Tim Cook tells Tulane University grads that 'my generation has failed you'

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 77
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,075member

    lkrupp said:
    Regarding climate change and one’s carbon footprint. Does Tim Cook drive an electric vehicle? Does Time Cook use public transportation to get to work? When he flies to China does Tim Cook travel coach on a common carrier or does he fly in the Apple corporate jet? Or is he the same kind of hypocrite that Al Gore is with his three mansions and private jets? You see, this is the kind of thing we peasants wonder about. When the BIG changes the climate advocates want are implemented will the elites still travel in luxury or will they be squeezed into mass transit cigar tubes like the rest of us will be? When we peasants are reduced to rationed heating and cooling will theTim Cooks of the world still be nice and cool in their mansions? Don’t squawk about renewable clean energy when there’s absolutely no hope of that energy source ever catching up with the exponential growth of energy demands. Nuclear Fusion is still a pipe dream that’s been promised for the last sixty years at least with no commercial reactor in sight.
    Ironically, Trump's Tariffs may be the best thing to come along to fight global warming.   Local production of products eliminates carbon generated in moving goods around the world including iPhones and computers.   Latest news seems to be that the Chinese are still boycotting Apple products because of Trump.      Maybe Cook should wise up and move production out of China.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 42 of 77
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,203member
    chasm said:
    Looking around, I do not see -- regardless of your short-sighted political persuasions -- how any rational person could disagree with Cook's assertion. Blame whomever you like, but the world and planet is inarguably in worse shape than it was under the last generation of management.

    I’m a facts and data type of guy.  And I tend to be on the glass half full side too.  So go ahead and label me.  But you said “... the world and planet is inarguably in worse shape ...”. Where does that word “inarguably” come from?

    If you ask people’s opinion on whether things are better or worse compared to 50 years ago you get mixed results.  No need to wonder why.  Opinions are molded by big media, interest groups seeking to maintain their livelihoods, rent seekers in academia, those seeking power by sowing fear among the population, cloistered Facebook groups and web spaces where likeminded people congregate to share and reinforce their own believes and opinions.  Of course you know what people’s opinions are like, so I won’t repeat it here.

    But actual global statistics on tangible things such as life expectancy, healthcare, poverty rates, availability of clean drinking water and food all point in positive directions.  Although we need to do much more.  So I think the word “inarguably” was perhaps not the best word to use.

    Best thing of all from 50 years ago, we have iPhones!  Thank you Apple.  Thank you Steve Jobs.

    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 43 of 77
    If Lefties like Tim really believed in climate change, they'd be shilling non-stop for nuclear energy in their daily affairs. This is proven technology we have today that can wipe out our carbon footprint within a generation. Without having to revamp our entire economy in the process.
    I used to support massive investment in fission plants. Then someone dropped a couple of airplanes on the WTC. And also, we learned that nuclear operators keep failing at safety 101, because money. I now support fission a whole lot less, though I still think we should be trying to build new-gen tech like molten salt reactors.
    Thats why climate change is a scam meant to take away your freedom and your money. Don't fall for it. I'm glad Tim thinks his generation has failed these students. Its good when doomsday prophets fail, because their predictions are always bunk anyway. Doesn't matter whether its a wild-eyed street preacher or the head priest of the technorati class.
    Like the other liars and fools, you fail at logic 101:
    - Imperfection in the messenger does not make the message less true
    - There are rational reasons to consider nuclear a bad solution (though it's a complex balance of evils)
    - "Freedom" and "money" are hot-button words typically used to obfuscate facts. If you live in any modern society, you are already making tradeoffs using both those commodities. You pay taxes, and you give up the ability to kill anyone or take anything you please. The important question is how much are you giving up, and what are you getting in return? The sky-is-falling wailing about how climate change legislation will take all this away is patently nonsense (for example, there are a lot more jobs in green energy than in coal; if you had to kill one of those industries, which one would it be? - not that that's really the choice we face).
    - Even if the costs are significant (unproven, and likely to be false for most people), they're not going to be as high as the cost of climate change ALREADY IS. Open your eyes! If you're not old enough to remember what the weather in this country was like 40-50 years ago, go read some statistics. Which you should anyway.
    - The predictions aren't failing. Except in that they haven't been dire enough.

