Sunday 28 October 2012

“Deadly” Radiation and God’s Design


October 22, 2012
By Guest Writer
A feature article in the August 2012 issue of Scientific American trumpets a scary warning: “Deadly Rays from Clouds—Thunderstorms Give Out Powerful Blasts of X-Rays and Gamma Rays.”1
Headlines are written to grab the reader’s attention—whether or not the article’s content lives up to the hype. At the end of this particular article, the authors reveal that the real hazard is somewhat less frightening: “thunderstorms most often emit a relatively harmless, continuous glow of gamma rays. Preliminary calculations, however, show that if an airline flight happened to be struck directly by the energetic electrons and gamma rays [up to 100 million electron volts (MeV)] inside a storm, passengers and crew members could—without feeling anything—receive up to a lifetime’s natural radiation dose in a fraction of a second.”2
This raises the question of God’s providence. Humankind is bombarded by cosmic rays and radiation from a variety of natural sources in the Earth.3 Conventional wisdom—both among scientists and the lay public—suggests that all radiation is harmful.
Would a benevolent God subject the crowning glory of his creation—humankind—to bombardment by deadly rays, which provide no benefit to humanity and are harmful in even the smallest quantity? And if so, would not God design a compensatory biological system?
Indeed, in reviewing the data, we see a remarkable instance of divine design.
The concern that all radiation is harmful, even at the lowest levels, can be traced to a 1946 Nobel Prize lecture given by Hermann Muller. Although a recent review of Muller’s papers reveals that he was aware of contrary data at the time of his lecture,4 one must remember that in 1946 many scientists were reacting with horror and regret to the radiation effects of the atomic bombing of Japan the year before. Furthermore, in the absence of definitive data, the scientific community concluded that the safest approach is to assume all radiation is harmful. Later data, showing DNA strand breaks due to low-level radiation doses, seemed to support this “linear no-threshold” (LNT) hypothesis.
However, studies conducted over nearly 100 years5 indicate that radiation is beneficial in low doses—although its effects are lethal or carcinogenic at high doses.
Even so, radiation is necessary for life as we know it. In the 1950s, studies at Oak Ridge National Laboratory showed that animals were stated to have “done poorly” when radioactive potassium (K-40) was removed from their diets, yet they recovered when the extracted K-40 was returned; also, cells without K-40 “looked good but they didn’t function.”6 In other words, our bodies seem to be designed to work in an environment of low-level radiation.
In fact, “low-to-intermediate doses [of ionizing radiation] have been observed to enhance growth and survival, augment the immune response, and increase resistance to mutagenic and clastogenic effects of further irradiation in plants, bacteria, insects, and mammals.”7 A 1961 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reviewed all known low-dose studies (defined as “to about 1 rad [10 mSv]3 per day”) and concluded: “The preponderance of data better supports the hypothesis that low chronic exposures result in an increased longevity than it supports the opposite hypothesis of decreased longevity.”8 (10 mSv/day is 1,000 times more than the natural background.) Furthermore, “Animal studies have revealed that LDR [low dose radiation] … inhibits carcinogenesis induced by high dose radiation.”9 Furthermore, “It has been extensively and consistently confirmed that supplemental radiation, above the natural background level, stimulates organisms, enhancing their growth and increasing their mean lifespans.”10 A study has shown that “cancer-prone” mice given low-level radiation were found to be less susceptible to “spontaneously initiated” cancer.11
Most home-sellers are required to test for radon—and sometimes undertake expensive corrections if it is detected. However, a University of Pittsburgh study compared radon exposure and lung cancer rates in 1,729 counties, covering 90 percent of the U.S. population, and found far fewer cases of lung cancer in counties with the highest amounts of radon (a correlation that could not be explained by smoking rates).12
The question is: why is low-level radiation beneficial? Research suggests the answer may be divine design.
Evidence has accumulated over many years that the body is equipped with a mechanism to repair radiation-induced DNA mutations. Multiple papers over the last twenty-plus years have shown a pattern of DNA-strand breaking and resealing due to low-level radiation.13 Radiation biologists have observed “the capacity of a cell to react to a low [radiation] dose by increasing its radio-resistance to a subsequent high dose challenge,”14 that “human lymphocytes exposed to low doses of ionizing radiation … become less susceptible to the induction of chromatid breaks by high doses of X-rays,”15 and even that “exposure to low levels of chronic radiation can trigger or induce increased repair of radiation-induced chromosome breaks.”16
A recent article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reports the following:
Radiation-induced foci (RIF) in human cells … are characterized by the local recruitment of DNA damage sensing proteins.…We provide strong evidence for the existence of repair centers … [and] we show that multiple DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) 1 to 2 μm apart can rapidly cluster into repair centers … We observe an absolute RIF yield that is surprisingly much smaller at higher doses … Our discovery of DSB clustering over such large distances casts considerable doubts on the general assumption that risk to ionizing radiation is proportional to dose.17
So what does all this mean to the average person? I wouldn’t advise uranium baths to get extra radiation—as people did in the 1950s. However, the main point is not to have an unreasonable fear of radiation, as implied by the headline of the Scientific American article, because the design of the cell automatically compensates for reasonable exposure levels.
What is a “reasonable” exposure level? A recent article in the Health Physics journal provides some guidelines: “The linear no-threshold (LNT) model [which suggests all radiation is harmful] ... is not supported by scientific data at doses less than about 100 mSv or at chronic dose rates up to at least 200 mSv/yr.”18 200 mSv/yr is of course almost 100 times natural background radiation.
Exposure from a full-body CT scan is about 10–12 mSv; a person would need to have more than ten CTs a year before becoming concerned. A mammogram is about 1–2 mSv—less than annual background—and exposure from dental X-Rays are too low to matter. The Scientific American article claims if an airplane is in just the wrong place at just the wrong time, people would “receive up to a lifetime’s natural radiation dose;” but in reality, the radiation would just barely reach the level for which they might be concerned.
Furthermore, cancer patients can receive as much as 80,000 Sv to localized areas with curative intent and no anticipation of long-term detrimental effects. My mother was cured of cancer due to a high dose to a small area with no side effects—as is typical with modern radiation oncology. And this happens because of another miracle of cell design: normal cells are able to repair radiation damage more rapidly than cancerous cells.
Dr. Hugh Henry, PhD
Dr. Hugh Henry received his PhD in Physics from the University of Virginia in 1971, retired after 26 years at Varian Medical Systems, and currently serves as Lecturer in physics at Northern Kentucky University in Highland Heights, KY.
Posted by at No comments:

