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.
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 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.
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...
"The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human race to keep all its eggs in."
--Robert A. Heinlein.
I understand what you are saying, but I just don't agree. Despite what Hollywood tells you, when that asteroid is on its way Bruce Willis will not be able to save you. We need options, and the sooner the better. "A footnote of history" will be a meaningless phrase (though apropos) if there is nobody to write or read it.
Although somehow it would be fitting if the only thing to survive were the space robots...
I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
You can do that far more cheaply and effectively with pamphlets than with floating wifi hotspots that still require computers on the ground. The general point that knowledge is power is a good one, and the calculation I'd like to see is how many people are not dying of malaria thanks to the Gates foundation's contributions, vs. how many people are getting access to the internet thanks to Google's baloons. If the ratio is 1:1 or even 1:2, I think Gates has a point. But if, say, 20 students are able to take online courses and educate themselves for every person who is cured of malaria, then Google's initiative has merit. I just have no idea what the death rates due to malaria are right now, nor how many people in these regions have access to wifi-capable computers.
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.
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.
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.
Computers are down to $25, according to 3 of the 4 charts on this page that represents less than 1 months average income in every country in the world. The current barrier to information is the cost of access and the availability of electricity, not the capital cost of a computer.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
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.
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.
You opinion is absolutely not based in reality, and there have been many discredited charlatans before you saying the same things, and always being proven dead-wrong:
http://overpopulationisamyth.com/overpopulation-the-making-of-a-myth
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant