Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Paul Allen Confirmed as SpaceShipOne's Sponsor

Posted by michael on from the sugar-daddy dept.

Shafe writes "Space.com confirmed suspicions that Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen was the secret investor in Burt Rutan's SpaceShipOne, which completed a successful supersonic flight on the same day as the centennial of flight. Allen hopes Rutan's ship will win the $10 million X-Prize to help kickstart private manned space flight."

67 of 276 comments (clear)

  1. TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if Paul Allen will want to be the first Private citizen into space with the first privately built space ship.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    1. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder if Paul Allen will want to be the first Private citizen into space with the first privately built space ship.

      It is good to see people with his kind of wealth putting it to work for society. The benefits of a private space market will be....well more benefits than you could imagine. (sorry about the star wars thing) If his reason for doing this is just to get to be 'first inspace in a privately owned vehicle' well then, I wish him the best of luck!

    2. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by TrueBuckeye · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I would certainly go in a heartbeat if I had the option, but I don't know of the payload capacity of SS1...can it hold passengers as well as crew?

      --
      Was that night on the marge of Lake LaBarge I cremated Sam McGee...
    3. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by KendyForTheState · · Score: 2, Funny

      Finally, some Microsoft money being used for good rather than evil!

      --
      ...I just came for the free beer.
    4. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by netringer · · Score: 4, Informative
      would certainly go in a heartbeat if I had the option, but I don't know of the payload capacity of SS1...can it hold passengers as well as crew?
      It holds three. The plan is that the passengers are the crew.The White Knight is designed to serve as a simulator for flying SpaceShipOne. Crews would be trained in the White Knight.

      Rutan's space tourism plan always had the crew being trained to fly various phases of the flight, 1) launch/climb, 2) weighlessness, 3) landing.

      Actually the idea was that 10 or so would buy a chance for a seat and be trained for week in the Carribean after which the two who fly will be chosen by lottery. One seat would be guaranteed and purchased for 10x the money.

      --
      Ever dream you could fly? Get up from the Flight Sim. I Fly
    5. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by eln · · Score: 3, Informative

      What about the Gates Foundation?

      Granted, a lot of their "charity" work in the education sector is really just a thinly veiled attempt to get Microsoft-based computers in the public schools (the old "hook 'em young" strategy), but they also do a lot of good work involving bringing vital medications to third world countries and other such things.

      Paul Allen likes to spend his money on more "visionary" pursuits, trying to further push the technology envelope, but Gates has certainly thrown plenty of money to good causes in his own right. It's just too bad he had to do that whole selling his soul to Satan and ruining the computer industry thing to get to that point.

    6. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by October_30th · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wouldn't call Bill Gates bad at spending his money for a good cause. He's well known for donating significant sums for charity which, I might add, is much more moral than contributing to an X-prize attempt.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    7. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by SwissCheese · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Gates seems to be doing a good enough job spending his money in the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to help search for an Aids cure as well as fund education iniatives.

      Unless of course you are meaning to imply that private space travel is more important than these other causes.

    8. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by JPelorat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "It is good to see people with his kind of wealth putting it to work for society."

      They all do, it's just that most of it isn't high-profile or 'cool' stuff like space travel.

      Wealthy people don't stuff their mattresses full of cash or have a Scrooge McDuck vault where they hoard coin and bill, or in any other way keep it totally removed from the economy.

      No, instead what you find is that their money is socked away in investment portfolios, mutual funds, annuities, or their own businesses as capital investments. All that money gets invested somewhere in society, whether it's in government bonds, other companies, loans, etc etc etc.

      --
      Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
    9. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Insightful

      moving forward in technology and space travel is just as important as moving forward in medicine and food production.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    10. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
      > I wouldn't call Bill Gates bad at spending his money for a good cause. He's well known for donating significant sums for charity which, I might add, is much more moral than contributing to an X-prize attempt.

      Umm, "much more moral"? WTF d00d?

