Slashdot Mirror
Rise of the Slacker Millionaires
There was an article titled THE NEW GILDED AGE: Rise of the Slacker Millionaires in yesterday's Washington Post that caught my eye. It's about Hal McCabe, a 28-year-old AOL employee who quit as soon as his stock options vested and made him a millionaire. He's retired now, but spending his take so fast that friends say he may need to un-retire in a few years. And in an unrelated story (submitted by dozens of readers over the weekend), we finally learn what Bill Gates plans to do with his money. Both stories make interesting reading. I wonder how many Slashdot readers share Hal and Bill's money "problem," and how they're handling it. Hmmm...
...read Atlas Shrugged
...the entire URL system was designed after the Unix file system - hence the forward slashes.
Buy a house, raise some kids, send them to college, retire, etc....you're looking conservatively at 2 million at least to cover lifetime middle-class expenses. I can't imagine retiring on 1 million dollars. Luckily I won't have to (snicker).
So, like, did he GO to a third world country and be shocked? The US has over 80 missions in 'third world' countries around the world - and has for years - and this is just now coming to Mr. Gates' attention? Didn't he dump a pile of money on the UN awhile ago? No political motive there.
Oooh, I feel all fuzzy inside now. Mr. Gates is really a swell guy. Nice "I'm really a teddy bear" picture. Contrasts nicely with the ones of him yelling and screaming.
I 'plan' to give away billions too. I'd especially like to give it to my own charity.
Sorry - but ANYTHING (especially heart-strings tugging stuff) related to M$ and Billy while the DOJ trial is underway is spin. Remember, the 'grass roots movement' didn't fly either.
Bah. Peddle it elsewhere.
// START RANT
What if Gates was to sink billions into finding a cure for AIDS? He could setup some company and then hire famous/intelligent researchers and let them search for a cure. Well this would be good, but if they were able to pull it off think about the money that could be made. But thats a heck of a gamble - but it anyone could pull it off they probably could.
// END RANT
Cold Boot Copyright (Fu0k the login)
(Techie of trade)
your're all gay
moloch@13thep.org
*mumble* yeah.. uhhmm.. guess you're right... *mumble* maybe i-button linuses?
Perhaps if Bill Gates were never born we'd all be using smoke signals eh? Don't think so. Computers weren't Bill Gates' idea. Heck, has he had an idea?
Only macintoshes? No. There were plenty of others that might have stood the test of time if good ole Bill Gates weren't involved. Don't forget where Bill Gates saw his first GUI!
So Bill Gates is not the second coming of anything. Then again, there was someone claiming to be the first coming...so now that someone else has done it, maybe he will give it a try.
Bill Christ, it does have a certain ring to it. Get ready for a world that crashes all the time.
What is your stand man? I think your babblin like a trout outta water? Your making as much sense as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. Whats the matter with you boy? Need some learnin I thinks :)
Of course it does! If you cured Cancer you would be an international hero. You could have raped a village of women and people would still praise you. You'd probably be elected a Saint! Many people did some pretty horrible things before they achieved greatness.
Man, I'd really love to be HIS kid. What a wanker. Your dad builds this huge fortune and empire and goes and gives it all away!? I'd be PISSED.
I took a 25K loan on my house and boughtYahoo stock.....
:)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA can you say YAHOOO!!!!!
If you're a slacker and "stumble" upon wealth like that fellow did, chances are you'll just piss it away. Like he's doing.
Whereas if you have a real work ethic and make your money by working hard you'll continue working even when you don't need to anymore.
In conclusion, wealth in and of itself won't make your life better. Although if you spend your life straining at the bit trying to get more wealth, you'll make other people's lives better. Sucker.
I really wonder how many people here would continue working if they had, say, Steve Case' net wealth. Not many, I bet. So many people here like to talk about how the rich are "exploiting" the poor masses, yet you have to think about just how much someone like Steve is "exploiting" and how much he's being "exploited".