Eat This: Zombies Are Real


October 26th, 2012
By Sandra Dimas
They prey on their own kind. Some might call it cannibalism, but it’s the only way they can survive. Indeed, the zombie apocalypse is here.
Sort of.
So-called “zombies” exist throughout nature, but unlike their fictional counterparts, these zombies serve a good purpose.
For example, our very own galaxy has gobbled up smaller galaxies for over ten billion years. Astronomer Jeff Zweerink tells me that this regular diet of galactic food keeps star formation at a steady pace. Continual star formation might not seem like a big deal, as though non-continual star formation just means fewer objects to spot in the night sky. But, as Jeff puts it, “a galaxy must form multiple generations of stars” in order to host life. “On the other hand,” he continues, “a collision with a galaxy that was too large would have disrupted the MWG’s [Milky Way Galaxy’s] spiral structure and led to conditions hostile to life.”
Collisions with the just-right size galaxies affect our galaxy’s structure and add energy to the outer part of the Milky Way’s disk. According to Jeff, these cannibalistic collisions remain frequent throughout cosmic history, and yet they’re not so frequent as to disrupt Earth or any other planet in our solar system. That’s comforting.
Astronomers aren’t the only ones who get to “see” nature’s zombies in action. They can also be found much closer to home, too. Biochemist Fazale Rana explains a process called phagocytosis.
Phagocytosis is the process by which cells will eat solid material that can include other cells. It’s a way for cells to gain nutrients but it’s a critical part of the body’s defense mechanism so that when infectious agents like bacteria invade the organism the immune system unleashes cells that will recognize the bacteria’s foreign materials and then will consume them through phagocytosis.
It might seem like a stretch to refer to these cells as zombies, but Fuz assures me, “If one would like to call them zombie cells, one most certainly can.” Sounds good to me.
So if a gruesome zombie shambles to your front door looking for treats this Halloween, remember that zombies—at least those found in nature—are nothing to fear. Whether it’s zombie galaxies or cells, even the odd features found in nature point to universe that was fine-tuned to support life. Now there’s something to sink your teeth into.
–Sandra
Resources:
For more about “zombie” galaxies, check out these articles by Jeff Zweerink:
“Planet from Another Galaxy Discovered”
“Steady Diet of Dwarf Galaxies Maintains Milky Way Spirals”
“Milky Way Gobbled Gobs of Galaxies”
Subjects: Biochemical Design, Galaxy Design, TCM - Biochemical Design, TCM - Cosmic Design
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday 27 October 2012