      You have $10B. You wanna make the world a better place.

      Scenario 1:: Give $10000 to 1,000,000 third-worlders. If you want that to last for 25-30 years, your million people will have $300-400 per year. They will have running water, but the vast majority of those million people will be living in mud huts and abject squalor. At the end of your 25 years, most will have reproduced at least once, leaving you with 2,000,000 people still living in squalor.

      Number of lives improved: 1,000,000 for 25 years.
      Funds remaining: $0.00

      Choice 2: Drop $9B on a development programme to reduce lift costs to orbit from $10000/pound to $100/pound. Invest $1B in companies that have neat ideas, like doing science (which leads to more technology), strip-mining the moon or asteroids (reducing environmental loads on earth) for metals and silicon for solar cells. 25 years later, you've doubled your money (and can feed the 2,000,000 third-worlders that Mister Morality left behind if you so choose), and six billion people now have practically free electrical power and consequently, pure water as extracted from seawater through desalination plant, also becomes too cheap to meter.

      Number of lives improved: 6,000,000,000 permanently improved.
      Funds Remaining: Very probably more funds than you started with. So you can fund the next big thing, whatever that might be.

      And as an added bonus: If you still wanna help 10000 third-worlders because they're somehow a very special bunch of third-worlders (as opposed to the other 2-3 billion of them), just build them their very own hollowed-out asteroid for $850M, and use $150M (10000 people * 150 pounds * $100/pound) to fly them to it.

      Some of Gates' "charitable" actions are Good Things, such as his funding of medical research. Others are props for the monopoly, such as giving away free-as-in-beer Microsoft licenses to schools so that the kids never hear about penguins.

      But to pretend that "charity" is somehow intrinsically more moral than funding the development of cool technology for private gain is utter and complete bunk.

      Damn near every improvement in your quality of life over the past 100 years has come from people just trying to make a buck by building a better mousetrap.

      You go, Paul Allen. And don't let the whining moralists get you down. Investing in private space development is one of the most moral acts a human being can perform.

    11. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by efflux · · Score: 3, Insightful
      On the most important issue, Gates passes the test with flying colors. .

      Yes, certainly. I mean, we should not mind it when someone hoards money and distributes to various charities. Certainly they're the best people to decide how to distribute the money. Certainly it's best to withold money to those who need it just to give it to them in an "officious manner".

      I was just talking about this with someone about Carnegie. It goes like this:

      let's exploit the workers and make them live in miserable conditions. Then let's reap our profits from this exploitation. Now, after we've made thourough use of the power large sums of money affords, let's give it away and build museums. Now, we fill these museums full of art depicting the struggle/misery/plight of the downtrodden. Finally, we add insult to injury and call the whole process "edificaiton".

      Man, fuck Gates and all the other fucks like them who think that they can exonerate themselves by giving away what they never should've had to begin with.

      We should *always* be leary of an individual having that sort of power that Gates has because of the money he has. Franky, I don't trust him to decide what the pressing issues of the day are, nor to influence our politics as much as he certainly does.

      --
      Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes. -- Walt Whitman
    12. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by ScuzzMonkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, my observation is that Gates is focused on addressing traditional charity problems and is more interested in putting out charitable money for its own sake, whereas Paul puts his funds into stuff that he thinks is cool. Some of that stuff has added benefits, which is great, and I am sure that's a factor for him--but I think mostly it's just because it's stuff that he has always wanted to do (and most likely that you or I would want to do) given a few billion dollars to throw around.

      Bill invests in the Third World and putting computers in schools. Paul puts up EMP, renovates Cinerama, buys a few sports teams, and throws some cash at building better rocket ships. Which of these is someone going out and consciously adopting the 'charitable millionair' veneer and which is a regular guy that suddenly became fabulously wealthy doing the cool stuff he fantasized about before all that money?

