[스크랩] 데니스 황의 낙서 스토리

[스크랩] 목숨 걸고 일한다.

진섭생각

3학년때인가, 영준이형이 나한테 장인에 대해 이야기 한적이 있었다.
장인, 쟁이가 되고 싶다고...
장인(쟁이)는 한분야의 최고의 전문가를 이야기한다.
비록 우리는 실험실에서 납땜이나 하는 엔지니어(공돌이)이지만,
장인이 정신으로 살고 싶다고..

오카노씨의 인생을 담은 이 책을 읽다
영준이형이 이야기 했던 그 장인의 삶을 이해 할 수 있었다.

P.S. 이상직, 책 읽다가 이 책 너한테 꼭 필요할것 같다고 생각했는데,
꼭 읽어 봐라.

2007-06-19
박진섭

=========================================

책 소개
일본인들이 가장 닮고 싶은 초일류 장인
그는 첨단 기계를 무색케 하는 인간이다 - 타임 2000.5
불황에 대한 두려움을 깨끗이 씻어준 경영자! - NHK<금주의 주역> 2003.1

2003년, 일본 초거대 서점들을 석권하며, 전 일본 열도를 강타한 진한 감동의 초베스트셀러! 아마존, 키노쿠니아,야에스북센터,야후저팬 베스트셀러! 지금 일본은 장인 오카노 마사유키의 삶을 보며 '설익은 성공, 얼치기 부자놀음'에 넋을 뺐던 지난 수십 년의 세월을 뼈저리게 반성하고 있다. 그는 초등학교 학력이 전부에 나이는 70에 접어들었고, 아는 것은 프레스와 금형뿐이다. 하지만 매스컴은 불가능을 모르는 금형과 프레스의 마술사 불황에 대한 두려움을 깨끗이 씻어준 경영자 라고 격찬한다. 2003년 발간 즉시 일본 amazon 등 일본 전국 서점의 베스트셀러를 석권하는 기염을 토했다. 그리고 그 인기를 반영하듯 본서를 읽은 독자들은 서평란마다 대기업이 아니라 당신이 일본의 희망입니다! 이라고 주저 없이 글을 올렸다. 왜일까? 10년 불황이 닥치기 전만 해도 '괴짜' '정신병자' 소리를 듣던 게 그의 인생이었는데 말이다. 실제로 그는 언제나 남과 다른 길을 걸어왔다. 다른 중소기업들이 그저 대기업 하청만 할 때 그는 죽도록 일하며 신기술 개발에 몰두했다. 남들이 주식과 부동산에 몰릴 때 자기 밥값 빼고 남은 돈 전부를 회사에 투자했다. 남들이 하청업체의 등을 치고 근로자 자르기에 급급할 때 불가능하다는 기술을 개발하여 비싼 값을 받았다. 남들이 하와이나 유럽으로 놀러 갈 때, 그는 개발도상국 사람들의 성실한 모습을 견학하러 다녔다. 이제 사람들은 그의 길이 옳았다고 말한다! 오카노 마사유키의 성공은 수많은 일본 기업들과 일본 사람들의 실패가 어디에서 비롯되었는지, 그리고 어디에서 어떻게 다시 시작할 수 있는지를 명백하게 보여준다. 또한 오카노의 성공 모델 속에서 무섭게 성장하는 중국으로 인해 지레 겁을 먹고 위축되고 있는 우리 한국 제조 업체들은 새로운 성공의 가능성을 배울 수도 있다. [인터파크 제공]

