> The worst [Steve Jobs] has been accused of is driving people hard to achieve the perfection he sought.

And colluding with other tech companies to fix his employees' wages.

And belittling people and treating them down emotionally.

Abandoning his daughter.

You've been praising Steve Jobs throughout this thread, saying his flaws "served" Apple. We don't know that they did. All we know is that they didn't run it into the ground.

If we are angry about Kalanick sexually harassing people (as we should be), Steve Jobs mentally/emotionally harassing people is as bad. There is no difference, don't make it seem like it is okay or that it was "good for Apple".

I've been doing saying it all over the thread to nip this idea in the butt that sexual assault is in any way a feature of a successful break-the-rules, disrupt-the establishment startup.

I'm not primarily interest in defending Steve Jobs, although I think his reputation may be a bit overblown, and largely based on a few anecdotes from rather early in his career.

But the repeated reference to him shows how people are equating the two, which is just terribly wrong, at least in as far as it concerns the sexism at Uber.

Because from the stories I know about Jobs, a credible case can indeed be made that he was slavedriver in search of perfection, and that his nastiness contributed to his success.

For Kalanick that may also be true in regards to Uber's repeated trouble with local law regarding employment and licensing. But the sexual harassment charges simply have nothing to do with it,

Jobs did some bad stuff apart from that and Kalanick is reputed to be quite talented.

There aren't reports of Kalanick himself harassing women.