6 ms·

Our grandchildren deserve a future without the vendor lock-in and anticompetitive behavior that gave Bill Gates the fortune he is currently using to attempt to

by RunSet 4y ago

Our grandchildren deserve a future without the vendor lock-in and anticompetitive behavior that gave Bill Gates the fortune he is currently using to attempt to whitewash his legacy.

kulahan 4y ago
I hate how nobody can have a change of heart and do an INSANE AMOUNT OF GOOD without some goofball constantly needing to feel cool by pointing out they weren't always doing good stuff. Who gives a shit about anticompetitive behavior in comparison to saving human lives from a preventable disease? Talk about missing the forest for the trees. It's so miserable to talk about positive actions these days, because it's verboten to focus on that when there are negatives to point out.
- swader999 4y ago
  Yeah, well there are those flight logs that tell a pretty disgraceful story.
  - darkwater 4y ago
    Sorry, never heard of this. What do you mean?
    - swader999 4y ago
      The Epstein plane that was used to shuttle underage kids to his island and elites that were served by them has Bill Gates name listed. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-bill-gates.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-...
      - lordfrito 4y ago
        I'm not a Gates fan or apologist, but apparently the links between Gates and Epstein are weak at best. It seems he flew with Epstein once, in the context of business/philanthropy. [1] I get the impression Epstein met a ton of who's-whos, which makes it easy to generate a ton of click-baity "guilt by association" type articles. I.E. "Hey did you know that <controversial public figure> <met/dined/visited/flew> with Epstein?". Guaranteed views, little substance. Again, not a Gates fan. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-epstein-island/false-claim-bill-gates-traveled-to-epsteins-island-multiple-times-idUSKBN22R2C4 https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-epst...
        swader999 4y ago
        Melinda knew though.
        lordfrito 4y ago
        This was 2011-2013, everyone knew. Epstein was already convicted and served time in 2008-2009. Melinda met Epstein once in 2013 and said that she "wanted to see who this man was". [1] Of course her spider-sense was tingling in the presence of a known predator. The meeting cemented things in her mind, and as a woman/wife she didn't understand why Bill continued to meet with him. Bill of course had no problem with Epstein. Gates regularly put aside any sense of morals/ethics for his own selfish financial interests. There was money to be raised here. Melinda's main problem with Bill was mainly his character, multiple affairs, etc. Combined with other things (like his decision to do business with Epstein), she eventually came to the conclusion she couldn't trust Bill any longer. Not surprising, given what we know about Bill's ruthlessness and general inability to stand by his word. I'm all for Bill bashing, but there doesn't appear to be a smoking gun here, just a lot of clickbaity speculation. I'm open to any evidence to the contrary, but all I can find is that Bill met Epstein several times, flew on Epstein's plane once, and he never visited Epstein's private island. I worry that Gates misdeeds are being diluted with time and good PR, and he'll simply be remembered as the guy that did a ton of good (with some unsubstantiated allegations of misbehavior, which of course all dog all powerful people), and not for the person he actually was. As they say, history is written by the winners. [1] https://people.com/human-interest/melinda-french-gates-did-not-like-that-bill-gates-had-meetings-with-jeffrey-epstein/ https://people.com/human-interest/melinda-french-gates-did-n...
- Xelynega 4y ago
  We're commenting on an article from the gates that essentially gives a plan for how to produce more Microsoft workers. What does a "high paying career" have to do with "the future our grandchildren deserve" unless the goal is to produce the future Bill Gates wants. The future our grandchildren deserve is one where they're not stratified by their income such that "high paying careers"(read: tech careers, which just so happen to be what bill gates company profits off an excess of) are the only path for them to be "successful". The idea that bill gates has done a "insane amount of good" is laughable because the "insane amount of good" he does for some reason never conflicts with the goals of Microsoft. "Missing the forest for the trees" would be ignoring the pattern of his decision and instead saying "he's done an insane amount of good, why are you criticizing him?"
  - nitwit005 4y ago
    He doesn't run Microsoft anymore, and he's been selling off the stock he owns in the company. Imagining it's all to support Microsoft somehow is delusional at this point. Are the efforts to combat Malaria also somehow part of a corporate agenda?
- bcrosby95 4y ago
  You're looking at second order effects. These aren't changes of heart. They're worried about their legacy. How history will view them. The same thing driving people like him to donate and found charities is the same thing that drove him to behave the ways he did with Microsoft. I mean, good on him that he refocused his energies. But don't fool yourself into thinking he's changed.
  - kulahan 4y ago
    How should he act if he has a change of heart and wants to do good, besides doing that good he wants to do?
- lordfrito 4y ago