Flame (malware) a virus that opens a computer and steals all the information from it

Flame (malware)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not to be confused with Stoned (computer virus)#Flame/Stamford or Olympic Torch (virus hoax).
Flame,[a] also known as Flamer, sKyWIper,[b] and Skywiper,[2] is modular computer malware discovered in 2012[3][4] that attacks computers running the Microsoft Windows operating system.[5] The program is being used for targeted cyber espionage in Middle Eastern countries.[1][5][6]
Its discovery was announced on 28 May 2012 by MAHER Center of Iranian National Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT),[5] Kaspersky Lab[6] and CrySyS Lab of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics.[1] The last of these stated in its report that it "is certainly the most sophisticated malware we encountered during our practice; arguably, it is the most complex malware ever found."[1]
Flame can spread to other systems over a local network (LAN) or via USB stick. It can record audio, screenshots, keyboard activity and network traffic.[6] The program also records Skype conversations and can turn infected computers into Bluetooth beacons which attempt to download contact information from nearby Bluetooth-enabled devices.[7] This data, along with locally stored documents, is sent on to one of several command and control servers that are scattered around the world. The program then awaits further instructions from these servers.[6]
According to estimates by Kaspersky in May 2012, Flame had initially infected approximately 1,000 machines,[7] with victims including governmental organizations, educational institutions and private individuals.[6] At that time 65% of the infections happened in Iran, Israel, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt,[3][6] with a "huge majority of targets" within Iran.[8] Flame has also been reported in Europe and North America.[9] Flame supports a "kill" command which wipes all traces of the malware from the computer. The initial infections of Flame stopped operating after its public exposure, and the "kill" command was sent.[10]
<a href='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=119&cb=3400' target='_blank'><img src='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=119&cb=7953&n=adc4e6a8' border='0' alt='' /></a>

Contents

History

Flame was identified in May 2012 by MAHER Center of Iranian National CERT, Kaspersky Lab and CrySyS Lab (Laboratory of Cryptography and System Security) of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics when Kaspersky Lab was asked by the United Nations International Telecommunication Union to investigate reports of a virus affecting Iranian Oil Ministry computers.[7] As Kaspersky Lab investigated, they discovered an MD5 hash and filename that appeared only on customer machines from Middle Eastern nations. After discovering more pieces, researchers dubbed the program "Flame" after the name of one of its modules.[7]
According to Kaspersky, Flame had been operating in the wild since at least February 2010.[6] CrySyS Lab reported that the file name of the main component was observed as early as December 2007.[1] However, its creation date could not be determined directly, as the creation dates for the malware's modules are falsely set to dates as early as 1994.[7]
Computer experts consider it the cause of an attack in April 2012 that caused Iranian officials to disconnect their oil terminals from the Internet.[11] At the time the Iranian Students News Agency referred to the malware that caused the attack as "Wiper", a name given to it by the malware's creator.[12] However, Kaspersky Lab believes that Flame may be "a separate infection entirely" from the Wiper malware.[7] Due to the size and complexity of the program—described as "twenty times" more complicated than Stuxnet—the Lab stated that a full analysis could require as long as ten years.[7]
On 28 May, Iran's CERT announced that it had developed a detection program and a removal tool for Flame, and had been distributing these to "select organizations" for several weeks.[7] After Flame's exposure in news media, Symantec reported on 8 June that some Flame command and control (C&C) computers had sent a "suicide" command to infected PCs to remove all traces of Flame.[10]
According to estimates by Kaspersky in May 2012, initially Flame had infected approximately 1,000 machines,[7] with victims including governmental organizations, educational institutions and private individuals.[6] At that time the countries most affected were Iran, Israel, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.[3][6]

