7 ms·

While I'm really, really happy that Bill and Melinda are doing Good Things with their wealth these days, it's easy to overlook the mechanisms by which they (but

by Jedd 9y ago

While I'm really, really happy that Bill and Melinda are doing Good Things with their wealth these days, it's easy to overlook the mechanisms by which they (but mostly Bill) acquired their wealth. I find people under the age of about 35 really have no clue about Ye Bade Olde Days, and seem to consider the Microsoft Corporation to have always been a force for good. Look, it's clear that he's changed a lot, but how much of this is genuine altruism rather than some guilt mitigation. For anyone unfamiliar, Bill's deposition (part 1) on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_2m1qdqieE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_2m1qdqieE There's myriad resources on the net that describe the USA's DoJ's case against Microsoft, and their three days (!) of deposition recordings with the guy.

davidmr 9y ago
I’m afraid I fail to see the relevance of this post to the matter at hand. Did his company do some despicable things, and did he have anything to do with it? Yes. I think most corporations of a certain size do. The good he has done the world since then so dramatically outweighs the bad that posts like yours above just seem catty to me. I’ve found it kind of funny and ironic that Bill was always the evil one and Steve Jobs was the cool “think different” upstart, but looking back on their entire lives, Bill has done so, so much more to make the world we live in a better place for everyone.
- Jedd 9y ago
  FWIW I've never thought of Steve Jobs as a force for good in the world. I didn't mean to seem catty. Rather, if someone exercises some philanthropic tendencies, but the wealth that backs those things up came from illegal, immoral, unethical, or dubious business practices, should we celebrate, or be cautious about our hero worship? For my own part, I find the sentiment: > I think most corporations of a certain size do. To be particularly apologetic -- we really should be holding our elites up to higher standards than 'many people do wrong stuff, so it's okay'. Also: > The good he has done the world since then so dramatically outweighs the bad ... This attitude implicitly discounts the benefits that other people may have done with that wealth, had it not been redirected into Microsoft / Bill Gates. Yes, look, undeniably, as I said from the outset, they're doing some really good work -- but it's impossible for us to know what may have been done, or may be being done right now, in a more ethical history.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Personally, I think we can't afford to not use the helping hand. It's not like there is a steady supply of Jesus-level saints, who had done not a single bad thing through their entire lives, and who are at the same time rich, smart, and willing to help the world.
    - Jedd 9y ago
      > Personally, I think we can't afford to not use the helping hand. Well that's just a defeatist attitude towards society and an uncaring, corrupted government (no matter where you happen to be writing that from). Comparing Jesus-level sainthood to Bill ... I can't tell if you're trolling there.
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        > Comparing Jesus-level sainthood to Bill ... I can't tell if you're trolling there. I feel I need to be direct: you seem to be failing at reading comprehension 101 all throughout this thread (I assume tiredness). I was not comparing Bill to Jesus. I was implying that you, and similar critics, think that we have streams of Jesus-scale saints who are smart, rich and ready to help, and we prefer Gates instead. But we don't have those saints. Right now, we can only choose between Gates and no one at all.
        Jedd 9y ago
        Appreciate your directness. I think the Jesus and saint juxtaposition confused me (saints first appeared about 200-300 years after Jesus, and no one has ever claimed Jesus was a saint, etc). Anyway, thank you for your clarification. To be clear, I do not think that we have streams of 'Jesus-scale saints' who are smart, rich (as Jesus ostensibly said, that won't get you into heaven), and ready to help. I do think we have a bunch of problems, and some institutions (governments, for example) that have been developed with the intent of solving those problems. If the problems of society/ies require that we have [the head of] an organisation convicted for violating the Sherman antitrust act come to rescue us with their ill-gotten gains, then perhaps we (as a society) should be aiming higher. Mind, I'm coming at this from a naive, optimistic attitude of wanting to not need heroes in order to save us all from each other.
300bps 9y ago
I got my first computer in 1982, my first modem in 1985 and I have a generally positive view of both Bill Gates and Microsoft.
- Jedd 9y ago
  Yes, sorry. I didn't mean to say everyone from before that era shares my worldview, merely that most people since then don't. I had a wider range of IT experiences than most people, which necessarily led me to a different perspective than most computer users of that era.
  - peacetreefrog 9y ago
    "I didn't mean to say everyone shares my worldview. Only that if you don't you're not as well-versed/smart as me."
TeMPOraL 9y ago
I think the universal hate of Microsoft has survived as a meme 'till this day. People may not know the details, but they know they're supposed to dislike MS. Still, all the bad things Microsoft did back then are a rounding error compared to all the good Bill and Melinda are doing right now. I understand the idea of not promoting "end justifies the means" thinking, but we need to be pragmatic about this - there are only few people on this planet who have, simultaneously, lots of resources, their heart in the right place, and enough smarts to use those resources effectively for the common good. Discouraging those people from helping is a pretty stupid thing to do.
- acdha 9y ago
  “rounding error” is being very quick to dismiss extracting billions of other people’s dollars using underhanded business tactics. That doesn’t mean that we should ignore what he’s done since but he has plenty of paid PR staff to spin for him – you shouldn’t contribute your services pro bono.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    I'm not dismissing it off-hand, just putting it into perspective. And frankly, there is orders of magnitude difference between those two things. > you shouldn’t contribute your services pro bono But I happily will. I want to. I will readily, and entirely for free, support every single company, organization, government and individual who puts a honest and smart effort to make the world a better place. We're in extremely short supply of groups and people who make a difference; almost everyone - companies, countries, NGOs - are too distracted playing market games and politics for their personal, short-term benefit. You get what you support. So let's support people who actually care.
    - Jedd 9y ago
      > .. too distracted playing market games and politics for their personal, short-term benefit. I'm guessing you didn't watch the youtube link in the message to which you're responding?
mseebach 9y ago
Microsoft did a lot of ruthless things and even some illegal things, yes, but it requires a very unkind reading of history to deny the absolutely huge role they played in bring about the world we take for granted today. It's a common, but not at all obviously correct, analysis that where we are today was manifest destiny and thus Bill Gates and Microsoft was just randomly the medium providence chose to carry out this destiny. Microsoft got so incredibly many things right, and they started flagging almost the second they got a major thing wrong (the internet). I really like this interview (Bill Gates on Letterman in 1995). He says the internet is a big deal, but he clearly doesn't get it, not does he provide any sort of thought leadership. Baseball and cigars? Snowcrash had been out for three years by then. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskpNmUl8yQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskpNmUl8yQ
- Jedd 9y ago
  > ... the absolutely huge role they [Microsoft] played in bring about the world we take for granted today. It's entirely not clear what would have happened if Microsoft / Bill had not brokered that highly dubious original deal -- if, say, CP/M or even *nix had won that war. My personal take is that we'd be ahead of where we are now. And I certainly don't think that we're at some kind of manifest destiny today. Consider this discussion on HN from a couple of years ago around this very subject: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9667498 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9667498
- whatifthat 9y ago
  > yes, but it requires a very unkind reading of history to deny the absolutely huge role they played in bring about the world we take for granted today. Yes huge role: but not a good one. > Microsoft got so incredibly many things right Like the FUD, EEE and the rest of the nasty stuff? Ms gets too much positive credit for all the bad things it has done.
hux_ 9y ago
Having lived through those days it's hard to believe this new avatar.
kyberias 9y ago
What was the exact reason for posting that link? Are you trying to make a point with that link? What point exactly?

