3 ms·
And I think a strong argument can be made that if Bill Gates had taken a little time to look at the big picture in his early days, Microsoft might have had a mo
by lanstin 5y ago
And I think a strong argument can be made that if Bill Gates had taken a little time to look at the big picture in his early days, Microsoft might have had a more positive effect on the world, rather than become a company that valued crushing opponents over technical quality or real innovation. Imagine the quality of Linux with 10% of the money of Microsoft.
- username90 5y agoOr the fair play might have meant Microsoft would never have surpassed Intel so we would have no big corporation making hardware decoupled OS.
- david927 5y agoAnother strong argument is that, if you showed the place where Bill Gates actually worked hard, it was in crushing every single competitor in sight in such vicious terms that not only did those competitors shut down but none sprang up in their absence. Those small competitors were often wildly innovative. That all went away. One often-cited reason why Europe did so well in the last half millennium, when it was far behind the Islamic world and the Far East, was not just the printing press but also that the various powers had reached a detente. There was not a single dominating, controlling power, and this spurred innovation. Anyway, this whole argument Paul is proffering here is because people, especially the youngest generation, are seeing behind the curtain and realizing that their sweat drives the engines, and yet they're not benefiting from that the same way the wealthiest are. They're not going to "hustle" for a remote shot at millions. It's a crooked game and they don't want to play it. Good for them.