    If you don't like "lefties", fine, fight with them all you like. But stop making this a political issue. It's not. It's a matter of survival. And while I'm not sure that suicidal ostriches deserve to survive, I'd really prefer that you not take my children with you.
    bilweelerMisterKit
  • Reply 44 of 77
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    JWSC said:
    Oh boy.

    Loons to the left. Loons to the right.  Moderator switching off comments in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ...
    You are worse than any of them.

    "A plague on both their houses, shrug". The lazy center is the doom of our world. You can't be bothered to spend the time to figure out that they are not equal, and the lack of your weight added to the debate is another big nail in our collective coffin.

    There are no "loons to the left" here. If you consider a recognition of anthropogenic climate change to be a left issue (why is it? It wasn't twenty years ago), then two posters here are "left". Neither was by any conceivable stretch of the imagination a loon. You don't have to have my point of view (that anyone on the other side of the issue is a loon, a liar, or willfully ignorant) to recognize that both StrangeDays and Normm posted fact-based statements. Even if you contest the validity of their facts, nothing was "loony".

    Come to think of it, I don't think the deniers are loons either- at least the ones who posted. They may just be liars or ignorant.

    The longer your expected lifespan, the more your willful blindness/laziness/whatever is going to cost *you* as well as the rest of us.

    While I don't agree with what he said, don't call it the center.   The center tends to base their opinion on fact rather than ideology.  He was engaging in a false equivalency:  "They're all wrong (and there is no center or truth)".
  • Reply 45 of 77
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Marvin said:
    Steve Jobs was part of Tim Cook's generation.  He was not perfect but I would hardly say he failed newer generations.
    He didn't say Steve Jobs or anyone else of his generation failed newer generations in general, the context of his statement was regarding the environment and the other talking points he mentioned like criminal justice and immigration. He was encouraging the audience to look at human needs and leave something better for humanity by not being overly cautious in the face of significant hurdles, not being concerned with unimportant issues and putting humanity's shared interests ahead of their own.

    He actually mentioned Steve Jobs as an example of this where he was convinced by him to leave a comfortable job to work for a near-bankrupt company because of its values in making a significant contribution to humanity. His success at Apple and his statement that the audience likely doesn't even know the name of the company he left demonstrates he made the right choice and encourages the audience not to lack the courage of making a similar choice.

    Tim Cook is a very thoughtful person and it makes a lot of sense why he chose and was chosen to work at Apple. It's good that he can be a positive example to younger generations. If Tim's generation failed anywhere, it's not making enough people like him.
    Thanks!
    I think, next time, Tim should ask you to write his speech!
  • Reply 46 of 77
    "A plague on both their houses, shrug". The lazy center is the doom of our world. You can't be bothered to spend the time to figure out that they are not equal, and the lack of your weight added to the debate is another big nail in our collective coffin.
    While I don't agree with what he said, don't call it the center.   The center tends to base their opinion on fact rather than ideology.  He was engaging in a false equivalency:  "They're all wrong (and there is no center or truth)".
    Now, that's an interesting position to take.

    I agree that it's a false equivalency. That was my main point. I *wish* I agreed that "the center tends to base their opinion on fact". Sadly, I don't think the center is any more fact-based than either "side". The person I was originally criticizing is a perfect example - he's too lazy to find the (readily available) facts in the first place. Also, there's some research showing that the right is generally less susceptible to facts, though the left is hardly immune to the will to stupidity.

