5 ms·

I disagree. Bill Gates is exactly what the title says, a villain who became a hero. We also have people who were heroes and stayed heroes. For example, Linus T

by js8 9y ago

I disagree. Bill Gates is exactly what the title says, a villain who became a hero. We also have people who were heroes and stayed heroes. For example, Linus Torvalds or Richard Stallman. It's unfortunate that our society values Gates (the converted villain) more highly than Torvalds or Stallman (the hero from the beginning). Or values Jobs more than Wozniak.

majewsky 9y ago
While I agree with your sentiment, it is worthwhile to point out that Linus is a villain (or at least not a shining hero) in the eyes of a lot of people because of the behavior he displays on mailing lists.
croon 9y ago
> We also have people who were heroes and stayed heroes. For example, Linus Torvalds or Richard Stallman. It's unfortunate that our society values Gates (the converted villain) more highly than Torvalds or Stallman (the hero from the beginning). I can really identify with this, but I also disagree. We reward effort, and it takes a lot more to become good than staying good. In the same way that we reward a struggling child who in the end manages to climb an obstacle or finish a task, while not recognizing the other kid who has already done both 20 times with ease. I will never claim I'm a better person than anyone else, but I definitely was a well behaved and quiet kid, and I remember seeing this a lot as a kid, at which time I too wanted praise for my behavior when some frankly shitty kids got it for occasionally not being jerks to the other kids. But kids (and many grownups) aren't rational. I don't think kid me was right. I think I wouldn't have grown as much, and I think my values would've been a lot worse had I been constantly rewarded for something that came naturally to me. But perhaps it is different with grownups where we don't (or shouldn't) have the expectation of shaping them. It's probably not shocking that I've always valued Wozniak more.
- js8 9y ago
  > We reward effort I don't think so. Capitalism (or human society in general) isn't really consistent in rewarding anything, and as a consequence, it is not automatically moral. (Despite many people, for instance libertarians, making lot of contortions to make it appear moral.)
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    You're looking for consistency in the wrong place. Capitalism is very consistent - it rewards whatever gives you money. This makes it amoral, because morality barely enters the equation (it's in the equation by proxy of what people will pay you for, and by proxy of the legal environment under which you operate). RE effort - yeah, capitalism usually doesn't reward effort, because effort alone does not bring money (unless they literally pay you to see you sweat). In our circles, we know it through clichés like "it's null until you ship it", or "ideas are worthless, execution matters", etc.
TeMPOraL 9y ago
It's not that our society values villains - especially not converted villains. Nobody is throwing money at Gates because he changed. It's just being a villain makes it easier for you to play the market game and get rich. Part of being a hero is really just refusing to engage in things that'll bring you money. In the end, it's more likely that a villain through his villaining will get rich, so when they convert, they're left with resources to do good with, unlike our heroes who never got rich in the first place.
meuk 9y ago
My view on this is a little bit different. Linux Torvalds and Richard Stallman are not willing to turn to degenerate practices for profit. People like Steve Jobs are. However, most people are impressed by casual impressions and simply don't research someone they admire. I held Steve Jobs in high regard, until I read his biography. Charismatic people with money are able to impress the general public easily. So it's not necessarily that people value Jobs more than Wozniak, but that many people are easily impressed by superficialities, and do not take the time to know more about people that they like.
hungerstrike 9y ago
I disagree with you and the title. Bill Gates was a hero since the beginning for bringing the world high quality and actually usable software, the likes of which had not been seen before. Linus Torvalds has always been an asshole both personally and professionally and he is actually a colossal impediment to having good software on Linux. Stallman has also always been a major asshole who has a huge ego, who preaches to people like he's better than them and who introduced the worlds shittiest software license which the great majority of people pretty much avoid like the plague if they are aware of it.

by js8 9y ago

majewsky 9y ago

While I agree with your sentiment, it is worthwhile to point out that Linus is a villain (or at least not a shining hero) in the eyes of a lot of people because of the behavior he displays on mailing lists.

croon 9y ago

> We also have people who were heroes and stayed heroes. For example, Linus Torvalds or Richard Stallman. It's unfortunate that our society values Gates (the converted villain) more highly than Torvalds or Stallman (the hero from the beginning). I can really identify with this, but I also disagree. We reward effort, and it takes a lot more to become good than staying good. In the same way that we reward a struggling child who in the end manages to climb an obstacle or finish a task, while not recognizing the other kid who has already done both 20 times with ease. I will never claim I'm a better person than anyone else, but I definitely was a well behaved and quiet kid, and I remember seeing this a lot as a kid, at which time I too wanted praise for my behavior when some frankly shitty kids got it for occasionally not being jerks to the other kids. But kids (and many grownups) aren't rational. I don't think kid me was right. I think I wouldn't have grown as much, and I think my values would've been a lot worse had I been constantly rewarded for something that came naturally to me. But perhaps it is different with grownups where we don't (or shouldn't) have the expectation of shaping them. It's probably not shocking that I've always valued Wozniak more.

js8 9y ago
> We reward effort I don't think so. Capitalism (or human society in general) isn't really consistent in rewarding anything, and as a consequence, it is not automatically moral. (Despite many people, for instance libertarians, making lot of contortions to make it appear moral.)
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  You're looking for consistency in the wrong place. Capitalism is very consistent - it rewards whatever gives you money. This makes it amoral, because morality barely enters the equation (it's in the equation by proxy of what people will pay you for, and by proxy of the legal environment under which you operate). RE effort - yeah, capitalism usually doesn't reward effort, because effort alone does not bring money (unless they literally pay you to see you sweat). In our circles, we know it through clichés like "it's null until you ship it", or "ideas are worthless, execution matters", etc.

TeMPOraL 9y ago

It's not that our society values villains - especially not converted villains. Nobody is throwing money at Gates because he changed. It's just being a villain makes it easier for you to play the market game and get rich. Part of being a hero is really just refusing to engage in things that'll bring you money. In the end, it's more likely that a villain through his villaining will get rich, so when they convert, they're left with resources to do good with, unlike our heroes who never got rich in the first place.

meuk 9y ago

My view on this is a little bit different. Linux Torvalds and Richard Stallman are not willing to turn to degenerate practices for profit. People like Steve Jobs are. However, most people are impressed by casual impressions and simply don't research someone they admire. I held Steve Jobs in high regard, until I read his biography. Charismatic people with money are able to impress the general public easily. So it's not necessarily that people value Jobs more than Wozniak, but that many people are easily impressed by superficialities, and do not take the time to know more about people that they like.

hungerstrike 9y ago

I disagree with you and the title. Bill Gates was a hero since the beginning for bringing the world high quality and actually usable software, the likes of which had not been seen before. Linus Torvalds has always been an asshole both personally and professionally and he is actually a colossal impediment to having good software on Linux. Stallman has also always been a major asshole who has a huge ego, who preaches to people like he's better than them and who introduced the worlds shittiest software license which the great majority of people pretty much avoid like the plague if they are aware of it.