Did you read that article? "He's such a nice person." "If one of his friends called him up and asked for $10,000 I bet he'd give it to him"
One thing I know for sure. He's going to be getting a lot of calls, letters, and emails from crackpots asking for money in the next few days.
1. One to three button Macintoshes beat the shit out of Windows on Intel/AMD/Cyrix ANY DAY! It's not their fault the average public are cheap, compromising and gullable fools... That they did BOTH the hardware AND software and still competed with Microsoft with only software and enormous profit margin (charging for bug-fixes) is absolutely amazing and I look forward to their come-back, regardless that Linux is my platform of choice. Wozniak did more for the computing industry than any other single entity... Bill Gates did more to destroy it than any other single entity! Why do you think we're still in the Dark Ages of computing and only now starting to experience innovation? (thanks to Linux) /. which is unique to UNIX and Linux - your damned right we're not going to glorify Bill Gates. You want a Microsoft crowd? Go to www.winfiles.com or some other sucky site.
2. Slashdot stands for
3. Slashdot didn't set out to become the giant it is today, and still doesn't act like it. You want corporate slop, go to one of your CNet sites. You want a nice mix of news, events and technology along with interaction without having to deal with the self-serving corporate crap - come to Slashdot. No one forces people to come to Slashdot - it's winning because it IS better than the other guys.
Wouldn't a slashdot reader be persecuted and
killed if he were found to have made money? I
thought the whole Open Source thing was all about money being a capitalist form of oppression, putting those with talent above those that simply want to steal the products of that talent for free.
Answer me one question: What have the masses
done for him?
And don't say they made him rich, because he did
that himself.
Actually, it may excuse past deeds. 'Excuse' is a nebulous term, but some people do believe in a thing called 'redemption'.
Its amazing that those that don't have it (money) don't want anyone else to have it.
The minute they get it, they seem to see things quite differently.
A liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet.
Who said money was what Bill Gates was all about? It's only usefull to him if it gets him what he wants - power and recognition. He got the power by developing a very stealthy monopoly and killing out the competition. Now he's going for the recognition. This is the same guy who couldn't take a pie in the face - a self involved egotistical wimp.
Are you still in High School? I haven't heard this kind of whining since I was about that age.
Any company that passes along almost 50% of its billing as wages is extremely generous. In my experience you're more likely to see something on the order of 15 to 20%. If your father is unable to manage money you're not doing anyone any favors by letting him waste everything you earn. Grow up - you're responsible (at least in part) for your own fate.
I've been seeing articles with Bill Gates promising to give his money to charity for 10 years now. So far, he just hasn't lived up to his promises. The guy's worth 100 billion. He gave maybe 5 billion so far. I believe at one point, in an interview, he had promised to give away 10 billion by something like 1996 or 1994 or thereabouts.
Bill is just so much richer than many other philintropes, and gives so much less (compare to Ted Turner, for instance), that its really sad he gets this much press over it.
If I retired at 29, I think I'd be bored to hell...I think I'd have to be like Woz, just keep coding/hacking
:)
Though the toys that I could buy...that would be nice
Even though I work and get paid accordingly, I dont get enough money. Our family is in debt
;(
and my father takes all of my money.
even that I've said dont take that money,
he does. he has to, and I understand him.
I like him, he's not bad, but he just has wasted too much money into nothing, and now the whole
family has problems.
I would like to find a better job, but I would have to move from here. No money to move
Last month the firm for whom I work billed $2,500 from a customer for whom I worked a month... and how much did I get paid? 1,200$.
.. and only $500 before that month. Reminds me of Scrooge, but hey it's the only employer I think in this area.. This month I'll get $1,500 though
for a programming job.
But where do that money go? Guess again, my father
takes and promises to pay me back in a while.
There's nothing I can do! I can't move since I dont have money.. I need at least $3000 to move.
I'm pennyless, and I want a better job, but noo.
Oh, but I'm just an admin, and a progammer. You dont have to listen to me. Just a typical working
day I guess.
So the saying "no money, no problems" is wrong.