      I think they are both doing excellent things with their money, especially considering that there are so many tremendously wealthy people who don't. And it's great living in Seattle and reaping some of the benefits of Paul reliving his youth, too. ;)

      --
      No relation to Happy Monkey
    13. Re:TechTV reported this last night on TechTV live. by fastidious+edward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. $9bn will not "reduce lift costs to orbit from $10000/pound to $100/pound". NASA funding was ~$14bn in 2002 alone, and you can't increase efficiency that much, even in cuckoo land, unless you have a very good idea?

      2. 1bn is way way way below the invested amounts in NASDAQ, even on IPO, full of tech companies that have neat ideas.

      3. ...six billion people now have practically free electrical power and consequently, pure water as extracted from seawater through desalination plant. I'm sorry, but unless the electricity is beamed and desalinated water materialised you still need low level electricity distribution and water transportation. Production costs are low compared to costs of transportation.

      I'm all for teaching people to fish rather than giving them a fish, but although $10bn is obscene for an individual, is is small fish on the global investment scale of things. Cool technology is cool, but it is not a cure-all, it is a part of a means to an end, but only a part. Nor will space-travel/exploitation be a cure-all for world poverty et al, low level solutions need to be made, the UN needs more money, development charities need more money, developing countries need more money (or be freed from their debt, but this is another discussion). Bringing back trillions of tons of ore from asteriods will make no difference if the price of ore is immediately depressed and people from developing countries still have no direct water supply, still have no electricity pylons to their village, or still have inadequate access to education. Old fashion engineering and logistics are the only things that can solve this.

      --

      karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
  2. Good for Paul! by Guano_Jim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is not the first time Mr. Allen has contributed to the common good: google link

    Good for him. If only more plutocrats thought the same way.

    Turkey Guts,BTW.

    --
    3D Printing Tips and Tricks at Zheng3.com
    1. Re:Good for Paul! by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's funny that most geeks really admire Paul Allen and Steve Wozniak but hate Gates and Jobs.

      My favorite mega-rich guy is Marc Cuban (The Dallas Mavericks owner who wisely sold Broadcast.com to Yahoo for cold cash when everyone else at the time was selling for stock). He acts like I imagine I would if I had a billion dollars.

      -B

    2. Re:Good for Paul! by haystor · · Score: 4, Informative

      As I understand, he sold for stock too, but bought options as a hedge.

      --
      t
    3. Re:Good for Paul! by mongbot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's funny that most geeks really admire Paul Allen and Steve Wozniak but hate Gates and Jobs.

      You have a point.

      Creating a spaceship is all well and good and will probably advance humanity in the long run. Kudos to Paul Allen for taking the initiative.

      But, in purely monetary terms, Bill Gates is much more charitable. In fact, it could be argued that he's the most philanthrophic individual in history. I don't like it any more than you do, but it's true. I suppose it's a small consolation to think that some of the "Microsoft tax" goes towards charity.

    4. Re:Good for Paul! by blackmonday · · Score: 4, Funny

      Excuse me, sir, but a lot of us on Slashdot not only don't hate Steve Jobs, we would pay good money to roll around in the leader's dirty underwear!

    5. Re:Good for Paul! by bwy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why is it that so many humans admire self-sacrafice above all other traits?

      I can admire someone because they are smart/wealthy/etc and worked hard to get that way without taking handouts along the way or otherwise being a burden on society. Nothing else is required to earn my respect.

      These people set a better lesson for society. Someone with billions who gives it all away just teaches people that handouts are readily available and personal achievement is meaningless.

      There are few exceptions to this. One is helping children, especially when their parents have forgotten them. However, this is self-serving as well. If I help children it is because I know they are a part of our future and thus MY future. I have an interest in seeing that the future is a desirable place to exist.

  3. Well that explains everything. by mgs1000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess he plans to blast the Trailblazers into space so they won't cause him anymore problems.

  4. Thanks for providing a link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hadn't before heard of this Microsoft of which you speak.