by Jedd 9y ago

davidmr 9y ago

I’m afraid I fail to see the relevance of this post to the matter at hand. Did his company do some despicable things, and did he have anything to do with it? Yes. I think most corporations of a certain size do. The good he has done the world since then so dramatically outweighs the bad that posts like yours above just seem catty to me. I’ve found it kind of funny and ironic that Bill was always the evil one and Steve Jobs was the cool “think different” upstart, but looking back on their entire lives, Bill has done so, so much more to make the world we live in a better place for everyone.

Jedd 9y ago
FWIW I've never thought of Steve Jobs as a force for good in the world. I didn't mean to seem catty. Rather, if someone exercises some philanthropic tendencies, but the wealth that backs those things up came from illegal, immoral, unethical, or dubious business practices, should we celebrate, or be cautious about our hero worship? For my own part, I find the sentiment: > I think most corporations of a certain size do. To be particularly apologetic -- we really should be holding our elites up to higher standards than 'many people do wrong stuff, so it's okay'. Also: > The good he has done the world since then so dramatically outweighs the bad ... This attitude implicitly discounts the benefits that other people may have done with that wealth, had it not been redirected into Microsoft / Bill Gates. Yes, look, undeniably, as I said from the outset, they're doing some really good work -- but it's impossible for us to know what may have been done, or may be being done right now, in a more ethical history.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  Personally, I think we can't afford to not use the helping hand. It's not like there is a steady supply of Jesus-level saints, who had done not a single bad thing through their entire lives, and who are at the same time rich, smart, and willing to help the world.
  - Jedd 9y ago
    > Personally, I think we can't afford to not use the helping hand. Well that's just a defeatist attitude towards society and an uncaring, corrupted government (no matter where you happen to be writing that from). Comparing Jesus-level sainthood to Bill ... I can't tell if you're trolling there.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      > Comparing Jesus-level sainthood to Bill ... I can't tell if you're trolling there. I feel I need to be direct: you seem to be failing at reading comprehension 101 all throughout this thread (I assume tiredness). I was not comparing Bill to Jesus. I was implying that you, and similar critics, think that we have streams of Jesus-scale saints who are smart, rich and ready to help, and we prefer Gates instead. But we don't have those saints. Right now, we can only choose between Gates and no one at all.
      - Jedd 9y ago
        Appreciate your directness. I think the Jesus and saint juxtaposition confused me (saints first appeared about 200-300 years after Jesus, and no one has ever claimed Jesus was a saint, etc). Anyway, thank you for your clarification. To be clear, I do not think that we have streams of 'Jesus-scale saints' who are smart, rich (as Jesus ostensibly said, that won't get you into heaven), and ready to help. I do think we have a bunch of problems, and some institutions (governments, for example) that have been developed with the intent of solving those problems. If the problems of society/ies require that we have [the head of] an organisation convicted for violating the Sherman antitrust act come to rescue us with their ill-gotten gains, then perhaps we (as a society) should be aiming higher. Mind, I'm coming at this from a naive, optimistic attitude of wanting to not need heroes in order to save us all from each other.