I dont want to be a bum. I know I could get
a cool job, since I know my stuff...
What should I do? Suicide?
If the world didn't have any money it would be
easy, but damn no!!
> Hey, no AIDS WOULD be a nice thing . . .
:)
This settles it, BG is really the antichrist. When that happens we'll be able to have free premarital sex with no worries...
AC
Of course helping starving people who live without clean water and medication for common diseases is less beneficial than a good operating system.
Think of all the dumb suits who've wasted tons of money on Microsoft products. You'd never get them to spend that kind of money on charity.
If that's what he has been planning all along, then he's not just a genius, but a saint as well.
Ha! Self-help group. Yes, I guess we do. Don't worry about McCabe, it gets old after the first year. He will still have a chunk of stock in the company, so there is no fear of him spending it all--you don't exercise it all because of taxes. He will get married, settle down, have kids. Probably start a lifestyle company, and live happily ever after.
What you reading this need to do is, get up and go get some while the getting is good.
$6.5 billion so far....no so small.
Yeah, 10 billion to fight disease is great. But my question is, when is Bill gonna fork over a nice chunk of cash to Nasa. After all, NASA did just get an 11% funding cut.
And I may not like Gates, but I have a serious problem with people (as the article points out) suggesting that he's giving away the money at a strategic time. Who cares!?!?! The man's giving away 10 billion dollars. If someone's giving away that kind of money to charity, DON'T try to figure out his motives. Just deposit the check and say thank you, for christ sake!
How about asking Bill to get a /. account and get here once in a while? M$ might be evil but he is not that bad. Besides, it'd be a good chance to begin a talk between the two sides of the software world...
I read several years ago in an interview with Gates that he was going to give away 95% of his wealth. That would only leave his family with $5 Billion ;-)
its only .0001%
Bill usually doesnt talk about it, but he sits on the board of a genetics research company and donates heavily to DNA, genetics and cloning research.
The first famous clone will be BGIII.2 or JFKjr2
I'm sure he thinks his kids will grow up to be better and happier people if forced to make separate lives for themselves. I tend to agree.
Hopefully in three years, I can retire too...
if i was unbelievable rich, hahahaha... thanks, i needed that, it'd prolly be gone before the sun came up again :) -machupo
*insert pithy sig here*
Hey McCabe, if you're reading this, do it up ! Get something together and do yourself and folks like you a favor !
I'm not sure how much I agree. When you've got
that much money you've got to give it to *someone*
when you die. Either it's going to be to your heirs,
or it's going to be to society (or a little to both).
What Bill is doing by donating it all to society
is making sure his name gets in all the history
books for years to come.
No, Billy boy doesn't pimp it right away - he stuffs it away for a rainy day when his public image needs that little extra boost, then whips it out and jumps around screaming "See! See! I'm a good guy too! Look at all the money I'm donating to all these good causes!"
That's the cheesiest to me - using your donations as weaponry in a war of words. Spare me, please. If he wants to make donations for the sake of making donations, that's fine. I don't want to see articles about it when his image isn't doing so well tho.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
His Billness has been talking about doing this for years - basically he's decided not to leave anything for his kids to inherit...
This sig left unintentionally blank.
Having said that, I do agree that if I were in Gates' shoes I would be pretty annoyed at the suggestion that such a massive donation was just a cheap ploy to distract attention from a court case.
--
You're wrong about Gates being so humble about it. I remember a story earlier this year about Microsoft bragging about charitable giving and how it ended up making the Ford Foundation and afew other charities looking bad. It turned out that much of the valuation of the giving of Microsoft was in their software, whereas the giving by the others was more cash-related. I think Microsoft and Gates has no shame at all.
AIDS has a lot of media impact, so curing AIDS would also have a lot of impact. So it is a logical choice for good PR points.
Actually, you are right. The absolute theoretical point of Capitalism is to kill your competitor. In fact, the absolute highest point a company can achieve in the true spirit of capitalism is a monopoly. But the catch 22 situation is that once you have a monopoly, competition is no more, and capitalism dies. Capitalism sometimes grows up and kills it's father, a financial Oedipal Complex if you will.