  Nietzche said that altruism is the most mendacious form of egoism. Now that he's won the game, there's no doubt Gates is paying to rehabilitate his image. There's an overwhelming amount of evidence that Gates was a ruthless and all around terrible human being back in the days he was running Microsoft. For example, there's the story of how Gates tried to screw his partner Paul Allen (who working hard to deliver DOS 2.0 while also fighting cancer) out of his stake in the company. [1] In Paul's own words: One evening in late December 1982, I heard Bill and Steve speaking heatedly in Bill’s office and paused outside to listen in. It was easy to get the gist of the conversation. They were bemoaning my recent lack of production and discussing how they might dilute my Microsoft equity by issuing options to themselves and other shareholders. It was clear that they’d been thinking about this for some time. Unable to stand it any longer, I burst in on them and shouted, “This is unbelievable! It shows your true character, once and for all.” I was speaking to both of them, but staring straight at Bill. Caught red-handed, they were struck dumb. Before they could respond, I turned on my heel and left. Don't take my word on it, read up for yourself. I can't find any stories from the early days of Microsoft that paint Gates in a positive light. His only skill was being insanely opportunistic. If if this the way Gates treats his friends, I don't want to hear about all of the good he's doing in the world. I don't believe the end justifies the means. There are plenty of people in the world worth looking up to, Gates isn't one of those people. [1] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371608/Bill-Gates-tried-cut-Paul-Allen-Microsoft-fell-ill-cancer.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371608/Bill-Gates-...
- pannSun 4y ago
  Bill Gates isn't doing good - the money he stole [1] from us is doing good. And he didn't have a change of heart - he hasn't opposed any of the IP maximalist, pro-corporate lobbying that helped MS grow so wealthy. Do you see him calling to end software patents? I can forgive the stolen money, even credit him for how he's using his loot [2], but he hasn't lifted a finger to undo the damage he did to software freedom - our freedom. Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity. [1] Acquired by underhanded means through the mentioned anti-competitive and lock-in practices. [2] The parts used to fight malaria and such, at least. Not so much the $319 million he sent to his pet media outlets, to give but one example of what is counted as "philanthropy": https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-gates-bankroll-media-outlets https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-gates-bankroll-media-outl...
  - awillen 4y ago
    > Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity. You can't just put the word "objectively" at the beginning of something and make it objective. He's not hostile to those kids in Africa who don't care about software freedom but are not dead because they didn't get malaria. I get that we're on HN, but this idea that the good of software is somehow the most important good is just lunacy. I genuinely cannot fathom how anyone can see stopping software patents as more important (or even remotely close to the same level of importance) than stopping malaria.
    - pannSun 4y ago
      > the good of software But it's not just the good of software, because software is eating the world. Software is in your phone, in the tractor that grows your food, in the gene sequencing machine (and gene sequencing software) used to fight disease, in self-driving cars, and in non-self-driving ones too. And you can bet there will be software in automatic weed killing robots. It's how you access your bank, the news, even government services. It's how you find a date, a taxi, how you order food. It. Is. Everywhere. On net, if you were at risk of malaria, he is not hostile. But to the average global citizen, and especially their descendants in the future, he is hostile. Because the line between software freedom, and just freedom, is vanishing, and fast.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
beachy 4y ago
Bill gates was a ruthless competitor in business who pushed things to the limits, the original alpha geek. Not unlike thousands of other business leaders over the centuries. Holding a candle of bitterness against him so long after he moved on to an admirably altruistic life and actively redistributed his wealth says more about you than about him. (Spoken as someone who has experienced brutal commercial outcomes thanks to Microsoft shenanigans back in the day).
- Xelynega 4y ago
  Why is it that his "admirably altruistic life" never seems to conflict with what Microsoft's goals are, if the line is that he's "changed since he started Microsoft". If that were the case, wouldn't it make sense that his new "altruistic" ideals conflict with the "ruthless competitor" ideals that Microsoft holds?
  - sbuk 4y ago
    Two monks were walking when they met a swift but shallow stream that they needed to cross. There was a young woman stood on the bank who also needed to get across, but she was scared, so she asked the monks for help. The monks had taken vows of chastity which included never touching a woman and the younger monk refused. The other, older monk, picked up the young woman and carried her across, gently placing her down on the other side. As the two monks carried on with their journey in silence, the younger monk blurted out, "You took a vow of chastity! You promised never to touch a woman! How could you have just picked her up?" The older monk replied; ”My brother, I put her down a few miles back. Why do you carry her still?”
    - Xelynega 4y ago
      The "why do you care" argument kind of falls on deaf ears when we all give our consent to discuss the contents of the article, and continue to give our consent as we actually reply to comments. If bill gates in the past was "ruthless" and Microsoft was born from that, then it's logically inconsistent to say "bill gates is a good person because of his altruism despite his ruthlessness in the past" since his current altruism does nothing to address that past ruthlessness.
frankish 4y ago
I think this argument is an ad hominem. Attacking the person and their motives does not address the actual substance of zir ideas and current actions.