작가 소개
저자 오카노 마사유키
저자 - 오카노 마사유키(岡野雅行)겨우 종업원 6명을 가진 동네 공업소 수준이면서 연간 6억 엔이라는 어마어마한 수익을 올리는 초일류 장인. 1945년에 초등학교를 졸업한 후, 학업을 그만두고 기업을 도우면서 제조업에 뛰어들었다. 1972년, 아버지로부터 사장자리를 빼앗는 ‘쿠데타’를 일으킨 후, 오카노 공업사를 설립했다. 설립 초기부터 매출이 아닌 수익을, 허세보다는 실력을 중시하는 풍토를 세웠다. 때문에 거품 낀 사장이란 호칭 대신 ‘대표사원’이란 직함을 쓰고 있으며, 변화를 중시하여 피땀 흘려 개발한 노하우도 3년만 지나면 무조건 팔아버린다.“아무나 할 수 없는 일을 한다!”는 모토 아래, 창립 이래로 휴대폰, 워크맨, 의료기긱, 전투기, 우주선 등에 들어가는 수많은 기술과 부품을 개발했으며, 휴대폰 소형화에 절대적인 리튬이온전지 케이스를 개발하면서 일본 모바일 혁명의 일등공신으로 매스컴의 주목을 받기 시작했다. 그리고 2003년에는 모기의 주둥아리 침과 같이 가늘어서 찔러도 아프지 않은 무통(無痛) 주사바늘을 개발하여 대량생산에 들어가기도 했다. 소니, 히타치 등 일본의 대기업은 물론이고 미국, 영국, 프랑스, 중국 등에서까지 기술적인 난제를 들고 그에게 찾아온다. 80년대 말 이후 미국 국방부 및 NASA의 프로젝트에도 관여하고 있다. 하룻밤에도 수십 억 원의 재료비를 쏟아부을 만큼 끝장을 보는 근성, 학벌이나 직위보다는 실력과 인간성을 중시하는 태도는 기술 대국 일본에서도 수많은 ‘열성 팬’을 만들어냈다. 초등학교 학력이 전부이지만, 60년 가까이 프레스와 금형을 하면서 그 업계의 세계적인 장인으로 일가를 이룸으로써 초일류 기업의 엔지니어와 명문대 교수들이 정보 교류를 하기 위해 그의 공장을 매일 제집처럼 드나들고 있으며, 그런 그의 명성을 반영하여 NHK나 『타임 TIME』 등에도 그의 관한 기사가 실리고 있으며, 강연 의뢰가 쇄도하고 있다.[엘리트2000 제공]

[스크랩] 이적닷컴

**** 다음은 이적닷컴에 올린 전문

요즘 메일이나 쪽지 등으로
<다행이다> 반주나 악보를 '내놓으라'는 요청을 많이 받습니다.
대부분 결혼 축가나 프로포즈용으로 쓰시겠다며.
(신랑이 직접 부르겠다는 분들도 꽤.)

원래 오리지날 반주(업계에서는 통상 MR이라고 부르는데요)는
한번도 공개한 적이 없습니다.
원곡의 신비함을 간직하고 싶은 깜찍한 마음?

하지만 인생에서 가장 중요하다 할 순간에
제 노래를 꼭 쓰고 싶다는 분들을 외면하는 것은
도리가 아닌 것 같다는 생각에,
그저 감사한 마음으로

<다행이다> 반주를 올릴까합니다.

제가 방송에서 노래할 때 쓰는 바로 그 음원입니다.

혹 주변에 찾으시는 분들께는 적닷민들이 몰래 전해주시구요.
결혼이나 프로포즈와는 아직 거리가 먼 분들은
틀어놓고 노래방 간 셈 치고 부르시구요.

반주만 들으시면 의외로 빈 공간이 많아서
처음엔 박자타기 좀 어려우실 수도 있어요.
시작할 때 원곡에는 없는 한 마디짜리 준비마디가 있으니
그 짧은 순간에 곡의 템포를 타는 것이 중요합니다.
(이러고 보니 무슨 노래교실 같아;;)

어쨌든 어린이는 어린이 대로
어른은 어른 대로 즐거운 주말 보내시구요~
결혼을 맞으시는 분들은 진정 행복한 날들 되시기 바랍니다.
어린이도 얼른 만드시구요~ㅎㅎ

그럼...

p. s.
그냥 듣기만 하실 분은
위의 첨부파일 중
File #1의 .mp3 파일 클릭하시면 플레이 되구요.
다운받으실 분은
File #2의 .zip 파일 받으시면 돼요.
용량과 음질 선택의 편의를 위해 mp3와 WAV 두 가지 담았습니다.

http://www.leejuck.com/zboard/data/literary_d/dahaengida.mp3
http://www.leejuck.com/zboard/data/literary_d/1178343844/dahaengida.zip

