26 ms·

If Bill Gates weren’t from such a wealthy family it is likely he wouldn’t have ever attended Harvard. Grooming for Harvard and the ilk start up from an early ag

by chuck- 8y ago

If Bill Gates weren’t from such a wealthy family it is likely he wouldn’t have ever attended Harvard. Grooming for Harvard and the ilk start up from an early age. It is also likely no one would know who he is today as well. He might had been that genius principle engineer that would have went on to do absolutely amazing work, but not one to start or lead a company. Imagine how many potential Bill Gates are majoring in CS from average to good state universities that have the potential to do so much more in academia and industry, but come from poor families/no one to help them. You’ll probably never hear of them/know they exist.

masklinn 8y ago
> If Bill Gates weren’t from such a wealthy family it is likely he wouldn’t have ever attended Harvard. If Bill Gates weren't from such a well-connected family, it is also likely Microsoft wouldn't have been selected to develop the OS for the IBM PC.
- C1sc0cat 8y ago
  I suspect Digital research Blowing off IBM had more to do with it
  - masklinn 8y ago
    That had to do with CP/M not being the standard/mainline OS for the IBM PC (and even then, CP/M was supported but released 6 months after DOS and for 6 times the price), it didn't have to do with IBM selecting Microsoft as their OS developer / vendor, especially since microsoft didn't even have an OS when they were selected.
    - asianthrowaway 8y ago
      You should read up on why Microsoft got the DOS deal. When IBM decided to build their PC, they first sent representatives to visit Microsoft thinking they had an OS in development. However, they didn't at the time, and Gates actually told them to go visit Kildall instead. When the IBMers arrived at Kildall's house, they got told to wait because Kildall was busy handgliding that day (or something similar). They waited the whole day before deciding they had enough and left. It's only then that Gates saw an opportunity, and told IBM they could provide an OS.
- david927 8y ago
  genius principle engineer He was never considered an especially talented developer. He bought the OS that was used for the IBM PC.
  - chuck- 8y ago
    I was referring more to potential, as opposed to what he actually did in software development. Per stories from Harvard, he had some mathematical talent. With talent like that he could have essentially pursued whatever intellectual pursuit he wanted and have obtained results in it. Whether that be software development, mathematics, running a business etc. My point is there are others out there like him, we likely won’t know about them because they aren’t from such affluent families.
imtringued 8y ago
>He might had been that genius principle engineer that would have went on to do absolutely amazing work, but not one to start or lead a company. Exactly! Bill Gates success is tied to much more mundane things like sales strategies and close business relations to major businesses like IBM (thanks to his mother) to the point that Bill Gates decided that he'd be better off just getting contracts at any cost even if it means over-promising and in the end buying software from Tim Paterson and merely ported it over to whatever IBM was selling at the time. "poor" people go to university. Rich people take advantage of their connections.
throwaway5393 8y ago
I find this line of thinking interesting and wonder if it can apply to other areas? For example, if Lebron James wasn't born with such great genetics, it's likely he wouldn't have been a "once in a generation" NBA superstar, and instead just a really good rec league player. Or, if Marilyn Monroe wasn't so attractive, it's likely she wouldn't have been a cultural icon, and instead just an average D-list actress.
- lmm 8y ago
  The implicit assumption in the grandparent post is that it's good for society if the most gifted basketball players play in the NBA, the most attractive people act in the best movies, and the most talented engineers lead the top companies. Of course personal talent is a question of luck just as much as parental wealth - a meritocracy will not allocate the top places to those with the most worthy souls any more than a nepotocracy does - but more nepotistic societies are less efficient overall in a way that makes life worse for everyone there than more merit-based ones.
aquadrop 8y ago
I think that's questionable and downplays his abilities. He won National Merit Scholarship. He scored 1590 out of 1600 in SAT. He had a profitable business running when he was still in school automating some traffic calculations, and he was actually hiring his classmates. You don't see that often. And I think one more important thing happened - he met very bright Paul Allen and together they were very powerful duo. Of course having wealthy family helped not to care about some stuff, but it wasn't just luck.
- chuck- 8y ago
  >I think that's questionable and downplays his abilities. He won National Merit Scholarship. He scored 1590 out of 1600 in SAT. I think you underestimate how much a proper background can help you in terms of admissions to elite schools. I know someone that scored a 1600 out of a 1600 on their SAT, but came from more of a modest background than Bill. They were denied from Harvard. Harvard receives plently of high SAT scoring, high achieving applicants. Smart people from poor backgrounds have a lot more to overcome in life to get to the same point as others with more resources. A head start with a secure background can make a large difference later in life. I'm sure if my friend didn't go to one of the worst high schools in the state, and went to a better STEM school, they could have been admitted to Harvard. Who knows how that would have changed their life for the better. Now we will never know.
  - agent008t 8y ago
    Don't know about Harvard, but I interviewed people for admissions into Oxford CS. If anything, poor background would help you - while we all try to be as objective as possible, if anything we would cut you a bit more slack if you came from a poor background. In this day and age, I would argue that access to education is actually nearly ubiquitous when it comes to STEM. Lack of encouragement/emphasis on education from parents and the rest of the social circle is a much bigger problem. That, and smart poor kids just don't apply, because they wrongly think they don't stand a chance. Arguably, a smart kid growing up in a poor family, but with parents that put great emphasis on education, has an advantage over a rich kid - the rich kid is unlikely to have the same kind of drive to succeed.

by chuck- 8y ago

masklinn 8y ago

> If Bill Gates weren’t from such a wealthy family it is likely he wouldn’t have ever attended Harvard. If Bill Gates weren't from such a well-connected family, it is also likely Microsoft wouldn't have been selected to develop the OS for the IBM PC.