Now the question is- do you allow a monopoly to grow and swallow competition? Obviously not... I won't go into economics, you all know the benefits of capitalism and competition.
The problem that I have (and most slashdotters) isn't the fact that they are a monopoly, per se. It's how they got there and what they are doing with it. They got there by stealing, bullying, lying, and betraying. Everyone know that. And while that might be capitalism, it's extreme capitalism. I like to think of it this way- if you put the mentality of the Microsoft business model and the argument that it's all just capitalism on top of, say, football, you'd have a team that carried knives and guns on to the field, stabbed their opponents while they were down, loaded the ball with explosives, etc. You might say that the goal of competition in this sense is to win at any cost- that's what you are there for. But there have to be rules- no one really wants to play a game for their life. If there are no rules it becomes pure bedlam. If a team played like that, they would not have much of a fan base for very long.
And what is Microsoft doing with the monopoly? When was the last time that you really were impressed with a new version of some software from them? I mean, from a serious look, not at frills like Active Desktop or the damn paper clip thing in word. Basically every new version of Microsoft product I have seen has been bigger, requires more processing power to use, and has been less usable and slower than ever. Take Office for example... half of the stuff that I could do in word '95 I have no earthly idea how to manage in Word '97.
As for Mr. Gates and his donations- whether or not he does it for the right or wrong reasons shouldn't matter- if someone in need gets some needs met as a result, more power to him. But I do have to ask- if you screw an entire industry for the sake of an extra dollar, do you really deserve to be treated like a "philanthropist" if you give some of it away? And how much and for how long do you donate before you aren't giving it away for the sake of making yourself look good. Like I said, it shouldn't matter, but to me, it does. I have watched him for years and this is just another maneuver.
heh, I usually read through all the coments before posting, I haven't even had my morning pot of coffee yet, so I'm gonna take the bet that no one brought this up yet.
Remember back in Europe, a long time ago, the Do-Nothing kings? They just threw parties in the palace and slept off hangovers, and they mayors of the palace did all the work. That's what it sounds like to me.
/Orion, Cliche` subjects: A thing of the past.
Earn cash in your spare time! Blackmail your friends!
The day 60% of PCs on this planet run Linux you will get flamed on Slashdot-next-generation for not running some GNU Hurd derived system (of course they will have GPLed super portable microkernel by then). But I am optimistic. This bad commercial Linux will be still GPL.
For me free programs have 2 advantages:
they are SIMPLE and IMPROVABLE. Important point is also the ease of personal intercation with the author, they are not anonymous.
In a lot of ways, I feel like Hal's right-wing counterpart: roughly the same age, people say I'm smarter than I think I am (if I can do it, how difficult can it be?), rather like the idea of "retiring" as young as possible... only here in Ann Arbor, there aren't a whole lot of stock option millionaires (starting to change, watch for BlueGill's IPO in a year or two), if my employer gets bought out it'll just mean that we can get a *full* T1 feed and replace the antiquated Sparc 10's (equiv. of 486's), and I know how to manage my money. And I have bitter hatred for the parasites who wrote the taxes that confiscate half of whatever annual pay raises I get (same as the rest of y'all in the 28% bracket that kicks in at $25K/year). Liberal Democrats keep people poor. Poor/stupid and rich/guilty are their symbiotic constituencies. (Including Bill Gates, 'til he got mugged by reality...)
I have two alternative plans, the relavent one being to retire by 40, having paid off the mortgage on my small but comfortable condo and live off investment income. I'll hack code for fun, do the occassional consulting job to slow my cash burn rate, write (I'm actually good at writing, want to get back to that)... and play Alpha Centauri and what not too much along the way, no doubt. If my investments go better than expected (or I manage to acquire AOL-calibre stock options), I might try angel investing.
I absolutely would not wonder what I did to deserve success. Everyone gets chances, few can execute them. Screw up, learn, try again, and don't hate the folks who are already there. Do fight the looters trying to hold you down, and never try to arbitrate what people "deserve".