[스크랩] iCon

대학 중퇴하고 약관의 나이에 창업해서 백만장자가 되고
얼마후 자신이 창업한 회사에서 쫓겨나고
다시 넥스트라는 컴퓨터 회사를 창업해서 최고의 운영체제를 만들고
픽사라는 세계최고의 3D 에니메이션 제작 회사를 세우고
애플로 돌아온 후, iTune 을 발표하면서 음반시장의 정상에 섰고
우라나라에서 최초로 개발한 MP3를 UI만 독보이는 iPod로 전세계 70%를 팔았고
이제는 iPhone으로 세상을 놀래킬 준비를 하는...
정말 파란만장한 인생을 살고있는 이 시대의 iCon 스티브 잡스.

이 책을 통해 읽으면 그는 우리와 같은 엔지니어로 보기 어렵다, 빌 게이츠가 그랬듯.
애플 창업시기에 천재 엔지니어 워즈니악이 애플을 제작했지만,
세상은 스티브가 PC를 만들줄 알고 있다.
잘아는 Toy story, Fiding NIMO, Cars, Bugs life 등을 제작한 픽사에서
스티브의 역할은 돈 많은 사장이었다.

하지만, 위의 내용을들을 보면 시대의 흐름을 알수 있다.
컴퓨터, 영화, 음악, 통신등..
또, 그 중심에 스티브가 항상 서있었다는 사실을 알 수 있다.

================================================================

책 소개

에디슨보다 엉뚱한, 빌 게이츠보다 창조적인 하이테크 스타
매킨토시는 아이콘 클릭만으로 프로그램을 여는 컴퓨터 혁명을 가져왔다. 픽사의 최초 3D 애니메이션 '토이 스토리'는 영화 산업을 뒤흔들었다. 디자인과 기능 혁신을 주도한 아이포드(iPod)는 또 한번 세상을 감동시켰다. 1977년 잡스는 워즈니악과 함께 “최초의 퍼스널 컴퓨터(PC)” 애플Ⅱ를 선보였다. “모든 사람에게 컴퓨터를 안겨 주는 것”은 잡스의 꿈이었다. 당시 사람들은 애플Ⅱ를 놓고 이렇게 작은 컴퓨터는 있을 수 없다고 생각했기 때문에, 잡스는 뒤에 대형 컴퓨터가 숨어 있지 않다는 걸 증명해 보여야 했다. 애플은 PC 시장을 장악했고, 스물다섯의 잡스는 가장 젊은 억만장자가 되었다. 잡스가 1984년에 내놓은 매킨토시는 GUI(그래픽 사용자 인터페이스)를 사용한다는 점에서 “컴퓨터 최대의 혁명”을 일으켰다. 그 누구도 아이콘 클릭만으로 프로그램을 열 수 있으리라고는 상상도 못했던 시절이다! (잡스의 혁명적인 아이디어가 없었다면 우린 최근까지도 컴퓨터에 도스 명령어를 입력하고 있었을 것이다.)
“시장 조사는 하지 않았다. 그레이엄 벨이 전화를 발명할 때 시장 조사를 했느냔 말이다! 천만의 말씀. 내가 바라는 것은 오직 혁신이다.” ―스티브 잡스
잡스는 늘 시대를 “너무” 앞섰기 때문에 시장성 면에서 실패하기도 했다. 잡스가 애플에서 쫓겨난 이유도 그 점이었다. 잡스가 다시 세운 회사 NeXT의 첫 번째 컴퓨터 큐브도 (플로피 디스크 대신) 아무도 쓰지 않는 광자기 디스크 드라이브(MOD)를 장착하는 등 잡스다운 혁신적인 컴퓨터였지만 언론의 주목만 받았을 뿐 팔리진 않았다. 한편 1996년에 내놓은 아이맥(iMac)에, 잡스는 이번에도 “전문가들의 만류에도 불구하고” (플로피 디스크 대신) CD롬을 장착했다. 그런데 이번엔 잡스가 120퍼센트 옳았다.