    In any case, I was careful to qualify what I said: the *lazy* center. Which, unfortunately, I suspect is most of it.
    bilweeler
  • Reply 47 of 77
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,600member
    Tim is not the spokesperson for his generation and many disagree with his assessment 
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 48 of 77
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    chasm said:
    Looking around, I do not see -- regardless of your short-sighted political persuasions -- how any rational person could disagree with Cook's assertion. Blame whomever you like, but the world and planet is inarguably in worse shape than it was under the last generation of management.
    That’s your personal perception at work. The fact is that individuals today have the best economic and survival advantages in human history thanks to options in technology and communications spurred on  by capitalism and competition.
    lkruppJWSC
  • Reply 49 of 77
    jimh2jimh2 Posts: 611member
    Another apology...I guess it makes the person apologizing feel good without saturating themselves in alcohol. Cook, please excuse me from your we. I have not failed a generation nor do I buy into the fact that anyone has failed them nor will I ever. The world's population is exploding and has been for sometime. People who live in the hell holes where growth is out of control want the same basic necessities that we take for granted and of course the do-gooders want to protect them from themselves.

    Do any of the climate change agenda people really believe that India and China care about global warming? Or that African countries will be willing to forgo 1st world conveniences to supposedly save the planet. I live a few hundred feet from the Atlantic Ocean and have been flooded multiple times with only one of them making it into the house (it is elevated to reduce the impact of flooding). When built in 1995 it was only a few feet above sea level and flooded for the 1st time in 2011 (major) and again in 2012 (very minor, no damage to house or loss of personal items). Prior to 1995 it was flooded in 1991, but there were only a few houses on the street and prior to that it was at a minimum prior to 1983. The point is flooding has always happened, but was not much of an issue until man moved into flood prone areas and built permanent structures. 

    I am willing to accept the risk of flooding, but am building a new house with an elevated garage. Minimum height will be 9' above sea level which is 5' above 100 year flood stage. If it were less than $80K to raise my house and I had room for a detached garage I'd stay, but I am not willing to risk losing any cars. There are other risks besides flood and in fact no one is immune. You just have to pick the one you can live with.
    edited May 2019 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 50 of 77
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    dysamoria said:
    Unless you’re talking about conservative religious “schools”, there’s zero evidence for these statements. From which conspiracy-theorist website did you pull this opinion? 
    Anybody who is informed and follows the news and current events will be aware that there has been a whole slew of anti-free speech and censorship incidents taking place on various campuses for many years now.

    If you choose not to believe it, then that's your choice. It doesn't change reality and facts. It's more real than global warming.
    JWSC
  • Reply 51 of 77
    mikethemartianmikethemartian Posts: 1,297member
    seankill said:
    lkrupp said:
    Regarding climate change and one’s carbon footprint. Does Tim Cook drive an electric vehicle? Does Time Cook use public transportation to get to work? When he flies to China does Tim Cook travel coach on a common carrier or does he fly in the Apple corporate jet? Or is he the same kind of hypocrite that Al Gore is with his three mansions and private jets? You see, this is the kind of thing we peasants wonder about. When the BIG changes the climate advocates want are implemented will the elites still travel in luxury or will they be squeezed into mass transit cigar tubes like the rest of us will be? When we peasants are reduced to rationed heating and cooling will theTim Cooks of the world still be nice and cool in their mansions? Don’t squawk about renewable clean energy when there’s absolutely no hope of that energy source ever catching up with the exponential growth of energy demands. Nuclear Fusion is still a pipe dream that’s been promised for the last sixty years at least with no commercial reactor in sight.
    In my mind, this is exactly it, you are 100% correct. I hope we continue to invest heavily in fusion, who knows what we will find. 