  5. That will teach by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    id software to write games that run on non-MS platforms!

    I kid.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. Versioning by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh. Damn that's good to know. The Microsoft co-founder, eh?

    If history is anything to go by, that contraption won't be worth a thing until SpaceShipThreePointOne is built.

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  7. not necessarily a good indicator by social · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Allen's sponsorship isn't necessarily a good indicator that the project will be any more successful, as he has had some major slip-ups in the past. His Experience Music Project in Seattle has thus far proven to be a financial wreck.

    1. Re:not necessarily a good indicator by dev0n · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps a financial wreck, but it's also an amazing place to visit. If you're a music fan, that is.

    2. Re:not necessarily a good indicator by cens0r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wouldn't call it a finacial wreck. I have quite a bit of experience with the place as my GF is a Museum Studies grad student at the UW and interned at the UW.

      Basically, people are of the misconception that Paul Allen has something to do with the museum. Technically he doesn't. He built them a building, donated his entire collection of stuff to them, and gave them funding to get started; but then they became atonomous. They aren't doing real well right now, but what museum did well in this economy?

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
  8. Don't forget Carmack by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm personally rooting for Armadillo Aerospace, which has John Carmack's involvement. He's got some great comments on his news page - feels much more open and less corporate than some of the other X-Prize contenders.

    1. Re:Don't forget Carmack by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I dont think it matters which team succeeds, I'm glad they are all taking part and actually progressing as a whole.

      I would practically give my right arm to go on any one of these trips.

      I feel blessed to be born in an age where spaceflight is possible :)

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Don't forget Carmack by Hieronymus+Howard · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would practically give my right arm to go on any one of these trips.

      If you went on one of these trips there's a good chance that you'd end up giving a lot more of your body than your right arm.

      HH
      --

    3. Re:Don't forget Carmack by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 5, Funny

      Whereas Paul Allen's spacecraft will have all kinds of gadgets you didn't think a spacecraft really needed (and won't really be safe to fly in until the first Service Pack), Carmack's craft will have guns. LOTS of guns.

      --
      When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
    4. Re:Don't forget Carmack by metachor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

      The Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!

  9. No anti-Microsoft statements yet? by drowstar · · Score: 2, Funny

    There were 5 posts so far and none of them was anti-Microsoft.
    Come on guys, we can do better than this!

  10. Obligatory joke by JamesP · · Score: 4, Funny

    This spaceship has encountered an error and will self-destruct now. Microsoft apologizes for the inconvenience...

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  11. Windows in Space by manganese4 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well if they use windows on the operatoring system for the Microsoft MicroShip, when it gets hacked as an SMTP relay, it will give new meaning to Chuck Yeager's phrase for the mercury astronauts "Spam in a can"

    --
    I make my face look like this and concerned words come out.
  12. It'll be tough to reboot ... by wardomon · · Score: 2, Funny

    when the MicroSoft spacecraft crashes.

    --

    - - - If the sun is a star, why can't I see it at night?
  13. Alien Confirmed... by SirChris · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought that it said Alien confirmed as sponsor. And that would have been good news.

  14. Re:windows or *nix by Kenja · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why would that be ironic? Most people do not view their OS as a religon and use the best tool for the job.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  15. Nice web site... by hungryfrog · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope their rocket design is better than their web skilz... Nice site with better than 1/2 the page (at 1024x768) taken up by a cheesy graphic and menu.

  16. Good to see it by Chitlenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This has to be some kind of ideological statement by this guy. 10M is nothing, for gods sakes, he pays ALL of his Seattle Supersonics more than that every year, so it can't be the money.

    Whatever his investment amount is, its good to see both noteriety and cash flow in to private space programs. Maybe we can set a trend where rich geeks get sick of waiting, and goto space on our own. If you think about it, it's kinda the way we (as in geeks as a whole) tend to act anyway (when we're at our best that is).