300bps 9y ago

I got my first computer in 1982, my first modem in 1985 and I have a generally positive view of both Bill Gates and Microsoft.

Jedd 9y ago
Yes, sorry. I didn't mean to say everyone from before that era shares my worldview, merely that most people since then don't. I had a wider range of IT experiences than most people, which necessarily led me to a different perspective than most computer users of that era.
- peacetreefrog 9y ago
  "I didn't mean to say everyone shares my worldview. Only that if you don't you're not as well-versed/smart as me."

TeMPOraL 9y ago

I think the universal hate of Microsoft has survived as a meme 'till this day. People may not know the details, but they know they're supposed to dislike MS. Still, all the bad things Microsoft did back then are a rounding error compared to all the good Bill and Melinda are doing right now. I understand the idea of not promoting "end justifies the means" thinking, but we need to be pragmatic about this - there are only few people on this planet who have, simultaneously, lots of resources, their heart in the right place, and enough smarts to use those resources effectively for the common good. Discouraging those people from helping is a pretty stupid thing to do.

acdha 9y ago
“rounding error” is being very quick to dismiss extracting billions of other people’s dollars using underhanded business tactics. That doesn’t mean that we should ignore what he’s done since but he has plenty of paid PR staff to spin for him – you shouldn’t contribute your services pro bono.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I'm not dismissing it off-hand, just putting it into perspective. And frankly, there is orders of magnitude difference between those two things. > you shouldn’t contribute your services pro bono But I happily will. I want to. I will readily, and entirely for free, support every single company, organization, government and individual who puts a honest and smart effort to make the world a better place. We're in extremely short supply of groups and people who make a difference; almost everyone - companies, countries, NGOs - are too distracted playing market games and politics for their personal, short-term benefit. You get what you support. So let's support people who actually care.
  - Jedd 9y ago
    > .. too distracted playing market games and politics for their personal, short-term benefit. I'm guessing you didn't watch the youtube link in the message to which you're responding?

mseebach 9y ago

Microsoft did a lot of ruthless things and even some illegal things, yes, but it requires a very unkind reading of history to deny the absolutely huge role they played in bring about the world we take for granted today. It's a common, but not at all obviously correct, analysis that where we are today was manifest destiny and thus Bill Gates and Microsoft was just randomly the medium providence chose to carry out this destiny. Microsoft got so incredibly many things right, and they started flagging almost the second they got a major thing wrong (the internet). I really like this interview (Bill Gates on Letterman in 1995). He says the internet is a big deal, but he clearly doesn't get it, not does he provide any sort of thought leadership. Baseball and cigars? Snowcrash had been out for three years by then. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskpNmUl8yQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskpNmUl8yQ

Jedd 9y ago
> ... the absolutely huge role they [Microsoft] played in bring about the world we take for granted today. It's entirely not clear what would have happened if Microsoft / Bill had not brokered that highly dubious original deal -- if, say, CP/M or even *nix had won that war. My personal take is that we'd be ahead of where we are now. And I certainly don't think that we're at some kind of manifest destiny today. Consider this discussion on HN from a couple of years ago around this very subject: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9667498 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9667498
whatifthat 9y ago
> yes, but it requires a very unkind reading of history to deny the absolutely huge role they played in bring about the world we take for granted today. Yes huge role: but not a good one. > Microsoft got so incredibly many things right Like the FUD, EEE and the rest of the nasty stuff? Ms gets too much positive credit for all the bad things it has done.

hux_ 9y ago

Having lived through those days it's hard to believe this new avatar.

kyberias 9y ago

What was the exact reason for posting that link? Are you trying to make a point with that link? What point exactly?