Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates Promotes Vaccine Projects, Swipes At Google
Nerval's Lobster writes "In a new interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, Bill Gates discussed his Foundation's work to eradicate polio and malaria, while suggesting that vaccine programs and similar initiatives to fight disease and poverty will ultimately do much more for the world than technology projects devoted to connecting everybody to the Internet. While Gates professes his belief in the so-called digital revolution, he doesn't think projects such as Google's Internet blimps (designed to transmit WiFi signals over hundreds of miles, bringing Internet to underserved areas in the process) will do the third world nearly as much as good as basic healthcare. "When you're dying of malaria, I suppose you'll look up and see that [Internet] balloon, and I'm not sure how it'll help you," he said. "When a kid gets diarrhea, no, there's no website that relieves that." Gates then sharpened his attack on the search-engine giant: "Google started out saying they were going to do a broad set of things. They hired Larry Brilliant, and they got fantastic publicity. And then they shut it all down." Google focusing on its core mission is fine, he added, "but the actors who just do their core thing are not going to uplift the poor." The Microsoft co-founder also has no intention of following Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and other tech entrepreneurs into the realm of space exploration. "I guess it's fun, because you shoot rockets up in the air," he said. "But it's not an area that I'll be putting money into.""
I've got an idea. How about we cure malaria AND give everyone free internet. I never thought Bill Gates was a jealous hater. He's beginning to see Microsoft as the failure it really is.
But it's not an area that I'll be putting money into.
Got burned by Teledesic he did.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Successful man, bright man, ruthless man, and entirely correct.
Bill Gates grew up. Page and Brin may still have some growing up to do, but Bezos has no excuse. And Musk's work has always been overrated, though it's almost geek suicide to suggest so.
"I guess it's fun, because you shoot rockets up in the air," he said. "But it's not an area that I'll be putting money into."
Sounds like he has no more vision now than he did when he was running Microsoft. I am totally in favour of his philanthropic work, and I agree with him that we should solve the difficult people problems first, but dismissing space exploration or the benefits of connectivity for the purposes of educating the third world out of poverty is short sighted.
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
Microsoft isn't out saving the poor from malaria, Bill Gates is. Why should Bill Gates expect Google as a corporation to be doing what he's doing as an individual philanthropist, rather than floating internet balloons which holds long-term potential for shareholders?
I personally have a hard time keeping track of all of the humanitarian efforts Microsoft engaged in while they abused their monopoly position to crush competitors without even the slightest regard for morality and decency. You know, because there were so many. I very much admire Mr. Gates and the work of his foundation - there is no question they have done and are doing wonderful things. But quite a lot of revisionism going on in his head, it seems. I wonder where he thinks his wealth came from?
I think he's wrong about the importance of space exploration. He's trapped on this sphere just like the rest of us and one stray gamma ray burst could end us all with zero warning. Figuring out how to spread out is a worthy human endeavor.
But I submit that seeing to it that children, especially girls, receive a proper (i.e. secular) education would go even further.
I did not read TFA, but in the summary it seems like Gates is complaining that Google is not doing humanitarian work like he does through the Gates foundation. What sense does this make? How much money does Microsoft Corporation give to comfort kids with malaria or diarrhea?
Using absurd amounts of resources and energy, to go to a place which is environmentally unfriendly, much like going to the bottom of the ocean, something that is best performed cheaply with robots. Beyond having those robots to help us learn things better, the whole idea of "manifest destiny" is utterly absurd at this point in time, we have completely more realistic priorities. We dont need an aerospace (and defense) "bubble" of fake capital, we dont need to be wasting precious minds on this nonsense, and the last people we should be serving is the super rich.
Spreading knowledge of how malaria spreads and how to stop it will stop FAR more cases than a proprietary malaria treatment.
boil water. and explain why, and how (to short a time is almost as bad as not doing it at all). Drain swamps, kill the mosquito.
Knowledge is power...
Education does more to liberate women than medical service. Education is available over the internet. Acculturation too. This includes education about culture and medicine - health. Why give a person a fish (or a vaccine) when you can teach them how to fish (or make their own vaccines) more efficiently through online educational programs. EdX - valuable stuff there.
Bill Gates does not waste his time "attacking" Google - he just answers questions.
-question: "One of Google’s (GOOG) convictions is that bringing Internet connectivity to less-developed countries can lead to all sorts of secondary benefits. It has a project to float broadband transmitters on balloons. Can bringing Internet access to parts of the world that don’t have it help solve problems?"
-answer: "When you’re dying of malaria, I suppose you’ll look up and see that balloon, and I’m not sure how it’ll help you. When a kid gets diarrhea, no, there’s no website that relieves that. Certainly I’m a huge believer in the digital revolution. And connecting up primary-health-care centers, connecting up schools, those are good things. But no, those are not, for the really low-income countries, unless you directly say we’re going to do something about malaria.
Google started out saying they were going to do a broad set of things. They hired Larry Brilliant, and they got fantastic publicity. And then they shut it all down. Now they’re just doing their core thing. Fine. But the actors who just do their core thing are not going to uplift the poor."