오직 혁신으로 시대를 앞당긴 개척자
잡스가 NeXT의 실패로 고전을 면치 못하고 있을 때, 순전히 컴퓨터로만 애니메이션을 만들 수 있다는 데 매료됐다. 그가 조지 루커스에게서 사들인 픽사(Pixar)는 결국 1995년 최초의 3D 장편 애니메이션 '토이 스토리'를 성공시키고, 애니메이션 산업을 한 단계 업그레이드시키면서 할리우드 영화사의 흐름을 바꾸어 놓았다. 그 누구도 컴퓨터만으로 애니메이션을 만들 수 있다고 생각지 못하던 시절이다. (아직 벤처 투자 열풍이 불기 전이었던) 당시 픽사의 주식 공개 상장은 “잠재 가치를 보는” 새로운 투자 패턴을 낳았고, 잡스를 다시 억만장자로 만들었다. 이후 픽사가 내놓은 '몬스터 주식회사'(2001), '니모를 찾아서'(2003) 등은 계속 할리우드의 불문율을 깨뜨리면서 기록을 냈다. 잡스는 “가장 성공한 할리우드 영화사”의 주인이 됐다! 컴퓨터 광 잡스가 전혀 다른 분야에서 몇 년 만에 거물이 된 것이다.
특히 '인크레더블'은 또 하나의 혁신이었다. 인간은 컴퓨터 그래픽(CG) 애니메이션으로 표현하기 어려운 캐릭터로 악명 높았기 때문에 모든 장편 애니메이션의 주인공은 괴물이나 동물이었다. 다른 영화사였다면 슈퍼 영웅 가족의 모험담을 만들자는 버드 감독의 제안이 경험 없는 감독의 “객기”로 치부되었을 것이다. 그러나 잡스는 항상 혁신만을 추구하는 인물이었기 때문에 픽사는 모험을 했고, '인크레더블'은 잡스에게 아카데미상을 안겨 줬다.

디자인 혁신으로 기술 혁신을 이끌어낸 꿈꾸는 예술가
잡스에게 가장 중요한 문제는 디자인이다. 잡스가 이끌어낸 모든 혁신의 중심은 사실 디자인이다. 키가 큰 매킨토시도 당시 대단한 디자인 혁신이었으며, 모니터와 본체를 하나로 만든 혁신적인 아이맥도 전혀 새로운 디자인을 원했던 잡스의 열망에서 비롯됐다. 2002년 작은 반구형의 새 아이맥 디자인은 모든 사람들의 감탄을 자아냈다. 특히 아이포드(iPod)는 우아한 디자인과 세련된 심플함으로 인해 높은 가격에도 불구하고 MP3 시장을 휩쓸었다. 물론 출시 당시 가장 많은 곡을 담을 수 있었고, 지금까지도 다른 MP3가 아이포드의 손쉬운 사용법을 따라잡지 못한다. 잡스는 무엇보다도 디자인을 가장 중요하게 생각하는 자칭 “예술가”이며, 첨단 기술을 가장 손쉽게 작동하도록 만드는 것이 애플의 정신이다. 아이포드는 이러한 잡스의 감각과 애플의 목표가 잘 결합된 작품이다.