by RunSet 4y ago

Our grandchildren deserve a future without the vendor lock-in and anticompetitive behavior that gave Bill Gates the fortune he is currently using to attempt to whitewash his legacy.

kulahan 4y ago

I hate how nobody can have a change of heart and do an INSANE AMOUNT OF GOOD without some goofball constantly needing to feel cool by pointing out they weren't always doing good stuff. Who gives a shit about anticompetitive behavior in comparison to saving human lives from a preventable disease? Talk about missing the forest for the trees. It's so miserable to talk about positive actions these days, because it's verboten to focus on that when there are negatives to point out.

swader999 4y ago
Yeah, well there are those flight logs that tell a pretty disgraceful story.
- darkwater 4y ago
  Sorry, never heard of this. What do you mean?
  - swader999 4y ago
    The Epstein plane that was used to shuttle underage kids to his island and elites that were served by them has Bill Gates name listed. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-bill-gates.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-...
    - lordfrito 4y ago
      I'm not a Gates fan or apologist, but apparently the links between Gates and Epstein are weak at best. It seems he flew with Epstein once, in the context of business/philanthropy. [1] I get the impression Epstein met a ton of who's-whos, which makes it easy to generate a ton of click-baity "guilt by association" type articles. I.E. "Hey did you know that <controversial public figure> <met/dined/visited/flew> with Epstein?". Guaranteed views, little substance. Again, not a Gates fan. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-epstein-island/false-claim-bill-gates-traveled-to-epsteins-island-multiple-times-idUSKBN22R2C4 https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-epst...
      - swader999 4y ago
        Melinda knew though.
        lordfrito 4y ago
        This was 2011-2013, everyone knew. Epstein was already convicted and served time in 2008-2009. Melinda met Epstein once in 2013 and said that she "wanted to see who this man was". [1] Of course her spider-sense was tingling in the presence of a known predator. The meeting cemented things in her mind, and as a woman/wife she didn't understand why Bill continued to meet with him. Bill of course had no problem with Epstein. Gates regularly put aside any sense of morals/ethics for his own selfish financial interests. There was money to be raised here. Melinda's main problem with Bill was mainly his character, multiple affairs, etc. Combined with other things (like his decision to do business with Epstein), she eventually came to the conclusion she couldn't trust Bill any longer. Not surprising, given what we know about Bill's ruthlessness and general inability to stand by his word. I'm all for Bill bashing, but there doesn't appear to be a smoking gun here, just a lot of clickbaity speculation. I'm open to any evidence to the contrary, but all I can find is that Bill met Epstein several times, flew on Epstein's plane once, and he never visited Epstein's private island. I worry that Gates misdeeds are being diluted with time and good PR, and he'll simply be remembered as the guy that did a ton of good (with some unsubstantiated allegations of misbehavior, which of course all dog all powerful people), and not for the person he actually was. As they say, history is written by the winners. [1] https://people.com/human-interest/melinda-french-gates-did-not-like-that-bill-gates-had-meetings-with-jeffrey-epstein/ https://people.com/human-interest/melinda-french-gates-did-n...
Xelynega 4y ago
We're commenting on an article from the gates that essentially gives a plan for how to produce more Microsoft workers. What does a "high paying career" have to do with "the future our grandchildren deserve" unless the goal is to produce the future Bill Gates wants. The future our grandchildren deserve is one where they're not stratified by their income such that "high paying careers"(read: tech careers, which just so happen to be what bill gates company profits off an excess of) are the only path for them to be "successful". The idea that bill gates has done a "insane amount of good" is laughable because the "insane amount of good" he does for some reason never conflicts with the goals of Microsoft. "Missing the forest for the trees" would be ignoring the pattern of his decision and instead saying "he's done an insane amount of good, why are you criticizing him?"
- nitwit005 4y ago
  He doesn't run Microsoft anymore, and he's been selling off the stock he owns in the company. Imagining it's all to support Microsoft somehow is delusional at this point. Are the efforts to combat Malaria also somehow part of a corporate agenda?
bcrosby95 4y ago
You're looking at second order effects. These aren't changes of heart. They're worried about their legacy. How history will view them. The same thing driving people like him to donate and found charities is the same thing that drove him to behave the ways he did with Microsoft. I mean, good on him that he refocused his energies. But don't fool yourself into thinking he's changed.
- kulahan 4y ago
  How should he act if he has a change of heart and wants to do good, besides doing that good he wants to do?
lordfrito 4y ago
Nietzche said that altruism is the most mendacious form of egoism. Now that he's won the game, there's no doubt Gates is paying to rehabilitate his image. There's an overwhelming amount of evidence that Gates was a ruthless and all around terrible human being back in the days he was running Microsoft. For example, there's the story of how Gates tried to screw his partner Paul Allen (who working hard to deliver DOS 2.0 while also fighting cancer) out of his stake in the company. [1] In Paul's own words: One evening in late December 1982, I heard Bill and Steve speaking heatedly in Bill’s office and paused outside to listen in. It was easy to get the gist of the conversation. They were bemoaning my recent lack of production and discussing how they might dilute my Microsoft equity by issuing options to themselves and other shareholders. It was clear that they’d been thinking about this for some time. Unable to stand it any longer, I burst in on them and shouted, “This is unbelievable! It shows your true character, once and for all.” I was speaking to both of them, but staring straight at Bill. Caught red-handed, they were struck dumb. Before they could respond, I turned on my heel and left. Don't take my word on it, read up for yourself. I can't find any stories from the early days of Microsoft that paint Gates in a positive light. His only skill was being insanely opportunistic. If if this the way Gates treats his friends, I don't want to hear about all of the good he's doing in the world. I don't believe the end justifies the means. There are plenty of people in the world worth looking up to, Gates isn't one of those people. [1] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371608/Bill-Gates-tried-cut-Paul-Allen-Microsoft-fell-ill-cancer.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371608/Bill-Gates-...
pannSun 4y ago
Bill Gates isn't doing good - the money he stole [1] from us is doing good. And he didn't have a change of heart - he hasn't opposed any of the IP maximalist, pro-corporate lobbying that helped MS grow so wealthy. Do you see him calling to end software patents? I can forgive the stolen money, even credit him for how he's using his loot [2], but he hasn't lifted a finger to undo the damage he did to software freedom - our freedom. Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity. [1] Acquired by underhanded means through the mentioned anti-competitive and lock-in practices. [2] The parts used to fight malaria and such, at least. Not so much the $319 million he sent to his pet media outlets, to give but one example of what is counted as "philanthropy": https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-gates-bankroll-media-outlets https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-gates-bankroll-media-outl...
- awillen 4y ago
  > Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity. You can't just put the word "objectively" at the beginning of something and make it objective. He's not hostile to those kids in Africa who don't care about software freedom but are not dead because they didn't get malaria. I get that we're on HN, but this idea that the good of software is somehow the most important good is just lunacy. I genuinely cannot fathom how anyone can see stopping software patents as more important (or even remotely close to the same level of importance) than stopping malaria.
  - pannSun 4y ago
    > the good of software But it's not just the good of software, because software is eating the world. Software is in your phone, in the tractor that grows your food, in the gene sequencing machine (and gene sequencing software) used to fight disease, in self-driving cars, and in non-self-driving ones too. And you can bet there will be software in automatic weed killing robots. It's how you access your bank, the news, even government services. It's how you find a date, a taxi, how you order food. It. Is. Everywhere. On net, if you were at risk of malaria, he is not hostile. But to the average global citizen, and especially their descendants in the future, he is hostile. Because the line between software freedom, and just freedom, is vanishing, and fast.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