The same about the "shooting rockets" thing!
-question: "There are other successful businessmen who are orienting their extracurricular interests around space exploration. Is that interesting to you? Is that worthwhile for humanity?"
-answer: "Everybody’s got their own priorities. In terms of improving the state of humanity, I don’t see the direct connection. I guess it’s fun, because you shoot rockets up in the air. But it’s not an area that I’ll be putting money into."
Keep saving the world Bill - God bless you!
"Ok, FINE! Surface can't compete with Android tablets. But my goodness is better than your goodness!"
Childish?
We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
Bill Gates made his money from screwing people over and devastating an industry. This saw his personal wealth become huge.
Now, he puts bits of the personal wealth into altruistic things. That's how it used to work (where the industry barons used to sponsor altruistic actions, before the State really got into it).
What he's doing is calling Google as a company out on not doing something that Microsoft is also not doing. If the Google founders end up with the personal wealth he's accumulated, then sure, call them out individually for not doing their bit. If they don't make the billions Gates has done, then perhaps their contributions will also be lesser.
Compare like for like; it's great to do altruistic deeds.. But don't use those as a bludgeoning stick to boost your own ego and agendas...
Fitzgerald: The rich are different than you and me.
Hemingway: Yes, they have more money.
.
Gates needs to look past his self-important blinders.
Different strokes for different folks. You would think he would know that.
And you would think he would be secure enough in what he's done that he doesn't have to tear down others.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
While Bill Gates isn't necessarily wrong, this is kind of awkward to see. I'm glad that Bill Gates cares enough to help countries in need of healthcare reform, however i would imagine those same countries would be glad for technologies that would enable them to figure out things like that for themselves. They are both covering relatively immediate needs.
So, I wonder if Bill Gates has considered asking Google's humanitarian projects if they might like to dedicate some resources to helping improving (and reducing cost of) the tech side of healthcare, which would be of the best ways to use a resource like Google, aside from throwing money at the problem.
Regardless, story feels incomplete or Bill needs to communicate.
that one of the best things to stop the spread of these diseases, is education. Vaccines won't remove poverty and promote more infrastructure to 3rd world countries.
If you are to get 50 billion dollars, how would you proceed to avoid pay taxes, and to keep your money for yourself?
I've grown more and more fed up of this kind of posturing from people like Gates.
While its nice that he is working on vaccines and is on a crusade for healthcare, the world has far deeper problems. We have entire failed states where stupid people have children that they simply cannot look after. They cannot feed them. They cannot educate them. This behaviour has become one where its rewarded and not penalised. This isn;t viable. It cannot work. Its_not going_to_work - They cannot economise the places where they live - and yet birth rates and economic collapse is only underwritten and fueled by people like Gates. Entire cities are now based around being refugees, and living off food aid and have no sustainable living capability at all - and are only maintained by wholly bankrupt operandai.
The human population on this planet is exploding. There are 7 billion, 103 Million, 448,849 people and its sky rocketting upwards. The numbers of people and growth are going to dwarf Gates vaccine programs, and food aid, and the numbers of people dying will upward curve, and I don't wish harm directly on anyone - but the fucking source of problems has to be faced.
For every child Gates saves, his program better be ten fold bigger to treat the children that will come from it. Same for food aid.
The programs that people like Gates are running paint a picture of fighting poverty. That is true. They fight short term poverty. They *do not* fight long term poverty, deprivation, or lack of healthcare. They create the fuel on which the next wave will burn.
At some point, the inhuman reality will have to be faced. Unsustainable human growth and failed states, on land that cannot sustain the populations, will run out of even generous people's large donations. Even if the most humanitarian people keep swinging, at some point round 12 billion, and even with advances in food, the reality is huge death tolls.
This can only be stopped now, and it can only be stopped now by harsher policies that at least focus people to behave and change their ways. Humans have for millenia realised that population control can become a scenario that cannot be avoided, except in our own population. Somehow this has become skewed to the degree that we refuse to believe it, and will avoid it no matter what the cost or logic.
We`re all equal
Why is Bill Gates comparing himself to a corporation like Google? Of course a retired billionaire can be 100% charitable and provide free physical goods and services to poor countries. What the hell has Microsoft done for the poor?
Got them into the H1-B program?
Oooo... Look at me! I'm a multi-billionaire dilettante! I made all my money screwing over the little guy, engaging in unethical business practices, but now I'm the best person in the world because I gave some money to malaria. That's right, I screwed y'all out of so much money, that after buying my mansions and getting bored being a super-rich asshole, I still had plenty to spend on African diseases!
Oh, some other rich guys also donate to charitable causes? Well, are those charitable causes MUTHERFUKIN MALARIA?! No? Well then I shit on all of their efforts. In fact, the world just grind to a halt right now, and everyone should focus on 2 things:
1) Wiping out malaria, because that's the only problem that matters.
2) Talking about how awesome I am, because I'm donating some of my money to wiping out malaria.
We only went to slashdot and reddit etc AFTER we found wikipedia. Lets not forget that KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. What good is it to save millions of starving people only to leave them in squalor forever? Education and information is just as important in the long term.