세상을 바꾸겠다는 “비전”과 우주에 영향을 미치겠다는 “꿈”이 있다
잡스는 “비현실적인 목표를 세우는 데 일가견”이 있었다. 잡스는 “너무 어린 데다 경험도 없기 때문에 성취할 수 없는 것이 무엇인지 몰랐다. 또 아이디어라는 열정 하나에 이끌렸다. 그는 불가능한 것에 대한 감이 없었다. 그런데 바로 이 점 때문에 지혜로운 사람들이 ‘이룰 수 없다.’고 판단한 일도 일단 시작했다.” 1976년 허름한 차고 하나 달랑 갖고 있던 잡스는 5년 안에 애플 사를 《포춘》500대 기업으로 성장시키겠다고 호언장담했다. 학벌도 “빽”도 없는 잡스는 그 꿈을 이루었다! 1981년 IBM이 PC를 출시했을 때, 잡스는 자신을 “골리앗에 맞서 싸우는 다윗”으로 여겼다. “만약 IBM이 이긴다면 앞으로 20년은 컴퓨터 암흑시대일 거다. IBM이 시장을 장악하는 순간 더 이상 혁신은 없다!” 한편 잡스는 늘 기상천외한 아이디어를 냈다. IBM 규모의 10분의 1밖에 안 되는 애플은 IBM이 PC 시장에 경쟁자로 나타난 대에 대해 “IBM을 환영합니다.”라는 뻔뻔스러운 광고를 냈는데, 이 광고 덕분에 애플이라는 작은 회사의 브랜드가 널리 알려지게 되었다.
잡스는 독단과 아집, 갖가지 기벽으로도 악명 높지만, 워즈니악을 비롯하여 잡스 곁에서 혹독한 노동을 견딘 사람들은 한결같이 그의 비전에 매혹된 사람들이다. 자신이 입양아라는 사실 때문에 자신의 능력을 증명해 보여야 한다는 강박관념을 느꼈지만, 잡스가 자신이 창업한 회사에서 쫓겨나는 수모와 NeXT의 실패를 극복하고 경쟁이 치열한 냉엄한 미국 비즈니스 세계에서 “애플 신화의 창조자”로 성공할 수 있었던 원동력은 자신의 아이디어로 세상을 바꿀 수 있다는 강한 신념과 “비전”이었다. 스티브 잡스는 디지털 시대 최대의 혁신을 주도하면서 컴퓨터, 영화, 음악을 장악한 이 시대의 독보적인 아이콘이다.

“세계에서 가장 창의적인 회사” 애플과 스티브 잡스 신화의 모든 것!
“전 세계 기업들이 스티브 잡스를 본받고 있다.” ―《비즈니스위크》
애플Ⅱ가 시장을 장악하고 있을 때 주위의 반대에도 불구하고 잡스는 애플Ⅰ을 산 사람들이 계속 업그레이드할 수 있도록 배려했다. 그것은 잡스가 항상 고수하던 원칙이다. 알 수 없는 그의 복잡한 성격에도 불구하고 잡스는 언제나 “올바른 것”에 대한 판단력은 잃지 않았다. 회사에 손해가 되더라도 자신이 옳다고 생각하는 바는 끝까지 밀어붙였다. 또한 잡스는 자신의 한계를 정확히 인식하고, 뛰어난 인재를 찾아내 끌어들이는 비상한 수완을 발휘했다. 잡스에게는 또한 미래를 내다보는 능력이 있다. 잡스의 아이튠 뮤직스토어는 음반 업계의 축복 속에 탄생한 최초의 인터넷 음악 공급 업체다. 잡스는 디지털 음악 공급이 음악의 판매와 배급 방식을 영구히 변화시킬 것을 확신하고 있었다. “이번에도 그는 미래의 맥박을 정확히 짚어냈다!” “디즈니 사장 마이클 아이스너 같은 걸출한 인물들 간의 파워 플레이와 비즈니스 전략의 깊숙한 내부를 들여다본다.” ―《USA 투데이》 'iCon 스티브 잡스'는 잡스라는 오만한 천재 기술 마니아가 추락과 죽음의 문턱을 넘으며 어떻게 예술가로서, 인간으로서 거듭나게 되는지 보여 주는 흥미진진한 드라마이다. 잡스의 사업가 기질과 발명가적인 재능을 엿볼 수 있는 어린 시절부터 추락과 부활은 물론이고 전혀 새로운 영역을 개척하고 음악 시장까지 장악한 다음, 이제 미니맥(Mini Mac)을 내놓고 빌 게이츠로부터 컴퓨터 왕국을 되찾으려고 준비하는 현재의 모습까지 생생하게 담아냈다. 이 책의 저자인 제프리 영은 실리콘 밸리 기사를 전문으로 쓰는 기자로 1983년에 잡스를 처음 만나, 잡스에 대해 두 번째 평전을 쓴 것이며, 윌리엄 사이먼은 애플의 전 사장 길 어밀리오와 함께 애플 관련 책을 저술한 인물이다. 이 책은 다른 어떤 책이나 잡지에서는 볼 수 없는 애플 내부의 문화와 잡스의 성향 및 걸출한 인물들 간의 파워 플레이를 가장 잘 보여 준다.