Operation

Name Description
List of code names for various families of modules in Flame's source code and their possible purpose[1]
Flame Modules that perform attack functions
Boost Information gathering modules
Flask A type of attack module
Jimmy A type of attack module
Munch Installation and propagation modules
Snack Local propagation modules
Spotter Scanning modules
Transport Replication modules
Euphoria File leaking modules
Headache Attack parameters or properties
Flame is an uncharacteristically large program for malware at 20 megabytes. It is written partly in the Lua scripting language with compiled C++ code linked in, and allows other attack modules to be loaded after initial infection.[6][13] The malware uses five different encryption methods and an SQLite database to store structured information.[1] The method used to inject code into various processes is stealthy, in that the malware modules do not appear in a listing of the modules loaded into a process and malware memory pages are protected with READ, WRITE and EXECUTE permissions that make them inaccessible by user-mode applications.[1] The internal code has few similarities with other malware, but exploits two of the same security vulnerabilties used previously by Stuxnet to infect systems.[c][1] The malware determines what antivirus software is installed, then customises its own behaviour (for example, by changing the filename extensions it uses) to reduce the probability of detection by that software.[1] Additional indicators of compromise include mutex and registry activity, such as installation of a fake audio driver which the malware uses to maintain persistence on the compromised system.[13]
Flame is not designed to deactivate automatically, but supports a "kill" function that makes it eliminate all traces of its files and operation from a system on receipt of a module from its controllers.[7]
Flame was signed with a fraudulent certificate purportedly from the Microsoft Enforced Licensing Intermediate PCA certificate authority.[14] The malware authors identified a Microsoft Terminal Server Licensing Service certificate that inadvertently was enabled for code signing and that still used the weak MD5 hashing algorithm, then produced a counterfeit copy of the certificate that they used to sign some components of the malware to make them appear to have originated from Microsoft.[14] A successful collision attack against a certificate was previously demonstrated in 2008,[15] but Flame implemented a new variation of the chosen-prefix collision attack.[16]

Deployment

Like the previously known cyber weapons Stuxnet and Duqu, it is employed in a targeted manner and can evade current security software through rootkit functionality. Once a system is infected, Flame can spread to other systems over a local network or via USB stick. It can record audio, screenshots, keyboard activity and network traffic.[6] The program also records Skype conversations and can turn infected computers into Bluetooth beacons which attempt to download contact information from nearby Bluetooth enabled devices.[7] This data, along with locally stored documents, is sent on to one of several command and control servers that are scattered around the world. The program then awaits further instructions from these servers.[6]
Unlike Stuxnet, which was designed to sabotage an industrial process, Flame appears to have been written purely for espionage.[17] It does not appear to target a particular industry, but rather is "a complete attack toolkit designed for general cyber-espionage purposes".[18]
Using a technique known as sinkholing, Kaspersky demonstrated that "a huge majority of targets" were within Iran, with the attackers particularly seeking AutoCAD drawings, PDFs, and text files.[8] Computing experts said that the program appeared to be gathering technical diagrams for intelligence purposes.[8]
A network of 80 servers across Asia, Europe and North America has been used to access the infected machines remotely.[19]

Origin

On June 19, 2012, The Washington Post published an article claiming that Flame was jointly developed by the U.S. National Security Agency, CIA and Israel’s military at least five years prior. The project was said to be part of a classified effort code-named Olympic Games, which was intended to collect intelligence in preparation for a cyber-sabotage campaign aimed at slowing Iranian nuclear efforts.[20]
According to Kaspersky's chief malware expert, "the geography of the targets and also the complexity of the threat leaves no doubt about it being a nation-state that sponsored the research that went into it."[3] Kaspersky initially said that the malware bears no resemblance to Stuxnet, although it may have been a parallel project commissioned by the same attackers.[21] After analysing the code further, Kaspersky later said that there is a strong relationship between Flame and Stuxnet; the early version of Stuxnet contained code to propagate via USB drives that is nearly identical to a Flame module that exploits the same zero-day vulnerability.[22]
Iran's CERT described the malware's encryption as having "a special pattern which you only see coming from Israel".[23] The Daily Telegraph reported that due to Flame's apparent targets—which included Iran, Syria, and the West Bank—Israel became "many commentators' prime suspect". Other commentators named China and the U.S. as possible perpetrators.[21] Richard Silverstein, a commentator critical of Israeli policies, stated that he had confirmed with a "senior Israeli source" that the malware was created by Israeli computer experts.[21][24] The Jerusalem Post wrote that Israel's Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'alon appeared to have hinted that his government was responsible,[21] but an Israeli spokesperson later denied that this had been implied.[25] Unnamed Israeli security officials suggested that the infected machines found in Israel may imply that the virus could be traced to the U.S. or other Western nations.[26] The U.S. has officially denied responsibility.[27]