Good-bye
The way everything Gates says is a dismissal of the activities of other wealthy institutions, I'm forced to conclude that what Gates is spending his money on is in fact a license to feel self-righteous.
Right now, he is picking projects that make him look good. However, like his OS, it will come with major hits.
At this time, all of the locations that have malaria issues, have a very high death rate and local resources are strained badly. So, what happens if this is cured? It will put far more pressure on the local resources.
Instead, if gates REALLY wanted to help, he would cut way back on Malaria R&D and instead push for new businesses that do 2-way trade with all of these locations. In addition, put in schools and push education. Finally, make certain that it is the SMALL guy that gets the new businesses and not war-lords. By doing this and helping these locations to build up their economy, they will over time, clean up the environment and solve these issues. BUT, to be able to do this, you must have a decent economy.
Google is the ones that have it right. They are working on developing new ideas and new businesses. Not just in the west, but all over. They tried it in China and found that it was disaster (not surprising). However, if Google pushes for 2-way trade with Africa, middle east, and Latin America, they will improve many many lives and help re-start the global economy.
internet connectivity and laptops are a First World solution to a non-existant problem - I haven't been convinced that the lack of internet connections is truly a problem in the Third World.
The lack of internet is not a problem. However lack of opportunity for education is. Providing Internet access is the 21st century version of building a library.
It's not as high up on the priority list of people who are starving or dyeing from disease, but there are issues with simply handing out food and cures. As the saying goes "give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime".
Providing the means for people to educate themselves and solve their own problems is a better long term solution, and there's no reason to not pursue it in parallel to the more imminent handouts.
... teaching people to keep their dicks to themselves and stop multiplying?
Because if we don't stop ourselves, Mother Nature will do the stopping for us -- and it won't be pretty.
And what, exactly, is Microsoft doing to uplift the poor and how are they different? Anything? What were you doing to get Microsoft to help uplift the poor when you were the CEO besides trying to get vendor lock-in in schools and charities?
Arguably, Google is doing nothing different than every other corporation -- and singling out what they are doing with technology initiatives has nothing whatsoever to do with what he chooses to do with his charities.
Google as a corporation is pursuing technology stuff. So is Microsoft.
The whole article is a red herring and just a sensational headline. It boils down to "rich asshole berates a company for doing the exact same things as the company he founded still does today".
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Money spent to combat malaria must be worlds better for improving the human condition than money spent to support Senator Inhofe.
If folks want evidence in support of this claim, refer to this
http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-giving-ethics/
I can't find it now, but there was another article about how Gates' agenda of pushing private health care is undermining public health care systems in Africa.
Nothing interesting to say...MUST...NOT...REPLY...ohtheheckwithit.
I think it is good to kind of name and shame Google for this type of behavior. I know some people who were involved with their supposedly revolutionary endangered language preservation project:
http://www.endangeredlanguages.com/
According to some insiders, Google came in with big promises of building a platform and providing funding. In the end it was like a child with last year's toys. They basically dropped the project, which it turns out wasn't about new research or new aid to educational projects but simply a site where researchers were expected to dump their data and put it under Google's brand. Researchers were, of course, puzzled as to why they should do this. Now the languishing project is supported by their much less wealthy partners, more of a burden on their resources than anything else.
If you look at the site above, you'll see how little the fanfare amounted to. A juggernaut like Google might have actually made a difference in an area where resources are scarce.
Why is it ./ windows fans are always cowards here... Oh, wait...
"When a kid gets diarrhea, no, there's no website that relieves that."
Not directly, but a website can give you information on what to do in the case of getting diarrhea and how to avoid it in the future.
Teach a man to fish, Gates. Teach a man to fish.
You are taking your First World education and wealth, for that matter, for granted.
How does someone with no education to start with utilize the internet or WikiPedia or any other education website?
They can't read or write. They do not have any basic skills, and yet, they are supposed to go to the internet and get 'educated'.
See what I'm getting at?
The ability of the internet to educate is only available to those that have already received a basic education.
That seems to be lost on everyone here.
.
2) Gates is an individual, google is a corporation. Apples and oranges to compare the two.
Gates needs to look past his self-important blinders and see the whole picture.
"What is this? A center for ants? How can we be expected to teach children to learn how to read... if they can't even fit inside the building?"
You can be educated up the ass but if you are restricted from trade you are always going to be poor.
People keep trotting out this "Education" mantra as if it solves everything. An educated person on a deserted island is still going to shit in a hole in the ground.
I think Gates efforts at vaccination is great. However it would be even greater if those countries affected move forward on respecting private property and allowing for economic freedom and let their people get richer, because then they themselves could pay for vaccination efforts without needing Gates' billions, and without crushing poverty the efforts would be more effective with less graft & corruption.
So you think that Bill Gates should hire a private army, over throw the cleptocrates, and employ a non corruptible bureaucracy, to allow the citizens of third world nations to bring themselves out of poverty?