C1sc0cat 8y ago
I suspect Digital research Blowing off IBM had more to do with it
- masklinn 8y ago
  That had to do with CP/M not being the standard/mainline OS for the IBM PC (and even then, CP/M was supported but released 6 months after DOS and for 6 times the price), it didn't have to do with IBM selecting Microsoft as their OS developer / vendor, especially since microsoft didn't even have an OS when they were selected.
  - asianthrowaway 8y ago
    You should read up on why Microsoft got the DOS deal. When IBM decided to build their PC, they first sent representatives to visit Microsoft thinking they had an OS in development. However, they didn't at the time, and Gates actually told them to go visit Kildall instead. When the IBMers arrived at Kildall's house, they got told to wait because Kildall was busy handgliding that day (or something similar). They waited the whole day before deciding they had enough and left. It's only then that Gates saw an opportunity, and told IBM they could provide an OS.
david927 8y ago
genius principle engineer He was never considered an especially talented developer. He bought the OS that was used for the IBM PC.
- chuck- 8y ago
  I was referring more to potential, as opposed to what he actually did in software development. Per stories from Harvard, he had some mathematical talent. With talent like that he could have essentially pursued whatever intellectual pursuit he wanted and have obtained results in it. Whether that be software development, mathematics, running a business etc. My point is there are others out there like him, we likely won’t know about them because they aren’t from such affluent families.

imtringued 8y ago

>He might had been that genius principle engineer that would have went on to do absolutely amazing work, but not one to start or lead a company. Exactly! Bill Gates success is tied to much more mundane things like sales strategies and close business relations to major businesses like IBM (thanks to his mother) to the point that Bill Gates decided that he'd be better off just getting contracts at any cost even if it means over-promising and in the end buying software from Tim Paterson and merely ported it over to whatever IBM was selling at the time. "poor" people go to university. Rich people take advantage of their connections.

throwaway5393 8y ago

I find this line of thinking interesting and wonder if it can apply to other areas? For example, if Lebron James wasn't born with such great genetics, it's likely he wouldn't have been a "once in a generation" NBA superstar, and instead just a really good rec league player. Or, if Marilyn Monroe wasn't so attractive, it's likely she wouldn't have been a cultural icon, and instead just an average D-list actress.

lmm 8y ago
The implicit assumption in the grandparent post is that it's good for society if the most gifted basketball players play in the NBA, the most attractive people act in the best movies, and the most talented engineers lead the top companies. Of course personal talent is a question of luck just as much as parental wealth - a meritocracy will not allocate the top places to those with the most worthy souls any more than a nepotocracy does - but more nepotistic societies are less efficient overall in a way that makes life worse for everyone there than more merit-based ones.

aquadrop 8y ago

I think that's questionable and downplays his abilities. He won National Merit Scholarship. He scored 1590 out of 1600 in SAT. He had a profitable business running when he was still in school automating some traffic calculations, and he was actually hiring his classmates. You don't see that often. And I think one more important thing happened - he met very bright Paul Allen and together they were very powerful duo. Of course having wealthy family helped not to care about some stuff, but it wasn't just luck.

chuck- 8y ago
>I think that's questionable and downplays his abilities. He won National Merit Scholarship. He scored 1590 out of 1600 in SAT. I think you underestimate how much a proper background can help you in terms of admissions to elite schools. I know someone that scored a 1600 out of a 1600 on their SAT, but came from more of a modest background than Bill. They were denied from Harvard. Harvard receives plently of high SAT scoring, high achieving applicants. Smart people from poor backgrounds have a lot more to overcome in life to get to the same point as others with more resources. A head start with a secure background can make a large difference later in life. I'm sure if my friend didn't go to one of the worst high schools in the state, and went to a better STEM school, they could have been admitted to Harvard. Who knows how that would have changed their life for the better. Now we will never know.
- agent008t 8y ago
  Don't know about Harvard, but I interviewed people for admissions into Oxford CS. If anything, poor background would help you - while we all try to be as objective as possible, if anything we would cut you a bit more slack if you came from a poor background. In this day and age, I would argue that access to education is actually nearly ubiquitous when it comes to STEM. Lack of encouragement/emphasis on education from parents and the rest of the social circle is a much bigger problem. That, and smart poor kids just don't apply, because they wrongly think they don't stand a chance. Arguably, a smart kid growing up in a poor family, but with parents that put great emphasis on education, has an advantage over a rich kid - the rich kid is unlikely to have the same kind of drive to succeed.