    I forget who said it, but someone quoted that every good program begins as an itch that needs to be scratched by the programmer... maybe this one's his?

    -chitlenz

    --
    Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
  17. X-Prize Redundant? by N8F8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Russians are charging $20 mil per passenger for tourists. Doesn't take much for that to outcompete X-Prize for motivation.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:X-Prize Redundant? by taniwha · · Score: 2, Informative

      the X prize isn't about tourism - it's about creating alternates to the big govt controlled space programs and eventually getting the cost of space travell down so that you don't have to be a .com millionaire or pop star to be able to afford it

  18. For the benefit of Humanity by sufehmi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's hope the winner of X-prize and other participants won't patent their work like mad, to the point of disabling others to build similar machine.

    If ship was patented to death for example, I don't think there would be that many ships on the ocean now.

    I have high hopes for the future of humanity with X-prize and its participants, but then again I've yet to see the limit of human's ability to shoot itself on the foot.

    1. Re:For the benefit of Humanity by JimPooley · · Score: 2

      The Write Brothers...

      You ignorant FUCK. There is no excuse for such ignorance.

      The WRIGHT Brothers.
      I'll show you again.
      The WRIGHT Brothers.

      --

      "Information wants to be paid"
  19. kick'em! by ajaf · · Score: 2, Funny

    Good! they're investing on ships so they're prepared when we kick'em from earth!

    --
    ajf
  20. Submitter's thoughts by freeweed · · Score: 2, Funny

    Quick! Maybe we can Slashdot Microsoft!

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  21. And it wouldn't be possible... by Zebra_X · · Score: 4, Insightful


    If paul allen hadn't made boat loads of cash working for M$. I don't see Linus financing the Nina and Pinta of the infant space age.

    >:O

  22. Paul Allan is a JERK by zulux · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Paul Allan bought a summer camp out from under the camp, kicked the kids off and built a multi-million dollar trophy home in it's place.

    Kind of like a "Ernest Goes to Camp" without the happy ending.

    more info here

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  23. Nice going, Paul! by Thagg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's kind of amazing, in the last two days we've had a couple of interesting space stories, both involving about the same sum. Two more 'space tourists' are going to fly to the ISS in Soyuz capsules, for $20MM. Paul Allen is revealed as the sponser of Rutan's effort -- total cost, about $20MM.

    So, where one person gets to go into space, by himself, atop a converted Russian ICBM -- somebody with a little more sand kickstarts an entire private space industry. The tourists have only their memories, while Allen will have his own spaceship!

    Very inspiring, Mr Allen.

    thad

    --
    I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    1. Re:Nice going, Paul! by MarkLR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a dramatic difference between a sub orbital flight and going to orbit and staying in space for days.

      When a X-Prize craft can reach orbit that's interesting, until then these vehicles are really of little interest.

  24. Re:Damn... by Lane.exe · · Score: 4, Funny
    "Windows(R)(C)(TM) Spaceship(R)(C)(TM) has detected a General Radiation Protection Fault in Sector 129C. Preparing to eject all damaged material."

    "CTRL ALT DELETE! CTRL ALT DELETE!"

    --
    IAALS.
  25. Re:windows or *nix by whovian · · Score: 2, Funny

    Perhaps, but wouldn't opening Windows in space blow you out into the vacuum? ;)

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  26. Microsoft in Space by cheeseSource · · Score: 3, Funny

    Okay bring on the jokes about usiing the MS operating system in space...

    "I have no idea what happend - this blue screen appeared and the ship shut down on re-entry..."

    --
    (Sponsored by cheeseSource for President 2012)
  27. Gates vs. Allen by GuyMannDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Paul Allen likes to spend his money on more "visionary" pursuits, trying to further push the technology envelope, but Gates has certainly thrown plenty of money to good causes in his own right.

    There are lots of ways to look at how Gates and Allen spend their money. You pointed out one distinction. However, I'd like to go a little deeper into that and ask why.