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_leverage.html
The 2010 Gates Foundation announcement of $1.5 billion for maternal health in developing countries over five years was welcomed, but it came heavily leveraged. Gates launched the Health in Africa Fund, through the International Finance Corporation (IFC), to establish new mechanisms to invest world health funding and national health budgets in private-sector healthcare facilities in Africa. The Gates Foundation's funding category for Global Maternal Health includes research and development in the US of technology and treatments, and also advocacy in vulnerable African nations for government policies. Since Gates believes sustainable health systems must be privately profitable, he leverages his "maternal health" funding to effectively divert investment of available in-country funds, as well as NGO funding, into private ventures that he favors, instead of into national health plans.
Nothing interesting to say...MUST...NOT...REPLY...ohtheheckwithit.
The problem with focusing all your aid to decrease mortality rates is that you end up with explosive population growth that makes it that much harder to lift these people out of poverty.
"Growth is expected to be particularly dramatic in the least developed countries of the world, which are projected to double in size from 898 million inhabitants in 2013 to 1.8 billion in 2050 and to 2.9 billion in 2100. High population growth rates prevail in many developing countries, most of which are on the UN’s list of 49 least developed countries. Between 2013 and 2100, the populations of 35 countries could triple or more. Among them, the populations of Burundi, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania and Zambia are projected to increase at least five-fold by 2100." http://www.unfpa.org/pds/trends.htm
Founded in 1975, so they're 38 years old. Google was founded in 1998, 15 years old, same age as PayPal (where Elon Musk got started).
So what was Bill Gates doing when Microsoft was 15 years old (1990)? His foundation wasn't even founded until four years later (1994).
Put a sock in it, Billy.
You know that they have schools in Africa, right? Not all Africans live in the same conditions. Many could benefit from both malaria cures and Internet.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
So you think that Bill Gates should hire a private army, over throw the cleptocrates, and employ a non corruptible bureaucracy, to allow the citizens of third world nations to bring themselves out of poverty?
My personal belief is that violence is rarely useful in accomplishing the cultural change required to have a sustained political change to enhance economic freedom.
I have to admit that I don't think anyone fully understands why there have been bubbles of economic freedom showing up in parts of the world, but I suspect greater levels of communication (including recently the Internet) can help people to understand the great value of economic freedom.
The good news is that all-continent African economic growth is expected to be 5% this year.
Too many people out there seem to want to believe that they can do more for the world by doing nothing than Bill Gates can do with all his billions. Maybe they'll even go out and by Google Glass and get a warm feeling that they're helping to fix the world by giving Google money which helps give poor illiterate people the internet which helps them fix their own problems. Plus an extra warm fuzzy feel good tingle knowing that Bill Gates, the Antichrist, is crying.
"'When you're dying of malaria, I suppose you'll look up and see that [Internet] balloon, and I'm not sure how it'll help you," he said. "When a kid gets diarrhea, no, there's no website that relieves that.'"
Abosutely, Bill. Can I call you Bill?
Look, I think Bill has hit the nail on the head with this right here. I mean, let us really sit down and think this through: How in the hell is this so-called "internet balloon" suppose to help anyone? It's not as though someone suffering from diarrhea could use internet access to gain knowledge about the causes and treatments for diarrhea. It's not like they could even use the internet to locate a hospital or aid station that could help them in anyway. And they certainly couldn't use the internet to communicate with doctors or medical staff of any kind. Such an idea would be quite absurd don't you think, Bill? What's that, Bill? Oh, right, malaria. Yeah, based on all those previous examples, it also logically follows that people couldn't use the internet to find hospitals or aid stations that are administering malaria vaccinations and people certainly couldn't use the internet to learn exactly how dangerous malaria is or how imperative it is to get a vaccination for it if available.
And that's only thinking about the affected poor people and all the things that they can't do with this internet connection because it is so useless and not at all helpful. Bill, what about the aid workers or volunteers in these countries? Don't you think they would find these fanciful "internet balloons" quite useless as well? I mean, it's not like they could use them to link up and communicate with others where they couldn't before. It's not like they could use that coordination to better apply their efforts or anything right, Bill?
I mean, who does Google think is going to find use for these "internet balloons"? The lions of the serenghetti? That's just perposterous, Google!
Had Gates really wanted to help the first, second and third worlds, he would have dedicated his fortune to developing and improving useful, more human-like, artificial intelligence - something he's in a unique position to do.
We'd get scalable forms of artificial intelligence and the solutions to problems like Malaria as minor side effects. We'd get fusion power and space travel too, most likely.
Instead, Gates is indulging his ego in piecemeal, half-assed solutions to humanity's problems. Solutions that give him great publicity, but leave more major issues, like resource depletion, which in the long run will kill many more of us than malaria, untouched.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
With crappy Windows software, you might as well leave your machine off. Windows is digital colonialism, after all. However, use the BSD's/GNU/Linux and the like and you allow people to develop their own commerce. You know that old cliche, give people food you make them beggers, teach them to fish and they get their dignity.