<a href='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=119&cb=3673' target='_blank'><img src='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=119&cb=9601&n=adc4e6a8' border='0' alt='' /></a>
See also

Portal icon Computer security portal

Notes

  1. ^ "Flame" is one of the strings found in the code, a common name for attacks, most likely by exploits[1]
  2. ^ The name "sKyWIper" is derived from the letters "KWI" which are used as a partial filename by the malware[1]
  3. ^ MS10-061 and MS10-046

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k "sKyWIper: A Complex Malware for Targeted Attacks". Budapest University of Technology and Economics. 28 May 2012. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  2. ^ "Flamer: Highly Sophisticated and Discreet Threat Targets the Middle East". Symantec. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 30 May 2012.
  3. ^ a b c d Lee, Dave (28 May 2012). "Flame: Massive Cyber-Attack Discovered, Researchers Say". BBC News. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  4. ^ McElroy, Damien; Williams, Christopher (28 May 2012). "Flame: World's Most Complex Computer Virus Exposed". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  5. ^ a b c "Identification of a New Targeted Cyber-Attack". Iran Computer Emergency Response Team. 28 May 2012. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Gostev, Alexander (28 May 2012). "The Flame: Questions and Answers". Securelist. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Zetter, Kim (28 May 2012). "Meet 'Flame,' The Massive Spy Malware Infiltrating Iranian Computers". Wired. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  8. ^ a b c Lee, Dave (4 June 2012). "Flame: Attackers 'sought confidential Iran data'". BBC News. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
  9. ^ Murphy, Samantha (5 June 2012). "Meet Flame, the Nastiest Computer Malware Yet". Mashable.com. Retrieved 8 June 2012.
  10. ^ a b "Flame malware makers send 'suicide' code". BBC News. 8 June 2012. Retrieved 8 June 2012.
  11. ^ Hopkins, Nick (28 May 2012). "Computer Worm That Hit Iran Oil Terminals 'Is Most Complex Yet'". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  12. ^ Erdbrink, Thomas (23 April 2012). "Facing Cyberattack, Iranian Officials Disconnect Some Oil Terminals From Internet". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  13. ^ a b Kindlund, Darien (30 May 2012). "Flamer/sKyWIper Malware: Analysis". FireEye. Archived from the original on 31 May 2012. Retrieved 31 May 2012.
  14. ^ a b "Microsoft releases Security Advisory 2718704". Microsoft. 3 June 2012. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
  15. ^ Sotirov, Alexander; Stevens, Marc; Appelbaum, Jacob; Lenstra, Arjen; Molnar, David; Osvik, Dag Arne; de Weger, Benne (30 December 2008). "MD5 Considered Harmful Today". Retrieved 4 June 2011.
  16. ^ Stevens, Marc (7 June 2012). "CWI Cryptanalist Discovers New Cryptographic Attack Variant in Flame Spy Malware". Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica. Retrieved 9 June 2012.
  17. ^ Cohen, Reuven (28 May 2012). "New Massive Cyber-Attack an 'Industrial Vacuum Cleaner for Sensitive Information'". Forbes. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  18. ^ Albanesius, Chloe (28 May 2012). "Massive 'Flame' Malware Stealing Data Across Middle East". PC Magazine. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  19. ^ "Flame virus: Five facts to know". The Times of India. Reuters. 29 May 2012. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 30 May 2012.
  20. ^ Nakashima, Ellen (June 19, 2012). "U.S., Israel developed Flame computer virus to slow Iranian nuclear efforts, officials say". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 20, 2012.
  21. ^ a b c d "Flame Virus: Who is Behind the World's Most Complicated Espionage Software?". The Daily Telegraph. 29 May 2012. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  22. ^ "Resource 207: Kaspersky Lab Research Proves that Stuxnet and Flame Developers are Connected". Kaspersky Lab. 11 June 2012.
  23. ^ Erdbrink, Thomas (29 May 2012). "Iran Confirms Attack by Virus That Collects Information". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 30 May 2012.
  24. ^ Silverstein, Richard (28 May 2012). "Flame: Israel’s New Contribution to Middle East Cyberwar". Tikun Olam. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012.
  25. ^ Tsukayama, Hayley (31 May 2012). "Flame cyberweapon written using gamer code, report says". The Washington Post. Retrieved 31 May 2012.
  26. ^ "Iran: ‘Flame’ Virus Fight Began with Oil Attack". Time. Associated Press. May 31, 2012. Retrieved 31 May 2012.
  27. ^ "Flame: Israel rejects link to malware cyber-attack". 31 May 2012. Retrieved 3 June 2012.
View page ratings
Rate this page
What's this?
Trustworthy
Objective
Complete
Well-written
<a href='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=118&cb=5552' target='_blank'><img src='http://o.o-clk.com/www/delivery/afr.php?zoneid=118&cb=5014&n=adc4e6a8' border='0' alt='' /></a>
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday 9 October 2012