매년 50퍼센트씩 오른 애플 주가에는 “잡스 프리미엄”이 있다!
2004년 잡스는 죽음의 선고를 받았지만 췌장암 종류의 1퍼센트에 불과한 섬세포신경내분비종양으로 밝혀졌다. 수술을 무사히 마친 잡스는 애플 전 직원에게 이 사실을 알리며 다음과 같은 추신을 덧붙였다. “저는 이 메일을 병원 침상에서 17인치짜리 파워북 컴퓨터와 에어포트 익스프레스(무선표준지원장치)를 사용하여 이메일을 보냅니다.” 잡스의 회복 소식으로 잡시 주춤하던 애플과 픽사 주가는 다시 정상을 회복했다. 빌 게이츠 없는 마이크로소프트와 잭 웰치 없는 제너럴일렉트릭보다도 스티브 잡스 없는 애플은 상상할 수 없다. 현재 인터넷에서 떠돌고 있는 “Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.”(“늘 배고프고 늘 어리석어라.”)는 올해 명문 스탠퍼드 대학교 졸업식에서 스티브 잡스가 감동적으로 마친 연설문의 마지막 문장이다. 'iCon 스티브 잡스' 역시 독자에게 꿈과 성공에 대한 감동적인 메시지를 전할 것이다. [인터파크 제공]

[스크랩] 스티브와 빌

스티브와 빌이 함께 인터뷰한 동영상이 있었군.

짦은 대화이지만, 모두 이해될때 까지 반복해서 들으리다.

ㅋㅋ

[스트랩] 스티브 잡스 스탠포드 대학 졸업식 축사. 2006년 6월 12일

Stanford Report, June 14, 2005

'You've got to find what you love,' Jobs says





This is the text of the Commencement address by Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer and of Pixar Animation Studios, delivered on June 12, 2005.



I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I've ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That's it. No big deal. Just three stories.



The first story is about connecting the dots.



I dropped out of Reed College after the first 6 months, but then stayed around as a drop-in for another 18 months or so before I really quit. So why did I drop out?



It started before I was born. My biological mother was a young, unwed college graduate student, and she decided to put me up for adoption. She felt very strongly that I should be adopted by college graduates, so everything was all set for me to be adopted at birth by a lawyer and his wife. Except that when I popped out they decided at the last minute that they really wanted a girl. So my parents, who were on a waiting list, got a call in the middle of the night asking: "We have an unexpected baby boy; do you want him?" They said: "Of course." My biological mother later found out that my mother had never graduated from college and that my father had never graduated from high school. She refused to sign the final adoption papers. She only relented a few months later when my parents promised that I would someday go to college.



And 17 years later I did go to college. But I naively chose a college that was almost as expensive as Stanford, and all of my working-class parents' savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn't see the value in it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out. And here I was spending all of the money my parents had saved their entire life. So I decided to drop out and trust that it would all work out OK. It was pretty scary at the time, but looking back it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The minute I dropped out I could stop taking the required classes that didn't interest me, and begin dropping in on the ones that looked interesting.



It wasn't all romantic. I didn't have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends' rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5¢ deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on. Let me give you one example:



Reed College at that time offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully hand calligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn't have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can't capture, and I found it fascinating.



None of this had even a hope of any practical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the first Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It was the first computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, its likely that no personal computer would have them. If I had never dropped out, I would have never dropped in on this calligraphy class, and personal computers might not have the wonderful typography that they do. Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.



Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.



My second story is about love and loss.



I was lucky — I found what I loved to do early in life. Woz and I started Apple in my parents garage when I was 20. We worked hard, and in 10 years Apple had grown from just the two of us in a garage into a $2 billion company with over 4000 employees. We had just released our finest creation — the Macintosh — a year earlier, and I had just turned 30. And then I got fired. How can you get fired from a company you started? Well, as Apple grew we hired someone who I thought was very talented to run the company with me, and for the first year or so things went well. But then our visions of the future began to diverge and eventually we had a falling out. When we did, our Board of Directors sided with him. So at 30 I was out. And very publicly out. What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating.