"SO we bide our time, waiting for a purer kick to bloom and the future is still bleak, uncertain and beautiful" -GSYBE
Malaria or not, there is no shortage of people on Earth. There is shortage of space exploration. Curing diseases is commendable, but unless Bill develops a vaccine from civilization-wiping meteorite strikes, he is focusing his formidable resources too narrowly.
To make a real dent in the death and suffering, all we need to do is become civilised. We live in a world controlled by violent states that are responsible for more death and destruction than anything else on this planet. About 240 million people have died between 1 Jan 1900 and 31 Dec 2000 in wars and that doesn't count the indirect deaths from the pollution that they produced. Wars use radioactive weapons, a massive amount of fossil fuel, not only to power vehicles and generate electricity but also to build weapons, feed soldier etc. This unnecessary pollution will kill people, animals and plants for generations. Wars are mass murders sanctioned by the state. Once we add in the non-war murders, which are mostly caused by the state in my opinion, the number are staggering. In 2012, there was an estimated 466,078 murders world wide. We don't need billions of dollars to solve this problem.
ayottesoftware.com
Vaccines don't really help the root problems of the world's poor. So more children survive a while longer to die of something else, or simply exist and need feeding. Google is doing two HUGE long term things for the world's poor: 1) the Renewables Cheaper Than Coal project. Addressing global warming head-on, and working for affordable energy for all, to give poor societies the juice to join the 21st century 2) Internet for the poorest regions, the blimps that Gates hates, means enlightenment for all, and promotes education for girls -- the latter being the single most effective way to lift people out of poverty. Gates just doesn't get it. Nor do I think he ever will.
Isn't Gates' belittling if Google's balloon plans the best compliment possible. Based on his previous prediction record they will be huge succes.
You just made the point I think was in my head all along, but I wasn't sure how to express it.
I have no problem with the Gates Foundation wanting to do the charity work they're doing, and making a decision that it's going to be about such things as curing malaria in Africa, vs. helping countries get a better internet experience. But I *do* have a problem with Bill or anyone else implying that others with money to spend on projects are somehow "lesser" or in the wrong because they don't follow his chosen path.
I'm a big believer in the idea that individuals should pursue things that personally interest them. If Google's expertise is with the Internet and application development, then it stands to reason it can be most efficient working on projects in that vein! How many folks at Google are experts in water purification, or in treating diseases? How many would even find that type of work enjoyable?
Gates is in a different situation than the folks running Google. He already LEFT his tech. company by choice, after it made massive amounts of money for him. That tells me that basically, he grew tired of running Microsoft each day and wanted out. So when you see him pursuing other things, it stands to reason he would.
Problem solved!
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Oh, please.... You have every right to decide Ayn Rand's philosophies aren't ones you side with. But she was *clearly* anything but a moron, and I'd argue not a hypocrite either (at least based on your claims).
If one is forced to contribute a portion of his/her income to the government by way of taxation, why wouldn't he/she at least take advantage of an opportunity to reclaim some of that money if the opportunity arose to do so legally? It's not like she spent her whole life on the government dole while she wrote her books.
It's possible to participate in a system while still disliking and protesting it, and advising people it needs to be eliminated or changed.
Not at all. Is that better than stamping out a deadly disease? Not necessarily, but if the access to information lets those affected manage their own care better (or not get sick to begin with) then it gets very hard to judge.
The American South was once haunted by parasites and tropical diseases.
In 1910, an estimated 40% of the population of the southern United States was infected with hookworm.
In 1910 the RSC began campaigns to eradicate hookworm in nine states, including Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana. The RSC used a three-pronged approach that included:
1.Conducting a survey to map out the prevalence of the disease in a particular area
2.Curing patients at mobile dispensaries
3.Providing education through illustrated lectures and demonstrations that urged prevention through improved sanitary measures, including the construction of privies.
Southerners initially distrusted RSC efforts. Many were offended by accusations of infection and refused to accept testing and the treatment of Epsom salts and thymol. Others believed that the disease simply did not exist. Regional newspaper editorials also strongly criticized RSC employees and viewed them as a Northern imposition.
Eradicating Hookworm
The geek thinks that putting up a web page = meaningful access to information = the solution to someone else's problems.
The Rockefeller Foundation page has some telling exhibits to the contrary. The doctors are on horseback. Their patients desperately sick and debilitated. Educational materials --- films, posters and the like --- could only reach out to those who were well enough to act ---
and literate in all media.
People like Gates talk like ensuring that more humans live longer is somehow self-evidently a good thing in its own right, That isn't at all self-evident to me.
I'm all for trying to stop suffering, but we all have to die sometime. Its not like the human species is at risk, or that humans are even difficult to make. In fact many countries already have the opposite problem.
Stuff like putting people on Mars and bringing internet to everywhere not only enriches everyones daily lives (for example NASA's Apollo project spurred off all sorts of new technologies), those things are achieving something no-one has done before, so when met they advance the whole of human civilisation. That seems to be a far more significant goal and achievement to me.
Why the hell do you need trade if you can build your own internal economy?
Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
Why Malaria? Because no one was doing it yet. Bragging rights.
Really? I'm sure these people will be very surprised to hear that.
