Paul Allen Confirmed as SpaceShipOne's Sponsor
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."
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
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
I guess he plans to blast the Trailblazers into space so they won't cause him anymore problems.
I hadn't before heard of this Microsoft of which you speak.
id software to write games that run on non-MS platforms!
I kid.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
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.
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.
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.
This spaceship has encountered an error and will self-destruct now. Microsoft apologizes for the inconvenience...
how long until
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.
I thought that it said Alien confirmed as sponsor. And that would have been good news.
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.
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
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.
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.
"CTRL ALT DELETE! CTRL ALT DELETE!"
IAALS.
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
that might explain why they used Visual Basic naming conventions.
"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*
__
/ \
|O O|
|\_/| "Looks like you are trying to Break
| | The sound barrier!"
| | |
| | |
| \_/
"Bill Gates does not run... blah blah blah"
/. 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.
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
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.