5 ms·

I'd rather see more people following the lead of Elon Musk than Bill Gates. Instead of throwing money at problems that will always exist and producing no real

I'd rather see more people following the lead of Elon Musk than Bill Gates. Instead of throwing money at problems that will always exist and producing no real value, Musk is creating high-tech jobs and advancing the state of humanity.

manhotten 16y ago
How dare bill gates help people get access to clean water and better agricultural techniques!
xiaoma 16y ago
I share neither your certainty that malaria will always exist, nor your belief that ending the epidemic would produce no real value. Along with HIV, it has crippled a continent and caused immeasurable suffering. Elon Musk is doing great things. How many other potential Musks are there whose opportunities to do such things were cut short due to the very problems the Gates foundation addresses? Even just in his home country, South Africa, there have likely been a few.
- klbarry 16y ago
  Absolutely - in Hans Rosling's famous TED speech, he mentions how public health is the most important thing regarding a countries economic growth and well being.
smallhands 16y ago
i disagree with you elon musk is just creating toys for the rich.bill gates and likes are working on real problems . In some developing countries that l know you may not believe how hard it is to get a clean drinking water
mquander 16y ago
It's certainly a testament to the power of perspective that you've dismissed a quarter of the planet living sick, hungry, and in poverty as "problems that will always exist", and decided that doing something about it produces no "real value."
- lionhearted 16y ago
  > It's certainly a testament to the power of perspective that you've dismissed a quarter of the planet living sick, hungry, and in poverty as "problems that will always exist", and decided that doing something about it produces no "real value." Can we spare the moral condemnations? Today's advances in the cutting edge of sciences become the life-saving and enhancing cheap commodities of the future, and being skeptical that poverty can ever be truly defeated isn't exactly a radical position. That said, I agree with you more than the original poster, and I think philanthropy is fantastic. But let's spare the moral condemnations and shaming of someone who has an alternative point of view.
  - mquander 16y ago
    I find it a really shameful comment. It seems like unbelievably wishful thinking to claim that high-tech startups are the most important thing everyone should be doing when the going rate for saving lives from tuberculosis or malaria is in the hundreds of dollars per (e.g. http://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities http://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities). I'd like to hear why that is not real value. No doubt most First World businesses produce technology and efficiency advancements that are genuinely useful, but I doubt that very many are that useful. I can't imagine how you could hold the original poster's view as stated unless you literally don't value human life very much, or you have done some convincing math about how much good Tesla Motors is likely to do the world. I condemn it without reservation.
    - lionhearted 16y ago
      > I find it a really shameful comment. You can still debate the merits civilly - and that makes it more likely to actually change someone's opinion than just expressing outrage. > It seems like unbelievably wishful thinking to claim that high-tech startups are the most important thing everyone should be doing when the going rate for saving lives from tuberculosis or malaria is in the hundreds of dollars per There's no conflict here. New technology saves lives, often by use in unexpected ways. Eradicating disease saves lives. They're both good. > I can't imagine how you could hold the original poster's view as stated unless you literally don't value human life very much, or you have done some convincing math about how much good Tesla Motors is likely to do the world. I condemn it without reservation. You don't see how electric cars could save lives? Coupled with better batteries and advanced nuclear power, it goes a long way towards obsoleting fossil fuels and driving down the costs of transportation. That's huge - lower pollution and lower costs on everything - medicine, food, housing - lower transport costs makes everything more affordable. As for the condemnation? Why not just, y'know, state your point of view without the moral condemnation? I don't think it adds much to the discussion. By the way, I'm more in agreement with you than the OP, though I think it's a bit more nuanced than you make it out to be.
tzs 16y ago
So saving several million lives produced no real value?
jasonlotito 16y ago
Except Bill Gates isn't just throwing money at problems and producing no real value. You may not be seeing the benefits of his work directly, but he is making a real difference, and I'd be willing to bet, through his work, employing far more people who work to pull people up rather than merely advancing the advanced. Edit: I'm not against people advancing the human race mind you (advancing the advanced). However, neither is Bill Gates merely handing out money. He's teaching men to fish, rather than simply giving them fillets.