beachy 4y ago

Bill gates was a ruthless competitor in business who pushed things to the limits, the original alpha geek. Not unlike thousands of other business leaders over the centuries. Holding a candle of bitterness against him so long after he moved on to an admirably altruistic life and actively redistributed his wealth says more about you than about him. (Spoken as someone who has experienced brutal commercial outcomes thanks to Microsoft shenanigans back in the day).

Xelynega 4y ago
Why is it that his "admirably altruistic life" never seems to conflict with what Microsoft's goals are, if the line is that he's "changed since he started Microsoft". If that were the case, wouldn't it make sense that his new "altruistic" ideals conflict with the "ruthless competitor" ideals that Microsoft holds?
- sbuk 4y ago
  Two monks were walking when they met a swift but shallow stream that they needed to cross. There was a young woman stood on the bank who also needed to get across, but she was scared, so she asked the monks for help. The monks had taken vows of chastity which included never touching a woman and the younger monk refused. The other, older monk, picked up the young woman and carried her across, gently placing her down on the other side. As the two monks carried on with their journey in silence, the younger monk blurted out, "You took a vow of chastity! You promised never to touch a woman! How could you have just picked her up?" The older monk replied; ”My brother, I put her down a few miles back. Why do you carry her still?”
  - Xelynega 4y ago
    The "why do you care" argument kind of falls on deaf ears when we all give our consent to discuss the contents of the article, and continue to give our consent as we actually reply to comments. If bill gates in the past was "ruthless" and Microsoft was born from that, then it's logically inconsistent to say "bill gates is a good person because of his altruism despite his ruthlessness in the past" since his current altruism does nothing to address that past ruthlessness.

frankish 4y ago

I think this argument is an ad hominem. Attacking the person and their motives does not address the actual substance of zir ideas and current actions.