Why Steve Jobs was like Ronald Reagan – and 3 other great men

The Week writes, “Equal parts innovator and authoritarian, [Steve] Jobs had a fierce, unwavering style of leadership and a brilliant imagination that left a seismic imprint well beyond the tech industry, turning a start-up founded in Steve Wozniak’s garage into what is now the world’s most valuable company. How is Jobs’ legacy resonating, now, [one year] after his passing?”

Here, four great men Jobs is being compared to:

Henry Ford: Just like the automotive innovator, Jobs was “one of those rarefied individuals who had not only a vision” but also the “will and force of personality to execute it through America’s greatest cultural triumph: The public corporation,” says Mat Honan at Wired.

Thomas Edison: When Jobs is remembered decades from now, it’ll be as the man who invented the iPhone and iPad, “not as the executive who was sometimes a tyrant,” says Brandon Griggs at CNN.

Ronald Reagan: Jobs’ legacy has taken on a “mythical role for people who write about Apple that’s very similar to the way conservative pundits invoke the late President Ronald Reagan,” says Rebecca Greenfield at The Atlantic Wire.

U.S. President Ronald Reagan awards Steve Jobs the 1985 National Medal of Technology
U.S. President Ronald Reagan awards Steve Jobs the 1985 National Medal of Technology

 

Walt Disney: Disney was “the closest thing corporate America had to a Steve Jobs-like figure before Steve Jobs came along,” says Harry McCracken at TIME.

Read more in the full article here.

146 Comments

        1. Your opinion about Reagan says much about the value of your opinions in general. You do not speak for the rest of the world, I doubt you could identify most of the rest of the world, and I really doubt you know much of anything outside of a narrow band of liberal echo chamber thought.

          1. You have the wrong guy here. I am not liberal. I doubt that you have much experience in travelling around the world or listening to news other than CNN. Get some experience and wisdom before you spout off.

            1. ooh.. pla41n b4g3l! How about practicing what you preach? You constantly tell people here, like some feeble minded church lady, to watch their attitudes and language like you are pontificating on self righteous island, and look at you… just another hypocrite.

            2. Well most of my comment stands regardless of what you label yourself as. Calling Reagan a doofus says more about you than anything else you could ever say, do, or write.

              I doubt you have been to 1/2 as many countries as I have, not that it matters.

              I do agree with you that Steve Jobs was a genius but just as you think Reagan was a doofas, many think the same of Jobs.

        2. “Which one of the following presidents do you think was the best overall president in our history?”

          1. Abraham Lincoln (R) – 27%
          2. Ronald Reagan (R) – 22%
          3. George Washington (no party) – 12%

          Harris Interactive poll, January 16-23, 2012

            1. JFK was a failure until he managed to get his head blown off by Castro, then he was deified.

              What did JFK do besides give some nice speeches* and almost plunge the world into WWIII?

              * Libs really love nice speeches; style over substance. See: Obama

            2. Yeah, ya know, “Libs” like the guy were are discussing here: STEVE JOBS

              It’s hilarious all this name calling towards liberals from the right when the very topic of this discussion is about a liberal that we all admire so much.

            3. Obama: “I have a dream! A dream where… uh, uh, you know, uh… Hey, can somebody fix the damn teleprompter?!!!”

              The mistake that is the presidency of the empty chair is rapidly coming to an ignominious end.

            4. I do so love that “Smirk” video. It is the very definition of “bitch slap” and it’s all done so gracefully and efficiently by Romney, the next President of the United States of America!

              Can’t wait for Ryan to “debate” that clown Biden. Biden’s last remaining plugs are going to pop right out of his head.

            5. Castro had nothing to do with the Kennedy assassination.
              You are not a historian. JFK was not one of the greatest presidents. He didn’t have the time in office to even begin to put a mark on the world. His accomplishment he will be remembered for is averting war with the Soviets during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

              Presidents are usually in these ratings because of dynamics beyond their control and their reaction to them.

              Lincoln kept a United States whole at a time when secession over slavery almost became a reality. FDR for his stewardship through the great depression and WWII.

              Washington for his leadership in our movement to independence from Great Britain.