stay hungry, stay foolish- steve jobs

Don’t Wait
When the young Steve Jobs wanted to build something and needed a piece of equipment, he went straight to the source.
“He began by recalling that he had wanted to build a frequency counter when he was twelve, and he was able to look up Bill Hewlett, the founder of HP, in the phone book and call him to get parts.”
Make Your Own Reality
Steve Jobs learned early that when you don’t like how things are in your life or in your world, change them, either through action or sheer force of will.
“As Hoffman later lamented, “The reality distortion field can serve as a spur, but then reality itself hits.” – Joanna Hoffman, part of Apple’s early Macintosh team.
“I didn’t want to be a father, so I wasn’t,” Jobs later said, with only a touch of remorse in his voice.
Control Everything You Can
Steve Jobs was, to a certain degree, a hippie. However, unlike most free spirits of the 1960s-to-1970s love-in era, Jobs was a detail-oriented control freak.
“He wants to control his environment, and he sees the product as an extension of himself.”
Own Your Mistakes
Jobs could be harsh and even thoughtless. Perhaps nowhere was that more in evidence than with his first daughter. Still, as Jobs grew older and began to face mortality, he more readily admitted his mistakes.
“I’ve done a lot of things I’m not proud of, such as getting my girlfriend pregnant when I was twenty-three and the way I handled that,” Jobs said.”
Know Yourself
While not always aware of how those around him were reacting to his appearance or demeanor, Jobs had no illusions about his own formidable intellectual skills.
“Then a more disconcerting discovery began to dawn on him: He was smarter than his parents.”
Leave the Door Open for the Fantastic
Jobs was a seeker, pursuing spiritual enlightenment and body purification throughout his life. He wasn’t a particularly religious person, but did not dismiss the existence or something beyond our earth-bound realm.
“I think different religions are different doors to the same house. Sometimes I think the house exists, and sometimes I don’t. It’s the great mystery.” — Steve Jobs
Don’t Hold Back
Apple’s founder was famous for his outbursts and sometimes over-emotional responses. In product development, things were often amazing or sh_t.
“He was an enlightened being who was cruel,” she recalled. “That’s a strange combination.”– former girlfriend and mother of Jobs’ first daughter, Chrisann Brennan
Surround Yourself with Brilliance
Whether he was willing to admit it or not, Steve Jobs could not do everything. Yes, he could have a huge impact on every product and marketing campaign, but he also knew that there were others in the world with skills he did not possess. Jobs’ early partnership with Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak perfectly illustrated this fact. His early success with Wozniak provided the template for future collaborations.
“After a couple of months he was ready to test it. ‘I typed a few keys on the keyboard and I was shocked! The letters were displayed on the screen.’ It was Sunday, June 29, 1975, a milestone for the personal computer. “It was the first time in history,” Wozniak later said, “anyone had typed a character on a keyboard and seen it show up on their own computer’s screen right in front of them.”
Build a Team of A Players
Far too often, companies and managers settle for average employees. Steve Jobs recognized talent and decided that any conflict that might arise from a company full of “A”-level players would be counterbalanced by awesome output. He may have been right.
“For most things in life, the range between best and average is 30% or so. The best airplane flight, the best meal, they may be 30% better than your average one. What I saw with Woz was somebody who was fifty times better than the average engineer. He could have meetings in his head. The Mac team was an attempt to build a whole team like that, A players. People said they wouldn’t get along, they’d hate working with each other. But I realized that A players like to work with A players, they just didn’t like working with C players.”– Steve Jobs
“I’ve learned over the years that when you have really good people you don’t have to baby them,” Jobs later explained. “By expecting them to do great things, you can get them to do great things.”
Be Yourself
Steve Jobs was often so busy being himself that he had no idea how people saw him, especially in his early, dirty-hippie days.
“At meetings we had to look at his dirty feet. Sometimes, to relieve stress, he would soak his feet in the toilet, a practice that was not as soothing for his colleagues.”—Mike Markkula, Apple’s first chairman.
Be Persuasive
While it’s true that early Steve Jobs was a somewhat smelly and unpleasant person to be around, this same Steve Jobs also trained himself to stare without blinking for long periods of time and found that he could persuade people to do the seemingly impossible.