    But the the sad truth is, until we can plateau and maybe even decline our world population, we are chasing a moving target we will never meet. Same is true for world hunger. Technology and advanced methods are the only reasons we’ve made it this far. 
    Yet fission reactors have been available for decades and if wasn’t for the boogeyman hysteria surrounding them there would likely be less global warming today if we had relied on them more.
  • Reply 52 of 77
    seankill said:
    lkrupp said:
    Regarding climate change and one’s carbon footprint. Does Tim Cook drive an electric vehicle? Does Time Cook use public transportation to get to work? When he flies to China does Tim Cook travel coach on a common carrier or does he fly in the Apple corporate jet? Or is he the same kind of hypocrite that Al Gore is with his three mansions and private jets? You see, this is the kind of thing we peasants wonder about. When the BIG changes the climate advocates want are implemented will the elites still travel in luxury or will they be squeezed into mass transit cigar tubes like the rest of us will be? When we peasants are reduced to rationed heating and cooling will theTim Cooks of the world still be nice and cool in their mansions? Don’t squawk about renewable clean energy when there’s absolutely no hope of that energy source ever catching up with the exponential growth of energy demands. Nuclear Fusion is still a pipe dream that’s been promised for the last sixty years at least with no commercial reactor in sight.
    In my mind, this is exactly it, you are 100% correct. I hope we continue to invest heavily in fusion, who knows what we will find. 

    But the the sad truth is, until we can plateau and maybe even decline our world population, we are chasing a moving target we will never meet. Same is true for world hunger. Technology and advanced methods are the only reasons we’ve made it this far. 
    Yet fission reactors have been available for decades and if wasn’t for the boogeyman hysteria surrounding them there would likely be less global warming today if we had relied on them more.
    I'll add that our current fusion effort is called ITER and the WORLD is building it as our collective, first prototype. It's not a pipe dream. The US Turmp administration contributed $120 million in 2018 despite threats to cut their contribution in half when the most recent feasibility report was released. They're expected to contribute another $500 million by 2025. So even Orange 45 thinks there's something there. His sycophants don't have know or care to know anything about it. It' a massive undertaking that requires a little more than praying something into existence. They have no nose for real science. 

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nuclearpower-fusion-iter/iter-nuclear-fusion-project-avoids-delays-as-us-doubles-budget-idUSKBN1H2286
    edited May 2019
  • Reply 53 of 77
    thttht Posts: 5,421member
    seankill said:
    lkrupp said:
    Regarding climate change and one’s carbon footprint. Does Tim Cook drive an electric vehicle? Does Time Cook use public transportation to get to work? When he flies to China does Tim Cook travel coach on a common carrier or does he fly in the Apple corporate jet? Or is he the same kind of hypocrite that Al Gore is with his three mansions and private jets? You see, this is the kind of thing we peasants wonder about. When the BIG changes the climate advocates want are implemented will the elites still travel in luxury or will they be squeezed into mass transit cigar tubes like the rest of us will be? When we peasants are reduced to rationed heating and cooling will theTim Cooks of the world still be nice and cool in their mansions? Don’t squawk about renewable clean energy when there’s absolutely no hope of that energy source ever catching up with the exponential growth of energy demands. Nuclear Fusion is still a pipe dream that’s been promised for the last sixty years at least with no commercial reactor in sight.
    In my mind, this is exactly it, you are 100% correct. I hope we continue to invest heavily in fusion, who knows what we will find. 

    But the the sad truth is, until we can plateau and maybe even decline our world population, we are chasing a moving target we will never meet. Same is true for world hunger. Technology and advanced methods are the only reasons we’ve made it this far. 
    Yet fission reactors have been available for decades and if wasn’t for the boogeyman hysteria surrounding them there would likely be less global warming today if we had relied on them more.
    It’s water under the bridge now. The buildout for nuclear was in the 60s, 70s and maybe 80s. Perhaps some strategic reactor design mistakes were made back then, but it’s not possible to build out nuclear now. There’s not much point in building nuclear when renewables are cheaper. I’m not sure if there is any scenario by which nuclear will be cheaper than renewables. For a lot of places, it is just cheaper to build a wind farm or a PV farm than continuing to operate an existing coal plant let alone building a new one. In the near future, less time than it takes to build a nuclear plant, renewables+storage+HVDC will be cheaper than nuclear.

    The DOE should be continually building prototype reactors though. There really should be full scale salt and helium pebble bed and thorium reactors in operation to flesh out the designs, but the DOE moves too slow for even that, but energy isn’t really what the DOE does. The department really should be renamed the Department of Mutually Assured Destruction.


