This description of Jeff Bezos is…odd.
Jeff is a very smart person (recent infosec issues notwithstanding, he’s probably smarter than you are).
Why is it still allowed to call him very smart if there are infosec issues on shared infrastructure?
Are we seeing a case of Jeff has no clothes on yet his staff are too terrified of his emperor-like “bruising” management style to tell him?
And which of the many infosec issues are they referring to? Amazon has built a reputation for playing dumb.
As far as I can tell, Amazon only even acknowledged the mistake because Zack Whittaker wrote an article on it. That pretty much forced Amazon’s hand to respond.
Would someone building and maintaining bridges over water that then collapse still be called smarter than you are “notwithstanding” the collapses? Seems unfair, as if to say you can be smart at engineering and yet do harm.
If you are smart enough to avoid a collapse doesn’t that make you smarter and in the most important way (abiding by core engineering ethic of do no harm)?
I’ll be teaching a CS course on ethics again this year and can’t wait to hear what students think of how smart it is for the CEO of a tech company to do harm and play dumb.