? It is if it lives in an Apple product.

Every one I own sets out to do the same thing: make my life better in some way. Unlike any other brand I own, Apple consistently makes good on the promise.

Ironically, the way I found out Steve Jobs had died today was while I was searching for information about Apple's newest release: the iPhone 4S. I went to the Apple site, and on the home page was the above image.

I know how silly it sounds, but it knocked the wind out of me. I've lost family members before. It feels the same.

It's not just the man, but the idea of the man that's so powerful. A visionary, often compared to people like Henry Ford and Ben Franklin. The kind of person that only comes along once in a lifetime. Regardless of what people who have accomplished much less with their lives and their companies will tell you, it's a valid comparison.

Tonight there'll be plenty of coverage of his passing, with smarter people than me paying tribute. I'm sure I'll be watching it all.

So, as I sit here writing this on my MacBook Pro, listening to iTunes, with my daughter watching Toy Story 3 in the other room and waiting for a call on my iPhone, I just wanted to say goodbye Steve.

Thank you for thinking different.

Thank you Steve

It'll be all over the news and the internet tonight. Steve Jobs has resigned as CEO of Apple, and has been named Chairman of the Board.

While it's a nice title, judging by his resignation letter it's probably more symbolic than real.

There's no arguing what he's done for Apple. For technology. For retail selling. For movies, music and cell phones.

While all the business pundits will have their "What does this mean?" fifteen minutes tonight, I'd just like to thank Steve.

For the awesome products you envisioned and then brought to life.

For the coolest phone ever.

For the excitement and anticipation of every new product announcement. Or old product improvement.

For the laptop that I make my living with.

For the tools that allow my kids imaginations to soar.

For never wearing a suit.

For your exceptionally inspiring graduation address at Stanford.

As you enter this next chapter, I hope you have the time to heal, the energy to continue doing what makes you happy and the desire to keep bringing your unique and incomparable vision to the world.

Thank you for everything you have done. And will do.