I can think of a dozen better ways to spend that money...
I call bullshit on your claim that you can think of "a dozen better ways to spend that money" than on a cure for malaria. If you genuinely believe that then you have NO idea how big a problem malaria actually is. Malaria devastates entire economies and kills millions of people. In some places it is responsible for close to half of all hospital admissions. It is estimated to cost Africa around $12 billion each year, infects over 200 million people and kills over 600,000 each year. That is as worthy a cause as you will find anywhere in the world.
You can do something though! Do you refuse to do anything to help even one person with disease because it won't fix the entire problem?
I do when I know nothing of what I contribute will go to help the one person with disease (or other problems).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Keep in mind that "private" != "for profit". Government health programs in most of the Third World are not what the Foundation considers to be 'sustainable' since a change of government, currency speculation, or an IMF assault on the economy can destroy them overnight. Private ventures, whether for-profit or non-profit, have a much better chance of surviving to provide long-term benefits to residents. It's not designed to maximize profit, it's designed to maximize results. The real world is messy that way.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
You make good points, cusco. I'm not in a position to state anything authoritatively on the topic. I'm merely passing on what I had read. The article which I couldn't find had quotes, however, from medical professionals on the ground in Africa expressing their dismay with the effects of Gates' philanthropy in their own countries. I'm willing to beleive that Gates genuinely wants to help and truly believes that private systems work better than public ones, but I wouldn't doubt that he'd take the opportunity to profit as well.
Given my recent experiences with the U.S. private health care system, though, I wouldn't wish it upon anybody else.
Nothing interesting to say...MUST...NOT...REPLY...ohtheheckwithit.
... inject humans in poverty third world areas with a vaccine to sterile them, preventing them from reproducing.
And that is the honesty of the matter. Bill Gates knows this and its is the plan.
Actually, he's wrong, not that he ever did understand the Internet. Knowledge does save lives. Access to education does help people get out of poverty. And there is a website -- in fact, more than one -- where you can find out a simple way to help your child who has diarrhea. Here's one. And another. And it's not a binary thing. Gates can work to get rid of malaria while Google simultaneously tries to bring internet connectivity to the same people. Why is that a competition requiring a negative remark? Everyone can do what they are good at.] -
AccountKiller
LETS stop rubbishing Bill Gates. I know personally, he has been involved many projects, spending nights on very backwards places and taking pains for those people who doesn't have any access to minimum facilities. Those who throwing guns at him, shouldn't do this as they are miles away from fatcts.. Just don't criticise someone to prove yourself worthy to others.
If everyone on the other hand tried to sell the stock, the value would crash and the company would go under because everyone was trying to jump ship and sell to squeeze the last bit of profit out of it.
Whoa, why would a company go under if stock value is zero? Their stock value is their perceived value, not their income and expense balances. Suppose that everyone in the world decided to dump Apple stock tomorrow. The stock value implodes in the sell off, and a few slow moving investors get shafted.They still have 80 billion in the bank, and they still are making ipads like crazy, so why would this drive them out of business? The few people who were buying during the sell off craze now own the company, and probably for very little. They can now do anything they want with the company, being investors with majority control.
So, selling your shares in immoral companies that are profitable doesn't do much of anything. Either you should buy shares in said companies, so you can vote out the jerks who are running the company at the next shareholder meeting, or you buy the stock to acquire more personal fiscal power so you can see that moral things are done with it. Just ignoring a river because you don't like water won't make it go away.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Bringing health care to poor people involves many, many services and service people for health support. The support people need internet access to learn and to communicate with each other. Also, it is difficult to get educated people to work on health care if there is no internet access. The internet provides relaxing experiences after work.
Does Bill Gates really think that it is he alone who is providing fundamental health care? Does he really not understand that an entire people and an entire culture must be educated?
Here is a question: Do you have evidence that Bill Gates knows much about technology? I'm serious. Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold wrote a really, really poor book together, The Road Ahead.
Quote from that Wikipedia page:
That New York Times review suggests that Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold were deliberately engaged in fraud, and deliberately eliminated anything of value from the book before it was printed.
However, is it possible that Gates and Myhrvold just don't know much about technology? Certainly the quote from Bill Gates at the top of this comment suggests he is not a deep thinker.
It would be helpful if someone could supply quotes or stories or experiences that show Bill Gates is knowledgeable about technology.
The comment to which I'm replying indicates that Bill Gates is an adversary to the health of the planet. He does things to make himself richer that are bad for everyone else.
Gates is no better than a random Somali witch doctor/mullah who does the same to girls.
And people who engage in ridiculous reductionist arguments like this are no better than Nazis! Nazis, I say!
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Just another example that very intelligence, highly successful people are not always smart. Some readily preventible diseases need vaccines, others need knowledge, and some need both if humanity is to be rid of them. To quote Charles Dickens:
'They are Man's,' said the Spirit, looking down upon
them. 'And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers.
This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both,
and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy,
for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the
writing be erased. Deny it.' cried the Spirit, stretching out
its hand towards the city. 'Slander those who tell it ye.
Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse.
And abide the end.'
Nice of Bill to be taking care of the girl though, I guess.
Hey Bill, when a kid has diarrhea what's your polio vaccine going to do for him? And btw, there are websites that instruct people on how to treat diarrhea so that it won't kill them.
Every time I see Bill Gates blowing his horn about spending a minute fraction of his fortune on malaria I am reminded of the fact Microsoft regularly sues schools for improperly licensed copies of Windows and Office through the BSA. They gag order as many fo them as they can so the numbers we know are just a fraction of the actual number of schools they've sued.
Seriously Bill, thanks for your malaria work. Other than that fuck you.
Can the man really be that dense as to criticize Google with its plans for wifi blimps? What higher purpose is served when you lock code up so that when it's broken, it can't be fixed? How much time and money is spent on formatting documents to ask the government for money in the first place thanks to the random Times New Roman font changes that popup and weird indents that just take place on half the document?
I mean, I always felt like it was jealousy that motivated me to harbor these "make the world a better place" kind of criticisms of Microsoft and Bill Gates in particular. To see Gates make the same criticism of Google is very surreal for me.
I've got projects in the works that would combine space AND humanity welfare at the same time.
How about space-based farming where we have higher solar energy to collect using LED tech?
Would you put money to that? From where we farm in space, getting it to the intended destination would literally take an act of 'God' to stop.
A few spaceports here and there, and we could solve world hunger given the nearly-infinite (compared to earth) area we could farm in orbit.
Would that get you into space? I can give you all the stuf the other companies won't tel you, so we can discuss the merits and demerits of the idea.
You seem to be intelligent enough to understand what I'd say within a couple of minutes. What do you have to lose?
Let's take the internet losers, and show them how real world-changing technology is done.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
You said, "He is an intelligent guy, ..."
Is that true? Or, did he take advantage of a social weakness? Most people didn't know much about technology, so it was easy to take advantage. Microsoft made $40 billion selling DOS. I estimate that it took 10 man-years to write DOS. Or 20? For example, FreeDOS was written by volunteers.
See my comment above, Does Bill Gates know much about technology?
In developing and less developed countries around the world, basic health such as malaria and polio still become massive problems. Efforts cannot be made individually to tackle those issues. A collaboration work from every party such as government, NGO, community, medical practitioners is needed to tackle these problems. I really appreciate with what Bill Gate has already done. Meanwhile, I think Bill should not underrate Google's contribution because they also have given extraordinary contribution for the world. Moreover, I think internet and technology also can improve the health status in poor country. Often health problems are affected by lack of information and education. By bringing the internet and technology to poor and less developed countries, the people there have opportunity to get better and quicker information. It makes them to be more educated and well informed especially regarding to health problems so they know about prevention and treatment initiatives. Furthermore, researchers and medical practitioners can do better researches and invention because of that technology and internet. I think each small or big action will make a difference for the world. So why don't just make a good collaboration to make a better world :-)
In developing and less developed countries around the world, basic health such as malaria and polio still become massive problems. Efforts cannot be made individually to tackle those issues. A collaboration work from every party such as government, NGO, community, medical practitioners is needed to tackle these problems. I really appreciate with what Bill Gate has already done. Meanwhile, I think Bill should not underrate Google's contribution to the world because they also have given extraordinary contribution for the people around the world. Moreover, I think internet and technology also can improve the health status in poor country. Often health problems are affected by the lack of information and education. By bringing the internet and technology to poor and less developed countries, the people there have opportunity to get better and quicker information. It makes them to be more educated and well informed especially regarding to health problems so they know about prevention and treatment initiatives. Furthermore, the researcher and medical practitioners can do better research and invention because of that technology and internet. I think each small or big action will make a difference for the world. So why don't just make a good collaboration to make a better world :-)
By saving all these lives, there will be more people in areas that can already not support the number of people that live there. They will be even poorer than before, there will be more hunger and other contagious diseases will take over from malaria and polio to make these people ill and die. It's very noble for him to try and eradicate these awful diseases, but it won't solve the problems of the people in these poor areas.
Getting political stability happening and viable local economies running will do much more for these people in the future. Part of that is not dumping excess food from the rich countries there so that local farmers can't sell their crops any more. Part of that is paying a fair price for products and produce that are exported from those countries if they adhere to environmental and humanitarian production processes we demand from our local producers. By putting large import taxes on products created in countries where wages are low, all you do is create an incentive to lower costs and treat people and the environment badly as a result. By putting taxes on products created under unsafe, unfair and polluting circumstances, you can "force" these countries to actually fix themselves, instead of relying on philanthropists to provide polio vaccin or a flushable toilet.
