From the Other Side of the Wall

Money Mozart

"I interact with a lot of people that have lots of money that continue to be engaged. It hasn't had much effect on me [being wealthy], as far as I can tell."
"I spent 25 years to get to this point [Stanford University computer science professorship]. And I'm not going to walk away from this just because I have enough money to."

"And I also look at who are the people involved. I like the startups where there's a technological challenge so that, you know, not every idiot can do this."

"There's just not that many smart people in the world in my humble opinion."

"It's a little frightening. The government needs to go back and read Wealth of Nations to learn how capitalism works."

"[Google] is dominant because ... it's the best search engine in the known universe. Who's being harmed by this? Well, it's not the consumer. We should be down on our knees thankful that Larry and Sergey created such a miraculous invention. I continue to be dazzled that you can sit down and in ten minutes become almost a world expert about a particular subject. Nothing like this has ever occurred in the history of mankind."

"If you don't like Google, imagine if Google was in communist China instead [of the United States]. Like, which would you rather have? Let's be happy that it's been our team and not their team."

"In the U.S., I tell people I'm Canadian, so that's why I'm very conservative on these things My theory is that everybody has a significant degree of latent stupidity. And if you give them something -- a lot of money -- they can unleash the stupidity."

"I know all these people that have more than enough money to go sit on the beach and do nothing, but they have incredible capabilities, and they continue to work hard and contribute."

"We should be celebrating the fact that people who can afford to retire a million times over continue to provide jobs and opportunities and push the technology forward. There should be more recognition that successful people are continuing to work, as opposed to successful people have somehow taken away from the rest of the population."

David Cheriton, emeritus professor of computer science, Stanford University

As of Sept. 8, David Cheriton’s net worth was US$11.5 billion (up from US$8.8 billion in April), according to Forbes. Photo by Handout

In the world of high tech entrepreneurs, Professor Cheriton, now 70, was in from the very beginning and helped to usher in the world of Internet the world is comfortable with today. Although both his parents were engineers, his intention was to be a musician. Classical and flamenco guitar influences had him applying to the University of Alberta to study music. When he was rejected he decided to study mathematics and began at the University of Alberta, switched to the University of British Columbia and then ended up at the University of Waterloo.

 

There, in 1974 he earned a master's degree, and four years later a doctorate in mathematics. Waterloo University is now where the David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science is in establishment. Professor Cheriton's contribution to encouraging the next generation of computing "hotshots". And nor have Stanford and UBC been left shy of his philanthropic generosity; again, his investments in the future of educating new computer whizz-kids. And he was most certainly a qualified whizz-kid.

Stanford University hired him in 1981 and there it was where he taught while engaged in research applicable to his expertise, while energizing his own companies. Investing in SiliconValley startups served his own interest in accelerating the science while making intellectual connections. In 1995 he sold one of his own, Granite Systems, to Cisco Systems for $220 million and became a multimillionaire. Since then his wealth has matured and grown exponentially to make him No.269 on the Forbes list of global billionaires; his current net worth standing at $11.5 billion.

Along the way to amassing his wealth he advised and encouraged Standford University PhD students. "A bunch of people at Stanford thought I must know something about startups and business", he said, after his $220 million Cisco sale. Two such students, Larry Page and Sergey Brin approached the professor with their baby project, in internet search technology. The advice they wanted was how to proceed in licensing the technology. So he connected them with an intellectual property lawyer.

Yahoo! turned down an offer to buy the Google technology; the price was $2 million. "Everybody makes mistakes. Not many people make that big of a mistake", observed the professor. Nine months went by without succeeding in finding a licensing partner for the technology. So Page and Brin consulted again with Cheriton, deciding to raise funding and start their own company. An offer came from their IP lawyer to help in exchange for five percent of the business. And Professor Cheriton put in $200,000 for a small equity stake.

That phrase ... 'and the rest is history' ...?Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Photo by Handout/Google/AFP/Getty Images

Another colleague of the professor invested [who now is worth $10.4 billion as a result]. Professor Cheriton waived a charge as technical adviser at Google, helping with hiring, and he "provided a few therapy sessions. I don't know how useful I was. I pushed them to think about mobile early on, and things like that. But the credit for the success really belongs to those guys", he insists. Google, the dominant internet force, has set Page and Brin up to be worth each over $100 billion, according to Forbes.

Professor Cheriton speaks of his concern over the recent demonization of people of great wealth. Most particularly in the United States. "Hopefully, Canada's not got the same sentiment going on as the U.S." Guess he's a little out of touch with Canada. Otherwise he would level the very same criticism at Canada that he complains about taking place in the United States. 

 

Of course, some of the issues being brought to bear in criticism of Big Tech is their habit of benefiting themselves by purloining material produced through other sources, without acknowledging their ethical obligation to pay those other sources for the daily, hourly, news stories they pick up so off-handedly, to benefit their followers and increase their popularity. Just as they're possessive of their exclusive rights, so are other outfits who produce the news they 'loan' without permission, taking advertising revenues with them.