“If it could save a person’s life, would you find a way to shave ten seconds off the boot time?” he asked. Kenyon allowed that he probably could. Jobs went to a whiteboard and showed that if there were five million people using the Mac, and it took ten seconds extra to turn it on every day, that added up to three hundred million or so hours per year that people would save, which was the equivalent of at least one hundred lifetimes saved per year.”
Show Others the Way
Jobs wasn’t truly a programmer or technologist, certainly not in the way that Microsoft founder Bill Gates is, yet he had an intuitive understanding for technology and design that ended up altering the world’s expectations for computers and, more importantly, consumer electronics.
“To be honest, we didn’t know what it meant for a computer to be ‘friendly’ until Steve told us.” — Terry Oyama, part of the early Macintosh design team.
Trust Your Instincts
I have, in my own career, navigated by gut on more than one occasion. Steve Jobs, though, had a deep and abiding belief in his own tastes and believed with utter certainty that if he liked something, the public would as well. He was almost invariably right.
“Did Alexander Graham Bell do any market research before he invented the telephone?” — Steve Jobs
Take Risks
Throughout his career, Steve Jobs took chances, first with the launch of Apple, then in walking away from it and then returning in 1997. In an era when most companies were figuring out ways to diversify, Apple — under Job’s leadership — shed businesses and products, and focused on relatively few areas. He was also willing to steer the entire Apple ship (or at least some aspects of it) in a single direction if he thought it would generate future success.
“One of Jobs’ management philosophies was that it is crucial, every now and then, to roll the dice and ‘bet the company’ on some new idea or technology.”
“I had this crazy idea that we could sell just as many Macs by advertising the iPod. In addition, the iPod would position Apple as evoking innovation and youth. So I moved $75 million of advertising money to the iPod, even though the category didn’t justify one hundredth of that. That meant that we completely dominated the market for music players. We outspent everybody by a factor of about a hundred.” — Steve Jobs.
Follow Great with Great
In everything from products to movies (under Pixar), Steve Jobs sought to create great follow-ups. He wasn’t so successful in the early part of his career (see Lisa), but his third acts to Pixar and Apple proved he had the sequel touch.
“There’s a classic thing in business, which is the second-product syndrome,” Jobs later said. It comes from not understanding what made your first product so successful. “I lived through that at Apple. My feeling was, if we got through our second film, we’d make it.”
Make Tough Decisions
Good managers and leaders are willing to do hard work and, often, make unpopular decisions. Jobs apparently had little concern about being liked and therefore was well-equipped to make tough choices.
“The most visible decision he made was to kill, once and for all, the Newton, the personal digital assistant with the almost-good handwriting-recognition system.”
Presentation Can Make a World of Difference
The Apple founder hated PowerPoint presentations, but perhaps somewhat uncharacteristically, believed elegant product presentation was critical.
“Packaging can be theater, it can create a story.” — Jony Ive, Apple designer.
Find a Way to Balance Your Intensity
It’s unclear if Steve Jobs ever truly mellowed, but he did learn that a buffer between him and the rest of Apple could be useful.
“In a company that was led by a CEO prone to tantrums and withering blasts, Cook commanded situations with a calm demeanor, a soothing Alabama accent, and silent stares.”
Live for Today
Even as Steve Jobs struggled with cancer, he rarely slowed down. If anything, the disease helped him focus his efforts and pursue some of his grandest dreams.
“Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life.” — Steve Jobs
“Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.” — Steve Jobs
Share Your Wisdom
Steve Jobs was not a philanthropic soul. He had a passion for products and success, but it wasn’t until he became quite ill that he started reaching out and offering his wisdom to others in the tech community.
“I will continue to do that with people like Mark Zuckerberg too. That’s how I’m going to spend part of the time I have left. I can help the next generation remember the lineage of great companies here and how to continue the tradition. The Valley has been very supportive of me. I should do my best to repay.” — Steve Jobs
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)