Regardless of Bill Joy's qualifications, this is difficult to accept considering Bill Joy is a partner at John Doerr's firm. I'm not at all opposed to the idea of a national CTO, but this article appears to be a blatant attempt on the part of this firm to cozy up to a new administration. Any advice that primarily benefits the one giving the advice should be taken with a grain of salt. That's not to say Bill Joy is not qualified, but I have no doubt there are other equally qualified candidates available. I'm surprised this would even be posted here.
If Bill Joy is indeed the most qualified, why does it matter who recommended him? It seems natural that Doerr would make Joy a partner since Doerr thinks so highly of him.
We don't know if Bill Joy is the most qualified. My point is that we should question Doerr's agenda. If Bill Joy did become a part of the new administration Doerr's firm would likely reap huge benefits similar to the way Halliburton did when Cheney took office.
Maybe Bill Joy is such a swell guy that not only does Doerr want him as a partner but also playing a large role in our country's government. Maybe Doerr's unsolicited advice is completely impartial and in the country's best interest. I, for one, believe that to be a very unlikely scenario.
In any case, the fact is we can't take this sort of thing at face value.
Or it could be that Kleiner hired Bill Joy because John Doerr thinks he's a swell guy, and that John Doerr is recommending him for national CTO because he's a swell guy. Given that Joy only recently joined Kleiner (2005), I think this is more likely.
The reason we can't take Doerr's word at face value is just another application of Buchheit's Law: "Advice = Limited Life Experience + Overgeneralization". John Doerr does not know every highly-qualified technopreneur in the country. He knows a lot of them, but remember Joy's Law: "No matter who you are, the majority of smart people do not work for you." Personally, I think Bill Gates or Marc Andreesen may have a more relevant, feet-on-the-ground perspective, while being just as qualified technically.
Comments
Regardless of Bill Joy's qualifications, this is difficult to accept considering Bill Joy is a partner at John Doerr's firm. I'm not at all opposed to the idea of a national CTO, but this article appears to be a blatant attempt on the part of this firm to cozy up to a new administration. Any advice that primarily benefits the one giving the advice should be taken with a grain of salt. That's not to say Bill Joy is not qualified, but I have no doubt there are other equally qualified candidates available. I'm surprised this would even be posted here.
If Bill Joy is indeed the most qualified, why does it matter who recommended him? It seems natural that Doerr would make Joy a partner since Doerr thinks so highly of him.
We don't know if Bill Joy is the most qualified. My point is that we should question Doerr's agenda. If Bill Joy did become a part of the new administration Doerr's firm would likely reap huge benefits similar to the way Halliburton did when Cheney took office.
Maybe Bill Joy is such a swell guy that not only does Doerr want him as a partner but also playing a large role in our country's government. Maybe Doerr's unsolicited advice is completely impartial and in the country's best interest. I, for one, believe that to be a very unlikely scenario.
In any case, the fact is we can't take this sort of thing at face value.
Or it could be that Kleiner hired Bill Joy because John Doerr thinks he's a swell guy, and that John Doerr is recommending him for national CTO because he's a swell guy. Given that Joy only recently joined Kleiner (2005), I think this is more likely.
The reason we can't take Doerr's word at face value is just another application of Buchheit's Law: "Advice = Limited Life Experience + Overgeneralization". John Doerr does not know every highly-qualified technopreneur in the country. He knows a lot of them, but remember Joy's Law: "No matter who you are, the majority of smart people do not work for you." Personally, I think Bill Gates or Marc Andreesen may have a more relevant, feet-on-the-ground perspective, while being just as qualified technically.