  • Reply 54 of 77
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    seankill said:
    lkrupp said:
    Regarding climate change and one’s carbon footprint. Does Tim Cook drive an electric vehicle? Does Time Cook use public transportation to get to work? When he flies to China does Tim Cook travel coach on a common carrier or does he fly in the Apple corporate jet? Or is he the same kind of hypocrite that Al Gore is with his three mansions and private jets? You see, this is the kind of thing we peasants wonder about. When the BIG changes the climate advocates want are implemented will the elites still travel in luxury or will they be squeezed into mass transit cigar tubes like the rest of us will be? When we peasants are reduced to rationed heating and cooling will theTim Cooks of the world still be nice and cool in their mansions? Don’t squawk about renewable clean energy when there’s absolutely no hope of that energy source ever catching up with the exponential growth of energy demands. Nuclear Fusion is still a pipe dream that’s been promised for the last sixty years at least with no commercial reactor in sight.
    In my mind, this is exactly it, you are 100% correct. I hope we continue to invest heavily in fusion, who knows what we will find. 

    But the the sad truth is, until we can plateau and maybe even decline our world population, we are chasing a moving target we will never meet. Same is true for world hunger. Technology and advanced methods are the only reasons we’ve made it this far. 
    Yet fission reactors have been available for decades and if wasn’t for the boogeyman hysteria surrounding them there would likely be less global warming today if we had relied on them more.
    I'll add that our current fusion effort is called ITER and the WORLD is building it as our collective, first prototype. It's not a pipe dream. The US Turmp administration contributed $120 million in 2018 despite threats to cut their contribution in half when the most recent feasibility report was released. They're expected to contribute another $500 million by 2025. So even Orange 45 thinks there's something there. His sycophants don't have know or care to know anything about it. It' a massive undertaking that requires a little more than praying something into existence. They have no nose for real science. 

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nuclearpower-fusion-iter/iter-nuclear-fusion-project-avoids-delays-as-us-doubles-budget-idUSKBN1H2286
    If this administration put research money into something you support, then the insult aimed at the President seems rather pointless.
  • Reply 55 of 77
    LatkoLatko Posts: 398member
    Hete’s how you failed on us, Tim.
    https://youtu.be/HetEYpYVrfI
  • Reply 56 of 77
    lkrupp said:
    Yeah, and it’s gonna stay that way because people are addicted to energy. People are obsessed with the consumption of energy. Energy demands are increasing exponentially across the globe, especially in China where coal fired plants are being brought online daily. Millions of acres of solar panels and windmill farms can’t keep up with that demand. Electric vehicles have their own carbon problems during manufacture. And how much environmental damage are Lithium mines causing? How much Lithium is there to go around?
    Lol. Too busy screeding to, say, look in Wikipedia? It's not like it takes a lot of research to find the answer to your question. Like any mining, the lithium industry (which is mostly not mining-based) has its environmental costs. So what? There are no perfect answers (yet). Renewables + storage are still by far preferable to the status quo, which is certain to destroy the planet. Of course, research into better batteries continues, and while progress is slow, it's still progress. And sooner or later, there will be a breakthrough on that front, be it nanomaterials, superconductors, or something else.

    It really doesn't matter what happens in China. We have to do what we can to slow the oncoming disaster, until technology truly solves the problem (probably with replicating nanomachines, but who knows?). It's not like we haven't caused the lion's share of the damage so far, so don't waste my time talking about fairness. Also, China is waking up to the problem too. They're not leading the charge, but they aren't dragging their heels as much as they used to. Their adoption of solar is incredible, vastly outstripping our own.
    edited May 2019
  • Reply 57 of 77
    thttht Posts: 5,421member
    jimh2 said:
    Do any of the climate change agenda people really believe that India and China care about global warming? Or that African countries will be willing to forgo 1st world conveniences to supposedly save the planet.
    Yes. China and India are in and care about it. They have no choice. The snows and glaciers of the Himalayan mountains feed 5 to 6 rivers that are the lifeblood of billions of people. Global warming means the snow line moves up in elevation, less water flowing through those rivers on average, and disastrous flooding on occasion due to more intense rainstorms. In certain parts of India, the heat will be so bad that they either migrate or they become nocturnal. 