              Harding for his ability to let crooks control the white house, George Bush Sr. For his leadership in the Iraq war. Bush Jr. for his ownership of the Texas Rangers.

            6. JFK was not killed by Castro. Nor was he a failure. His murder was a coup d’ etat. If you just dug a little you’d know. JFK was very well aware of the real power behind world governments and who actually run the planet.

              This speech alone was enough to get him murdered…
              http:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeYgLLahHv8

            7. “We choose to go to the moon, not because it is easy, but because it is hard.” And we went.

              As for JFKs accomplishments, start by reading PT-109.

            1. Delusional bastard believed he had beaten Romney’ in Denver debate:

              http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215173/Obama-believed-beaten-Romney-Denver-debate-ignoring-advice-aides.html

              So transparently narcissistic and hopelessly unqualified. I can’t believe so many fell for the empty suit in 2008.

              I voted for “old” John McCain – who’s still very much alive, by the way – and the U.S. would be much better off today if John McCain were president right now.

            1. Nope. GW was an “independent,” lower case “i,” or non-party politician. He was, and always will be, the greatest U.S. President.

            2. I’m getting contradictory responses from the web:

              •What political party was George Washington?
              George Washington was in the Federalist Party. (ChaCha)

              •Political parties did not exist in 1789. Washington despised the idea of political associations, formed in such a way as to pit one group of citizens against another. In his farewell speech in 1796 he said: “…They [political parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community…”

            3. man, his insight on political parties is more powerful than Eisenhower’s comment on the military-industrial complex during his Farewell Speech…why can’t we find people like that to lead our country now?

            4. Washington ran as a Federalist for his second term in 1792; no parties had formed in 1789 when he was first elected, so he was ‘unaffiliated’ then. (Only 10 states named electors then, New York, Rhode Island, and North Carolina did not participate &mdash Washington beat Adams by 69 to 34.) Hence the confusion on teh interwebs.

              Both Washington and Jefferson warned us *against* partisan politics, Washington in his farewell address as you noted and Jefferson in his inaugural address:
              having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions.
              They feared that what is actually happening today would damage the country irreparably — they were prescient.

        3. Pres. Reagan and Steve Jobs had a lot in common – In that they both had dreams and empowered the people around them to make those dreams a reality ……

          In my humble opinion, Pres. Reagan was the best President or close to the best ever the US had ….. Yes we have Lincoln, Kennedy and others just saying in modern lifetime he rates very high ….. I also put Clinton in that camp …..

          1. Reagan and Jobs had other things in common too like: both had two eyes, both their noses were in the middle of their faces, they both were war mongers . . . oh, maybe not.

      1. Seen bad presidents from both parties in my long lifetime, Reagan was one of the worst (deficits, S&L disaster, regressive taxation, criminal Iran-Contra affair, funding bin Laden, missile attack on Libya, senility, etc etc.) As John Tower told his Republican colleagues, “Ronald Reagan is too stupid to be president.” Jobs certainly would have agreed.

        1. Ronald Reagan, along with Pope John Paul II and Margaret Thatcher, won the Cold War without firing a shot and changed the world forever.

          Ronlad Reagan changed the world immeasurably more than Steve Jobs.

      2. Typical, you missed the point and are off on an ideological tangent. Let’s recap:

        Jobs’ legacy has taken on a “mythical role for people who write about Apple that’s very similar to the way conservative pundits invoke the late President Ronald Reagan,”

        The writer is saying that Jobs adorers are as out of touch as Reagan worshipers such as yourself. She asserts that your views are based on mythic view of the subject. IE not grounded in reality.

        In terms of Reagan supporters, you fit the bill. I disagree with her however on the Jobs comparison, while he does have his share of delusional fanboys, his contributions brought more good to the world than Reagan and his trickle down economics. Jobs greatness is NO MYTH, it’s indisputable.

      3. Reagan was an actor. He stood where the camera was pointed and said what he was told. He got started in politics on the backs of unions and then sold them out after he found out who his masters really were.

    1. They don’t have to share the same viewpoints in order to have comparable personality traits.

      It’s okay to separate the politics from the discussion.

      Seriously, it’ll be alright…

      1. Lib-Tards cannot process facts.

        They are either evil – low lives, gaming the system.

        or

        Clueless drones following along and being manipulated into thinking they are saving people from things.

        Lib-Tards are destroying the free world.

          1. I, for one, feel great!

            Mitt Romney’s 52-point debate victory over Obama the biggest in Gallup poll history:
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2214753/Mitt-Romneys-52-point-debate-victory-Obama-biggest-Gallup-poll-history.html

            Romney now leads in 11 key swing states:
            http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_swing_state_tracking_poll

            Why Romney will win and Obama will lose:
            http://battlegroundwatch.com/2012/10/08/gallup-national-poll-tied-at-47-and-how-undecideds-will-vote/

            As I’ve told you people many times:

            President Romney and Vice President Ryan. Get used to it.

            1. @ F2T2
              Funny how you disappeared like a late morning fog when the polls were trending heavily against you. Are you a fair weather teabagger?

              Obamanation’s lame performance aside, Willard “Mitt” RobbedMe/RawMoney is not likely to win- barring a stolen election in Florida and Ohio.

              From Nate Silver at 538 Blog
              “Mitt Romney(s)… chances of winning the Electoral College increasing to 25.2 percent from 21.6 percent on Sunday.

              The change represents a continuation of the recent trend: Mr. Romney’s chances were down to just 13.9 percent immediately in advance of last week’s debate in Denver. He has nearly doubled his chances since then.

              But the gains that he made on Monday in particular were all because of a single poll.”
              Read the rest @

              http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/oct-8-a-great-poll-for-romney-in-perspective/

              Sorry to bust your teabag.

      2. Had the opportunity to meet Reagan when I was a Photographer for the US Army many years ago. Didn’t seem that special compared to anyone else. Nice man, poor actor, great pitchman, bad President.

  1. So apparently only “conservative pundits” admired Reagan. Liberal revisionism at its finest. He was one of the most popular presidents in history and had a very rare talent of being able to bring democrats and republicans together to accomplish things. That is something that no other modern president has been able to do from either party.

    But don’t let facts get in the way of your liberal blinders.

    1. Exactly, the left admires Reagan as well.

      They compare themselves to Reagan as much if not more than the right does anymore. But like you said, don’t let facts get in the way…

      I only came here to see the hate speech, not going to stick around either.
      The left will bash, and not see the point of the story, not worth the time to read their hate.

      1. Curious that you would cite his greatness as being a moderate. A term vilified by by the GOP.

        Amazing that you find greatness in compromise and common ground, yet unloose daily ad-hominem attacks and partisan muck racking.

        Why do you not choose to emulate him and find common ground rather than be divisive.

        1. Quote me where I said moderate… I don’t see it anywhere.

          I said the left compares themselves to Reagan… Look at the Newsweek (could have been time) story a few weeks back, saying that Obama and Reagan are the same…

    2. Reagan talked about balancing the budget at exploded it.
      Reagan talked about growing the economy and destroyed it.
      Reagan pissed away 1 trillion on an unneeded Defense buildup. Included in this is the B-2 stealth bomber that can have it’s high tech skin ruined in a rainstorm and cost over $1 Billion a copy.
      Reagan pissed away even more with Star Wars.
      Reagan broke the law on a number of occasions worthy of impeachment (Iran Contra) and dealt with terrorists and the Iranian regime we supposedly still oppose.
      Reagan wagged the dog with the Grenada invasion.
      Reagan supported repressive governments in Latin America that murdered people for desiring free speech and fair elections.
      Reagan got almost 300 American service members killed in Lebanon due to not listening to his senior military staff.
      Reagan’s people tried to sell the idea of Ketchup as a vegetable in the school lunch program.

      And, no, he didn’t win the Cold War. He continued the policies that had been followed since the 1940’s from Truman-Carter before him.

      1. Reagan never had a Republican congress. We can thank Slick Willie for the first Republican congress in over 40 years, which did balance the budget under Newt Gingrich.

        Reagan lead the longest peacetime boom in history post WW2.

        Reagan used defense buildup to help pressure the Soviet Union which was instrumental in their collapse.

        B2 was a specific program, it is purely idiotic to blame a president for the failure or credit them with the success of any given military program. Not that being idiotic will stop you from something.