    Here's my theory: Gates has convinced himself that he's a genius. That he's smarter than almost everyone. He feels that he's the elite. This explains his attempts to so fully dominate and control the future of computing. He certainly doesn't need the money. He's doing it because he honestly feels that he knows better than anyone else how computing should evolve.

    But he's not entirely heartless. He sees the poor unfortunate masses who aren't as great as he is and feels like he should give them a few bucks. Kind of like royalty flinging coins out the windows of their buggies and at the miserable wretches in the crowd as they roll down the common street. It makes him feel good about himself and, quite frankly, those who are lucky enough to catch those coins he chucks out the window really do need the money so they are grateful.

    Allen, on the other hand, has a much more modest view of his place in the world. Unlike Gates, he does not believe that he's one of the greatest geniuses that ever lived. He can fully appreciate the fact that there are scores of other people out there with great ideas. Since he has the money, he funds their work in the hopes that they will be able to develop their ideas into fantastic technologies that advance the human race.

    There's no right or wrong here. Both are doing what they feel is best.

    GMD

    --
    watch this
    1. Re:Gates vs. Allen by kippy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Dude, this is so wrong it isn't even funny. If you look at the cash breakdown here you'll see that more than half the money goes to researching desease. This is a noble cause no matter what you think about his opperating system. The Gates Founddation does wonderfull things even if I hate Clippy.

      --
      Blaze a trail to the New World
  28. Paul Allen is cool.... by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why can't Bill Gates be more like Paul Allen and then more people would actually like him? Or maybe more like Sir Richard Branson... Just a thought...

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    1. Re:Paul Allen is cool.... by frankthechicken · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ahh, you mean like set up something like this?

    2. Re:Paul Allen is cool.... by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Ahh, you mean like set up something like this?"

      Uhm, no. Bill Gates did not participate in any philanthropic activities until Ted Turner started criticizing him. And a lot of it had to do with PR since Microsoft was taking a lot of flack over being a convicted monopolist. Aside from Corbis, Gates is almost completely focused on Microsoft; expanding Microsoft's monopoly. Allen funds whatever he thinks is interesting and/or can possibly make a profit. Allen is not concerned about expanding Microsoft's empire. Allen was the UNIX enthusiast at Microsoft when he was there, by the way. While its fine and dandy that Gates is paying for vaccinations, his company is also the organization that has the audacity to audit poorly funded schools and non-profits for licensing compliance on donated computers. Its much like Jack the Pumpkin King trying to take over Christmas, if you ask me...

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    3. Re:Paul Allen is cool.... by reverendslappy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And I thought I was a cynic.

      "Gates is almost completely focused on ...expanding Microsoft's monopoly."

      Yeah, I guess that little "almost" in there is the 6.2 BILLION DOLLARS in grants and donations. I guess this is what prevents him from being "completely" focused on Microsoft's monopoly, right?

      I'm not exactly a Microsoft apologist, but for you to sit there an dismiss such a huge amount of philanthropy as a PR campaign or tantamount to billionaire one-upmanship angers the shit outta me -- regardless of who's in question.

      Maybe I'll be more inclined listen to you bitch when you donate 13% of your net worth to charity.

    4. Re:Paul Allen is cool.... by reverendslappy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Bill Gates does not run... blah blah blah"

      You're right. It's only his $26 BILLION (sorry, $6.2 billion is just what they've given out so far) that comprises the endowment.

      "Mr. Gates did not get on the philanthropic exploits... blah blah blah"

      So? Just as I don't know "the amount of money or time" that you've committed to charities, you don't have a clue as to what Mr. Gates' motives are, and the smarmy, self-important intimation that you do is part of what angers me. And "guilt-tripping"? Is that a joke? Bill Gates can either be an emotionless corporate hard-heart, hell-bent on world domination, or he can be swayed by the "guilt" laid on him by people. He can't be both. Pick one.