Bill Gates owns a lot of shares in companies that actively "abuse" the people he's trying to help here. Why not put those shares to use and force these companies to do good? I'm sure his share in Monsanto might be convincing enough to stop them suing farmers that accidentally are growing round-up produce because they bought seeds at a local market that happened to have their genetically modified genes in them. 3rd world country seed markets are different than western markets. In practice, you have to use Monsanto's seeds in large areas because you can't really be sure your land will be free of their genes, even though the seeds and the round-up are way too expensive for most farmers. If you don't use it, you risk being taken to court and go bankrupt instantly. Monsanto is just an example, Bill Gates stock portfolio holds many more companies that profit from the inequality and he's making more money on this portfolio than he's giving back to the poor. That's his right to do so, but telling others they look bad and what he's doing himself is good, is rather hypocritical of him.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
It's possible to participate in a system while still disliking and protesting it, and advising people it needs to be eliminated or changed.
No, actually it is hypocritical. Ayn Rand was a hyper individualist and even with significantly more power and income than the average person she was unable to support herself in her retirement on that income. She spent her life claiming that not only was that easy, but it was a moral responsibility of every individual regardless of income and natural ability to do it for his or her own self. Her eventual enrolment in medicare and social security show that not only was she a hypocrit (because she was unable to do what she claimed was easy), but that she was also dead wrong in her libertarian beliefs.
If you take moron to mean "a foolish person" (one of the dictionary definitions) then she could also be fairly declared a moron by anyone who thinks her libertarianism was foolish. You don't need to agree with that view, though.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Casteism
First of all sorry about my english, I am from Spain. One of the richest men in the world has born and live's in Spain, his name is Amancio Ortega, and he owns Inditex Group. This year he just gave to charity around 20 million euros, it might be near 25 million dollars. On TV they were talking about his goodness, but in Spain you can't never trust some channels, the journalist writes something to not get in trouble, an easy writing to no to get into trouble. After the initial news, mostly in Facebook, you start to read about different opinions. "May be he was interest about cleaning his public image". In recent years Inditex some people talk about some big companies, like Inditex, and the employees conditions in the Third World. I don't know about Bill Gate's real intentions, may be we have to think in an overall to try to wonder about his real intentions. http://www.reducirgastos.com/
http://www.reducirgastos.com
You say that Apple has 80 billion in the bank and, in the case of Apple, is partially true (you don't think they really have 80 billion, instant liquidity, in the bank, do you?)
Actually, a year or two ago, they did have that much in liquid assets. There was even talk about a stock buy back. I would hope they have done something to capitalize on it since then, but its tricky to spend that much money in an intelligent fashion.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Bill Gates Foundation failed to acknowledge or resolve inhuman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issues
Casteism
I wanted to validate the claims that Gates is guilty. Gates related money is actually limiting the health of people in nations the West considers poor. If Bill Gates really wanted to save the lives of people in poverty he would agree that patents don't matter for medicine in many situations. It's a myth that progress in medicine depends on putting patents before people. We must allow generic and patent free drugs to reach more people, and it would not cut into the massive profits of the drug company stocks held by the Gates Foundation.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2003/06/mother-jones-daily-briefing-0?page=3
>> see the reporting by John Litchfield of the London Independent 2003
Litchfield quotes Doctors without borders and notes the lack of affordable generics
>> Read reporter Greg Palast
"let me let you in on a little secret about Bill and Melinda Gates so-called "Foundation." Gate's demi-trillionaire status is based on a nasty little monopoly-protecting trade treaty called "TRIPS" - the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights rules of the World Trade Organization. TRIPS gives Gates a hammerlock on computer operating systems worldwide, legally granting him a monopoly that the Robber Barons of yore could only dream of. But TRIPS, the rule which helps Gates rule, also bars African governments from buying AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis medicine at cheap market prices"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4103.htm
"The Bush Administration has also prevented a positive resolution to one crucial issue left unresolved at Doha. Currently, TRIPS allows countries to produce generic drugs through compulsory licensing, but requires that such drugs be used predominantly for the country's domestic market. That means that countries cannot export generic products thus produced - even to countries where there are no patents"
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/vi/node/285
As an English intellectual property and antitrust lawyer I read the piece by David Resnik and Kenneth De Ville (2002) with both interest and surprise. It is startling to suggest that a country with the democratic credentials of the United States should, as a matter of public policy and indeed on apparently "moral" grounds, prefer private monopoly rights to the lives and welfare of its citizens.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/ajb/summary/v002/2.3smith.html
By pouring most contributions into the fight against such high-profile killers as AIDS, Gates grantees have increased the demand for specially trained, higher-paid clinicians, diverting staff from basic care. The resulting staff shortages have abandoned many children of AIDS survivors to more common killers: birth sepsis, diarrhea and asphyxia.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gates16dec16,0,3743924.story
Thanks for posting the link to the LA times. Good data on the dirty secret of Gates and other "rich" folks trying to use money to solve poverty.
"Using the most recent data available, a Times tally showed that hundreds of Gates Foundation investments — totaling at least $8.7 billion, or 41% of its assets, not including U.S. and foreign government securities — have been in companies that countered the foundation's charitable goals or socially concerned philosophy.
This is "the dirty secret" of many large philanthropies, said Paul Hawken, an expert on socially beneficial investing who directs the Natural Capital Institute, an investment research group. "Foundations donate to groups trying to heal the future," Hawken said in an interview, "but with their investments, they steal from the future."