"In systematically developing and implementing this vision,Steven has become recognized as the world's leading expert on the trusted computing paradigm."
I thought this was a curious statement by Gilder. Developing and implementing.
The presumption seems to be that because Steven sits atop the executive hierarchy he must be the world's leading expert.
But knowledge and authority are two different things. I am not so sure that Steven rises above Allen, Veil or Thibadeau, for instance, let alone the folks from other companies like Steve Hanna. Indeed, my sense is that Steven likely has a strong commercial understanding, but he shows little sign of the social, political or legal subtlety which is just as necessary when describing a person as the bearer of expertise in this space. TC is all about interests that interlock in subtle ways. Steven promotes a single company's interests. By nature, his understanding is skewed.
When I google Thibadeau I find an awareness of the broader political and social environment which TC affects. When I google Allen I find a deep specialist knowledge of the plate tectonics of the trust market. When I hear about Veil, it is as a security scientist who knows his bits. On the other hand, Steven's public commentary has hardly troubled the dial: he believes in Wave and furthers its interests. Not a bad thing. But I feel confident that it is this that he is known for. He placed his bet (made up of investors' money!) on TC. He is known for running a company which offers a set of products in the trust market.
I wonder why Gilder places Steven atop the wrong mountain? Back slaps in the board room?
As for "paradigm". .... Gasp.
Evolution, not revolution. I guess futurists needs must deal in grand ideas. But small ones are so much easier to implement.
| 