manhotten 16y ago

How dare bill gates help people get access to clean water and better agricultural techniques!

xiaoma 16y ago

I share neither your certainty that malaria will always exist, nor your belief that ending the epidemic would produce no real value. Along with HIV, it has crippled a continent and caused immeasurable suffering. Elon Musk is doing great things. How many other potential Musks are there whose opportunities to do such things were cut short due to the very problems the Gates foundation addresses? Even just in his home country, South Africa, there have likely been a few.

klbarry 16y ago
Absolutely - in Hans Rosling's famous TED speech, he mentions how public health is the most important thing regarding a countries economic growth and well being.

smallhands 16y ago

i disagree with you elon musk is just creating toys for the rich.bill gates and likes are working on real problems . In some developing countries that l know you may not believe how hard it is to get a clean drinking water

mquander 16y ago

It's certainly a testament to the power of perspective that you've dismissed a quarter of the planet living sick, hungry, and in poverty as "problems that will always exist", and decided that doing something about it produces no "real value."

lionhearted 16y ago
> It's certainly a testament to the power of perspective that you've dismissed a quarter of the planet living sick, hungry, and in poverty as "problems that will always exist", and decided that doing something about it produces no "real value." Can we spare the moral condemnations? Today's advances in the cutting edge of sciences become the life-saving and enhancing cheap commodities of the future, and being skeptical that poverty can ever be truly defeated isn't exactly a radical position. That said, I agree with you more than the original poster, and I think philanthropy is fantastic. But let's spare the moral condemnations and shaming of someone who has an alternative point of view.
- mquander 16y ago
  I find it a really shameful comment. It seems like unbelievably wishful thinking to claim that high-tech startups are the most important thing everyone should be doing when the going rate for saving lives from tuberculosis or malaria is in the hundreds of dollars per (e.g. http://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities http://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities). I'd like to hear why that is not real value. No doubt most First World businesses produce technology and efficiency advancements that are genuinely useful, but I doubt that very many are that useful. I can't imagine how you could hold the original poster's view as stated unless you literally don't value human life very much, or you have done some convincing math about how much good Tesla Motors is likely to do the world. I condemn it without reservation.
  - lionhearted 16y ago
    > I find it a really shameful comment. You can still debate the merits civilly - and that makes it more likely to actually change someone's opinion than just expressing outrage. > It seems like unbelievably wishful thinking to claim that high-tech startups are the most important thing everyone should be doing when the going rate for saving lives from tuberculosis or malaria is in the hundreds of dollars per There's no conflict here. New technology saves lives, often by use in unexpected ways. Eradicating disease saves lives. They're both good. > I can't imagine how you could hold the original poster's view as stated unless you literally don't value human life very much, or you have done some convincing math about how much good Tesla Motors is likely to do the world. I condemn it without reservation. You don't see how electric cars could save lives? Coupled with better batteries and advanced nuclear power, it goes a long way towards obsoleting fossil fuels and driving down the costs of transportation. That's huge - lower pollution and lower costs on everything - medicine, food, housing - lower transport costs makes everything more affordable. As for the condemnation? Why not just, y'know, state your point of view without the moral condemnation? I don't think it adds much to the discussion. By the way, I'm more in agreement with you than the OP, though I think it's a bit more nuanced than you make it out to be.

tzs 16y ago

So saving several million lives produced no real value?

jasonlotito 16y ago

Except Bill Gates isn't just throwing money at problems and producing no real value. You may not be seeing the benefits of his work directly, but he is making a real difference, and I'd be willing to bet, through his work, employing far more people who work to pull people up rather than merely advancing the advanced. Edit: I'm not against people advancing the human race mind you (advancing the advanced). However, neither is Bill Gates merely handing out money. He's teaching men to fish, rather than simply giving them fillets.