[esrauch]

I don't see the comment you replied to as being that vague: that are claiming that the information asymmetry with the hardware manufacturers/suppliers (including Samsung) in terms of things like price negotiations and "what's the next big thing" is more valuable than the downsides of internal engineer productivity.

[adastra22]

Maybe? They didn’t claim anything at all. I didn’t see anything in that comment about price negotiations. Frankly I’m as confused as the grandparent as to what was being said.

[urthor]

I'd say the reason I was keeping it ambiguous is that I wasn't really making a point about hardware or price negotiations specifically. I'm not a hardware person at all.

I was maybe close to making a point that with supply chains, there's many reasons that might justify that kind of secrecy.

Really I just want to create empathy about non-software engineering reasons for secrecy.

Not ram home a particular hypothesis about a corporation I've never worked for. I have a habit of thinking from the perspective of corporate titans.

re: price negotiations which is my jam (3-D Negotiation and Never Split the Difference are excellent bedtime reading).

Keep in mind secrecy is often not JUST about withholding information to negotiate the best price. Sometimes the information is something the other person in the negotiation would also like you to keep secret.

[ClumsyPilot]

' I have a habit of thinking from the perspective of corporate titans.'

Thats sounds a bit presumtious, have you ever validated how accurate that perspective is? Maybe the perspective you imagine is totally different from reality.

[urthor]

Well I don't think I'm right haha. I haven't met these people and asked them exactly what they were thinking.

But I honestly think we're very biased towards assuming our senior corporate leaders are foolish and misguided.

Saying "assuming a corporation made a smart decision, why did xxx make that decision?" is usually a very fruitful line of thought.

[lapcat]

> I honestly think we're very biased towards assuming our senior corporate leaders are foolish and misguided.

I honestly think we're very biased towards assuming our senior corporate leaders are gods and not fallible mortals.

All humans make mistakes. Very bad mistakes. Even very smart people. Depending on circumstances and level of power, some people suffer the consequences of their mistakes, and others don't.

One common mistake of leaders is to surround themselves with "yes men" who never criticize them or tell them the truth. Leaders can become very detached from reality, but their power allows them to survive and even thrive in a state of reality detachment. And these leaders always have people who will defend them no matter what and paint them as infallible geniuses because of their power, which is part of what contributes to never suffering the consequences of mistakes.

[urthor]

Everyone makes mistakes.

But when they committed to that mistake, they thought they were right at the time.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23771902/

Diagnostic errors by Doctors are probably the gold standard of being error free. My estimate is that CEO types are usually right at least 60% of the time with these big decisions as it were.

What I'm curious about is why they thought they were right when they made the decision.

[ClumsyPilot]

> corporate leaders are foolish and misguided.

> corporation made a smart decision

The bankers who traded subprime mortgages and fucked off with their gains made an excellent decision. The corporations didn't, because they are not real, they don't make decisions.

Just because something is in the interest of a senior leader, does not mean it's in the interest of the whole company.

[mmcnl]

I totally didn't get that all. But could be me.

[RicoElectrico]

Seems like very Tim Cook thing to do. But the cost on innovation... doesn't really matter to him.