        Star Wars was a missile defense program. We have used Missile Defense numerous times. Not all the technology was in use but many of the ideas behind it have already been used repeatedly by our military.

        I am not sure there are any presidents who have not “broken the law” in one way or another. It’s a grey area, as Presidents have a lot of power and responsibility, and the law is often misleading, contradictory, or unconstitutional. Such as the law you are referring to I assume where it requires congress to approve all military actions, a law that has never been constitutionally verified and likely violates the separation of powers. I doubt you have actually read the US Constitution.

        Reagan is not unique in supporting some repressive governments, although I do not agree with the practice we did that all throughout the Cold War under many administration. Singling Reagan out here shows a remarkable lack of historical insight or perspective, which is typical of you.

        You are blaming Reagan for Lebanon, ok. Do you blame Obama for Libya Embassy too? If not you are a useless troll hypocrite. Obama was forewarned of an attack and his administration was asked for more security and he denied it.

        Reagan’s ketchup comment is like Gore’s Invented the Internet comment. Widely taken out of context by people who want to score political points. Reagan had a sense of humor which I doubt you could understand.

        Reagan didn’t single handedly win the Cold War but he sure had a massive hand in how it worked out at the end.

        You have a remarkably narrow and one-sided revisionist perspective of history, which is typical of people who are unable to think outside of a narrow world view, and only get news and information from sources that agree with their already held beliefs.

        1. The balanced budgets were because of a tax increase that was passed by Democrats with not one Republican vote by the Congress voted out in 1994. Gingrich never repealed the taxes, but enjoyed the balanced budgets the tax increase enabled.

          Bush later cut the taxes and the deficits began again. The truth is Republicans bitch about budgets and never balance them.

    1. Reagan was senile before he was senile. You couldn’t parody him- he was already a joke. But compared to today’s republicans, he was a socialist. One more thing- Obama 2012. Hillary 2016. Long live Steve Jobs- a hippie democrat.

  2. The headline should be “Why Steve Jobs was like Thomas Edison and Three Other Great Men” …that’s the nearest equivalent and who was actually featured in a Think Different Ad. Comparing Jobs to Reagan would be like saying that Jobs is similar to the Lorax!

    1. It’s clear this post is going to be littered with retarded liberal gibberish. I got better things to do with my time than babysit brainwashed liberal idiots. Maybe one of the other intellectually capable posters on here will come and monitor this romper room for awhile.

      1. Steve Jobs was a liberal, his wife Laurene still is. They both supported Obama and liberal social issues and Laurene was a guest seated next to Chelsea Clinton and the Democratic National Convention last month. Just sayin.

        1. He was rich enough to be able to afford being liberal. It didn’t effect him when the price of gas went to $4 a gallon and is now nearly $5 in California the west coast Mecca of liberal elitism. I disagree with most of Jobs’ politics although I do agree with him about the nightmare of the teachers’ union.

          That said I admire great men and women from all walks of life whether I agree with them politically or spiritually or have the same philosophies. Any enlightened person can do this.

          Modern liberals don’t seem to be able to for the most part and are therefore blind, shallow and ignorant.

            1. Yes, Jobs was a liberal in many social issues. But when it came to business, taxes, etc – he was a true conservative. He argued with Obama on several occasions to change his tune. Obama wouldn”t listen. Jobs, like many Republicans, wanted to repatriate overseas moneys and lower corporate tax rates. Jobs also dismissed the request made by libs to do more for the community in the form of liberal giveaways (i.e. free wi-fi).

            2. Agreed that on business Jobs was a true conservative.

              Now, if only there were true conservatives running in the Republican party of 2012… the loudest ones are merely RINOs with religious extremist tendencies, envious of the control the Taliban can exert over others. Forcing religious agendas via government is the exact opposite of minimizing government.

            3. You will get no argument from me there. Conservatives do not really have a party, the Republican Party is full of many who only give lip service to conservative ideals meanwhile they stuff their pockets full of special interest cash and bloat up the deficit for future generations to deal with.

            1. during the Reagan Administration, 1983:

              Oil glut takes hold. Demand falls as a result of conservation, use of other fuels and recession. OPEC agrees to limit overall output to 17.5 MMB/D. OPEC agrees to individual output quotas and cuts prices by $5 to $29 per barrel.

            2. Not directly, but he sets both policies and leadership that affects not only dealing with alien cartels that would be illegal in US business, but alleviates tax burden on those that drill domestically, thus freeing the capital expenditure risked by drilling companies to produce domestic oil and gas.

            3. Liberals love to beat up on Bush and Cheney for Haliburtan and big oil. Meanwhile has cost 1/2 as much when Obana took office as it does now.

              As for Reagan I guess you must not have been alive during the 70s when there were gas lines under Carter?

              Obama is a disaster on so many levels but clearly his energy policy shines as one if his greatest failings. Make gas expensive and make the unwashed masses suffer for not being able to afford a Prius.

        2. Although Jobs considered himself a liberal democrat on social issues, he was changing his tune on fiscal issues. From the book by Walt Isaacson:

          “You’re headed for a one-term presidency,” he told Obama at the start of their meeting, insisting that the administration needed to be more business-friendly. As an example, Jobs described the ease with which companies can build factories in China compared to the United States, where “regulations and unnecessary costs” make it difficult for them.

          Jobs also criticized America’s education system, saying it was “crippled by union work rules,” noted Isaacson. “Until the teachers’ unions were broken, there was almost no hope for education reform.” Jobs proposed allowing principals to hire and fire teachers based on merit, that schools stay open until 6 p.m. and that they be open 11 months a year.”

          Wanting to be business-friendly and seeing the need to bust teachers’ unions is not exactly bleeding-heart liberalism.

          1. yes, you are correct.. Although he definitely identifed himself as a liberal social he did have his own ideas and adopted some conservative fiscal ideals. As, I think most people in the middle who are not extreme left or right do. Ultimately, Jobs chose the social and civil issues of humanity more important the the fiscal issues in choosing parties. And rightfully so, IMO.

            1. Because he could afford to do so. It’s typical of rich liberals to sit in ivory towers when the price of gas doubling has no effect in them. The disastrous effect of liberal policies in California which is massively overpaying for services, has cities going bankrupt, union pension funds going insolvent while they advocate passing the highest taxes in the entire country meanwhile going bankrupt while going on a wild spending spree in the midst of a recession.

              California is a case study with everything that’s horribly wrong with liberalism. We haven’t even been fully hit by the massive tax from Schwartzeneggers global warming bill. This state used to be the destination spot in the country, now people are fleeing the state.

        1. I would argue that it did shine on its own. It’s just that modern liberalism is full of mindless, offensive, hypocritical twits. The large majority of the country loved Reagan. He was a class act.

          1. “It’s just that modern liberalism is full of mindless, offensive, hypocritical twits.”
            Speaking of offensive twits, you might try looking in the mirror before your next posting.

      2. “It’s clear this post is going to be littered with retarded liberal gibberish.”
        …Says the person who acts like a 2-year old..”You said something bad about my hero so I’m going to act like a child and call you every bad name I can think of…”

      3. There are NO Liberals in US politics. you have right wing centrists and far right wing. Nothing else. You been so brainwashed against the left you have absolutely no idea of what it means. Thank Sen. McCarthy and his ilk.
        HUYA™ = Head Up Your Ass.

        1. I will take that as a compliment from someone who calls the American left “centrists”.

          I would much prefer the company found up in my nether regions to anyone who would make such a retarded and ignorant comment.

          But other than that I like you. Have a nice day!

          🙂

  3. Thomas Edison? You have got to be kidding. He was a retard who electrocuted animals outside of his factory to prove how DC was superior to AC and he actually lobbied congress to try to have AC outlawed.

    Without AC, we all would be living in the 1900’s era.

    1. Agree with you on Thomas Edison. Comparing Jobs to that self serving and opportunistic twit is such an insult to Jobs who actually directly invented things.

  4. Steve Jobs wasn’t a senile, lying moron who thought “trickle down” economics would work. He also considered ketchup a vegetable. You know… for your kids future. Always looking out for the best for all.

  5. Reagan tried to secretly sell Hawk and Tow Missiles to the Iranians (Iran Contra scandal) to shoot my ass down while I was serving with the Navy in the Persian Gulf in 1986 and 1989.

    Worst president ever in my opinion.