      And does he "go around to countries asking them" for contracts? I'd like to see any evidence of that beyond anecdotal /. rants. Even if that has some basis in fact (which it could), it doesn't change the fact that countless people have benefitted with their lives from the grants. And it doesn't stand to reason that Gates would say "Hey, here's $200 million. But first, sign this $4 million contract." I'm no math major, but that doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

      Speaking of not making sense, let's examine part of what you're saying:

      "He doesn't run the Foundation."
      "He does run the Foundation and uses it to get Microsoft contracts."

      Huh?

      "You don't know me... blah blah blah."

      You're right. And you don't know Bill Gates. Maybe you should take some of your own advice, and not speculate as to the intentions of another person.

      But, given the size of the entire endowment, I think it's safe to guess you (just like I and most of the rest of the population of the world) haven't given 56% of their net worth to charity. That, unlike your assumptions, has at least some statistical validity to it (somewhere... I'm not about to look up average charitable donations by household as a percentage of income, but I'll betcha 50 bucks it's a whole shitload less than 56%. Feel free to look it up, though, if you think that statistical assumption is wrong).

      Either way, I suppose I don't really care what you donate. I think it's absurd for you dismiss the significance of the donations as being executed for personal reasons of ego, while ignoring the benefits they've caused -- regardless of their source. I don't think it's any better of you to criticize Mr. Gates like you do than it would be for you to say to me "Bah, whatever chartitable donations you've made have only been to make yourself feel good and only for your benefit" or something to that effect. And that'd get me wicked-pissed off.

  29. There's some padding... by zipwow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm reminded of KC Royals owner Ewing Kauffman in the early 70's.

    I should point out at this point that the Royals were very competitive, mostly due to the money that Kauffman was putting into the club.

    Anyway, the story goes that one reporter asked him if he was worried about the amount of money he was losing by owning the Royals. His reply?

    "Yeah, I can probably only afford to do this another fifteen or twenty years."

    If Paul Allen wants it to work, it works. That's what being in the "top 5 richest..." list is about.

    -Zipwow

    --
    I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
  30. if (SpaceShipOne) by sahen · · Score: 5, Funny

    that might explain why they used Visual Basic naming conventions.

  31. SpaceShipOne vs malaria, AIDS, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Was the post meant to be ironic? As a space nerd, I'm happy that Paul Allen is funding the development of a spacecraft, but all in all, I don't think a suborbital spacecraft is more important than trying to eradicate AIDS, malaria, and hunger. Check the Gates Foundation web site.

    And no, I'm not saying we have to choose between earthly needs and exploration.

  32. Gates Foundation grants.... $6,200,000,000 by The+Anointed · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's "Billions", folks.

    http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Grants/

    --
    "Everyone knows Lenin had to setup a police state," Chomsky
  33. MS Orbital Vehicle Assistant by Odonian · · Score: 5, Funny

    __
    / \
    |O O|
    |\_/| "Looks like you are trying to Break
    | | The sound barrier!"
    | | |
    | | |
    | \_/

  34. Re:What has Linus done for us lately? by dotwaffle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linus bought a Z3, yeah big deal. He has like $3 or 4 million if memory serves me right, and he spends wisely, like on his house. Bill Gates has $50 odd BILLION and gives 0.01 % to charity. Big deal. Linus Torvalds doesn't get money as people pay for linux, he gets it as a thank you from companies granting him stock interests. He isn't even the head developer (Andrew Morton is now...) so basically, he's just the face. Bill Gates OWNS Microsoft. Linux doesn't own Linux. He owns the copyright, but not the source. It's free for all, and every Linux developer (even user?) owns a share. Correct me if I'm wrong, IANAL.

  35. and in related news... by bikerguy99 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... Bill Gates of Microsoft has admitted to be a secret and a major is a sponsor of Clonaid (http://www.clonaid.com/news.php).