    Continuing on the path of using fossil fuels as an energy sources only accelerates and make these issues worse. 

    As for as 1st world conveniences, people are not being asked to give up any. They are being asked to use a different means of energy productions. PV, wind, storage, and hydro energy are all cost competitive now, and net-net provide a better environment for them, and for us half way around the world. 

    Like any market transition, the incumbents fight it every step of the way. They deny it every step of the way. Almost all the technology is available to make your household independent of your existing utility providers. This technology will net-net be cheaper for you to use and will make the world a better place for everyone. It’s a win-win-win. 

    Are you you willing to buy a 100% green electricity plan? Use LED lights? Use more efficient appliances? Are those inconveniences to you?

    At larger scales, would taking a bullet train be more inconvenient than an airplane? EV cars, pickups and trucks will eventually by the majority of cars sold, and will in the end be better vehicles. 

    The point is flooding has always happened, but was not much of an issue until man moved into flood prone areas and built permanent structures. 

    The flooding is predicted to occur in locations that never have flooded before, not because more people or moving into flood prone areas. 

    If you decided stay at your beach property or near ocean property, and you house is 3 to 5 above sea level, the prediction is that your property will be permanently “flooded” by the end of the century You would need a boat to get there, assuming the pylons are deep enough such that the inevitable erosion doesn’t make it fall over. 

    How fast the water rises is a bit uncertain. It could earlier, it could be later, but it’s coming. 

  • Reply 58 of 77
    Althougjh I admire Apple as a company, I sometimes feel Tim Cook virtue signalling. Is offputing by a CEO.  His graduation message would have been more impact if he did what another CEO said in a graduation speech  at Morehouse College.

    Robert Smith, CEO of Vista Equity Partners paid off all the graduating class’ student loans totalling $40 M.  Surely Mr Cook can afford to donate this amount since he has no family to take care of.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/19/billionaire-tells-morehouse-seniors-hell-pay-off-their-student-loans.html


  • Reply 59 of 77
    What a shame! Talking PC. Mr Cook, get off the soapbox.
  • Reply 60 of 77
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    jimh2 said:
    Another apology...I guess it makes the person apologizing feel good without saturating themselves in alcohol. Cook, please excuse me from your we. I have not failed a generation nor do I buy into the fact that anyone has failed them nor will I ever. The world's population is exploding and has been for sometime. People who live in the hell holes where growth is out of control want the same basic necessities that we take for granted and of course the do-gooders want to protect them from themselves.

    Do any of the climate change agenda people really believe that India and China care about global warming? Or that African countries will be willing to forgo 1st world conveniences to supposedly save the planet. I live a few hundred feet from the Atlantic Ocean and have been flooded multiple times with only one of them making it into the house (it is elevated to reduce the impact of flooding). When built in 1995 it was only a few feet above sea level and flooded for the 1st time in 2011 (major) and again in 2012 (very minor, no damage to house or loss of personal items). Prior to 1995 it was flooded in 1991, but there were only a few houses on the street and prior to that it was at a minimum prior to 1983. The point is flooding has always happened, but was not much of an issue until man moved into flood prone areas and built permanent structures. 

    I am willing to accept the risk of flooding, but am building a new house with an elevated garage. Minimum height will be 9' above sea level which is 5' above 100 year flood stage. If it were less than $80K to raise my house and I had room for a detached garage I'd stay, but I am not willing to risk losing any cars. There are other risks besides flood and in fact no one is immune. You just have to pick the one you can live with.
    Actually, China is one of the world leaders combating climate change.  Not only are they strongly promoting electric vehicles but are one of the strongest supporters of the world wide climate change accords from which the U.S. abdicated.
Sign In or Register to comment.