  6. LOL!

    I knew this would make the heads of liberals explode. Steve was actually a closet Republican. I remember his response to the “Free Wi-Fi” question when he spoke about about the new building in front of the Cupertino city council. Classic Reagan response!

    Love it.

  7. Note that no one said he was like Reagan in any way. He ” mythical role for people who write about Apple that’s very similar to the way conservative pundits invoke the late President Ronald Reagan…” Mythic role is not saying he has anything else in common with Reagan.

  8. The historical personage that Steve Jobs most resembles in
    temperament and work methodology is J. Robert Oppenheimer.
    With comparable historically significant similar results, in terms of
    cultural gravitas.
    I don’t know where people come up with Thomas Edison or
    Henry Ford, you dim bulbs must really not know all that much about them or have questionable poor comparative skills.
    The methods that Jobs used to push people in teams, to encourage others who were better versed than he was in particular areas of technical expertise matches identically the methods Oppenheimer used at Los Alamos (sighs – J. Robert Oppenheimer led the team that developed the atomic bomb in the early 1940’s at Los Alamos, New Mexico). In fact, I often wonder that no one ever asked Jobs about it, I am sure he was aware of Oppenheimer’s personnel management skills.
    Where the author of this story comes up with the ludicrous premise of comparing Jobs to Reagan is beyond me, unless they are just fishing for readers to click through the pages making inane politically motivated comments.
    The kind of people who think of Ronald Reagan as great are also the kind of people who watch professional wrestling and think they are witnessing real conflict (which is was why he was chosen).
    Reagan was a Democrat for a longer period of his lifetime than he was a Republican . His political conversion conspicuously lines up with events in his life when his acting career began to look like it was on the skids. Meaning he was probably recruited…

  9. The title shouldn’t have used ronald raygun. Job’s MYTHOLOGY is like the mythology of raygun. It has nothing to do with whether raygun was a great president or a dunce.

    A better title would have mentioned Disney as they both envisioned the future and implemented in their respective fields.

      1. Touche what? You are a partisan hack.

        And you obviously can’t read if you think Job’s was like “if you’ve seen one tree, you’ve seen them all” raygun. The comparison was about mythology.

        Shut up!

        1. First off you can’t label someone a partisan hack while name calling people you don’t agree with politically, you are a hypocrite.

          Second, clearly you use partisan hack purely against people on one side of the political fence, or are you going to try to pretend you use the term for people on both sides of the political fence?

          By the way I’m not going to reciprocate the shut up, but I am going to say this: don’t be a hypocrite.

          Have a great day.

          1. Oh yeah and you are the epitome of reasoned discourse who never name calls. I quote you..

            “It’s clear this post is going to be littered with retarded liberal gibberish. I got better things to do with my time than babysit brainwashed liberal idiots. Maybe one of the other intellectually capable posters on here will come and monitor this romper room for awhile.”

            You don’t need to reciprocate as that is all I have ever seen from you. By the way, you remain tiresome.

    1. Liberal revisionists who have to dump on Reagan, take away credit for his amazing accomplishments and give undeserved credit to Bill Clinton and Obama…

      Then throwing out the word scum?

      That’s rich.

  10. People, please read the quote: ““mythical role for people who write about Apple that’s very similar to the way conservative pundits invoke the late President Ronald Reagan,”

    They’re not saying anything about Jobs being ***politically*** similar (or dissimilar) to Ronald Reagan in anyway.

    They are saying that the way the GOP compares candidates to Reagan, and invokes the memory of Reagan is similar to what we see time and time again with Jobs, “Steve Jobs would have never ____”, “Apple seems lost without Jobs because they haven’t revolutionized 1,000 other industries since his passing”, etc…

    Regardless of your positive or negative opinion of Reagan, you can’t deny that the legacy of Reagan has been used for political purposes.

    1. You are indeed correct here. No one else seems to get that because they are too busy waving their ideological cocks at one another.

      The collective IQ points on this board couldn’t fill a dixie cup. Seriously, some of the stupidest people post on here.

      1. Oh cry more. This thread was obviously going to be about politics given that the headline included the name of a political figure. If you came here knowing that and were shocked to find political posts, then you need to grow up.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.