I really didn't know what to do for a few months. I felt that I had let the previous generation of entrepreneurs down - that I had dropped the baton as it was being passed to me. I met with David Packard and Bob Noyce and tried to apologize for screwing up so badly. I was a very public failure, and I even thought about running away from the valley. But something slowly began to dawn on me — I still loved what I did. The turn of events at Apple had not changed that one bit. I had been rejected, but I was still in love. And so I decided to start over.



I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life.



During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife. Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple's current renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.



I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn't been fired from Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it. Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith. I'm convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You've got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle.



My third story is about death.



When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.



Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.



About a year ago I was diagnosed with cancer. I had a scan at 7:30 in the morning, and it clearly showed a tumor on my pancreas. I didn't even know what a pancreas was. The doctors told me this was almost certainly a type of cancer that is incurable, and that I should expect to live no longer than three to six months. My doctor advised me to go home and get my affairs in order, which is doctor's code for prepare to die. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you'd have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means to make sure everything is buttoned up so that it will be as easy as possible for your family. It means to say your goodbyes.



I lived with that diagnosis all day. Later that evening I had a biopsy, where they stuck an endoscope down my throat, through my stomach and into my intestines, put a needle into my pancreas and got a few cells from the tumor. I was sedated, but my wife, who was there, told me that when they viewed the cells under a microscope the doctors started crying because it turned out to be a very rare form of pancreatic cancer that is curable with surgery. I had the surgery and I'm fine now.



This was the closest I've been to facing death, and I hope its the closest I get for a few more decades. Having lived through it, I can now say this to you with a bit more certainty than when death was a useful but purely intellectual concept:



No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life's change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.



Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.



When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960's, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.



Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.



Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.



Thank you all very much.

[스크랩] 빌 게이츠 졸업 연설문

6 개월간의 산고끝에 탄생했다는 빌게이츠의 하바드대 졸업연설문입니다.

President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:
I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”
I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.
I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.
But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.
Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.
One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.
I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.
What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.
But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.
I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.
I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.
But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.
I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.
It took me decades to find out.
You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.
Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?
For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.
During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.
We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.
If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”
So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”
The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.
But you and I have both.
We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.
If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.
I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.” I completely disagree.
I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.
All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.
The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.
To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.
Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.
But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”
The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.
We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.
If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.
Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.
Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.
The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior!.
Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.
The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.
You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.
But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.
I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.
What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?
You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.
Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.
The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.
Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”
Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.
The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.
The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.
At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion -- smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.
We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.
Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.
What for?
There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?
Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:
Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?
Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the preval!ence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?
Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?
These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.
My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: “From those to whom much is given, much is expected.”
When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.
In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.
Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.
You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort. You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.
Knowing what you know, how could you not?
And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.
Good luck. President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:
I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”
I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.
I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.
But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.
Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.
Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.
One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.
I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.
What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.
But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.
I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.
I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.
But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.
I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.
It took me decades to find out.
You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.
Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?
For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.
During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.
We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.
If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”
So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”
The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.
But you and I have both.
We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.
If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.
I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.” I completely disagree.
I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.
All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.
The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.
To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.
Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.
But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”
The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.
We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.
If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.
Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.
Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.
The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior!.
Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.
The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.
You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.
But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.
I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.
What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?
You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.
Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.
The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.
Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”
Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.
The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.
The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.
At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion -- smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.
We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.
Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.
What for?
There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?
Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:
Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?
Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the preval!ence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?
Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?
These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.
My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: “From those to whom much is given, much is expected.”
When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.
In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.
Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.
You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort. You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.
Knowing what you know, how could you not?
And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.
Good luck.

양파가 돌아오다.

돌아온 양파..

동갑내기라 친구 같은 양파.
노래 잘불러 많이 좋아했던 양파.
힘들었던 시절이 있어 더 애정이 갔던 양파.

수능날 2교시 마치고 울면서 고사장을 빠져 나오는 모습이 엊그제 같은데...
10년이 지났으니...

컴백, 정말 축하드리고
많이 가다렸습니다.

컴백 무대 동영상 - 다음 'tv팟'
http://tvpot.daum.net/clip/ClipView.do?clipid=2985355&type=chal