What's strange is that he could give away $10 to every single person on the face of the planet and still have a large wad of cash.
What's even more interesting is that when ol' Bill starts cashing in his stock, and flooding the market there-with, the value of M$ stock will inherently fall (supply and demand).
part of me kinda doesn't want to see the fortune split up like that. I always wondered who the first trillionaire would be. But charity is a good thing.
Still, how would you like to grow up and know that your dad was worth over 100 billion and he gave you "only" 10 million, less than 1%?
"Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"
if I had that kind of money, I'd try to open up apartment complexes with high speed internet connections like the one I live in.
Bandwidth for the masses.
"Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"
then again, once Gates gives away the rest of his fortune, it's another story
100 billion, not 10 billion (nt)
If any of Gates' 100 billion dollars goes to curing a disease that you are (or will be) afflicted with, you people owe him an apology for all the criticism.
All of this talk about him being greedy, etc goes out the window with him donating virtually his entire fortune to help improve society.
Shame on you.
According to my office mate many years ago Bill said the same thing in an interview.
I assume you'll pay taxes in a few years (if you haven't started already). Well, part of your taxes goes (or will go) to AIDS research.
"Steel from the rich and give to the poor",
more correctly put: "Make loads money by destroying other comapnies and then give it away".
---
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck,
---
I'm going to live forever, or die in the attempt.
You may think he's pulling out the stops because he needs his image polished now. I am attributing him with foresight. I think that either something unpleasant will happen soon (Y2K?) or he's planning something unpleasant (expiring software licensed?), and seeks to insulate himself in advance.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
"That would help a lot more people than any charity."
*Huh?*
Do you understand how interest on money works?
He'll have plenty in 5 years...
My question is why the media keep saying 90-100
billion dollars.... isn't most of his worth just
on paper?
Isn't it strange that Gates can give away 90-99%
of his fortune, and still be worth a billion
dollars? Whoa....
--
Why are there so many Unix-using Star Trek fans?
When was the last time Picard said, "Computer, bring
> Funny thing is, Gates doesn't make a huge deal of it.
It seems to be the Windows advocates that are making the biggest deal over it. Someone whipped his horse to get the news over to comp.os.linux.advocacy faster. Is it Linux advocacy news? No, but it's a break for Windows advocates who are in increasingly desparate need to justify their loyal support for Microsoft's business practices.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Or mini-Bill.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
With Linux around, will he still have 100Bills to give away if he waits five more years?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
According to the news, Gates will put $100B into this foundation, and it will support medical research (and treatment?).
An endowment of that size would throw off $5B a year in income, using my university's 5% rule. What can you do with $5B? You could endow a new Yale University _every year_.
So much money chasing a narrow research area will seriously distort the "market". Alternatively, it will give the foundation enormous control over how biomedical research develops.
Control is Microsoft's middle name, I guess.
How this $100B is managed will mean a lot more to the world than any software that will come out of Redmond.
Fiat Lux.
That was a horrible article. Whats up with saying the only reason he said this was becuase he was in trouble with the court. He already has a charity and its one of the biggest chairties in the world! He's been doing this before this stupid trial. Some people need to get their heads out of their butts and realize that bill gates isn't evil just because hes successfull. Mabey we should start shunning slashdot, all the linux people read it... its getting really popular, almost taking out the other news sites. Mabey we should take slashdot to court, they are killing the competition. They make it too hard for small tech writers to start up.
Wake up and realize if it wasn't for bill gates you would all be using 1 button macintoshes.
AOL:Good evening, AOL Technical Support. How may I help you today ??
Me: Yes, I having some trouble conn -
AOL: ... Excuse me just one moment please, I'm getting some interefernece on this line. Are you by chance talking on a cordless phone?
Me: No ....
AOL:Oh, nevermind, I think it was just a lear jet passing over our building here ...
Me: Lear jet ??!! I didn't know Dulles flew in Lear's ....
Oh no, they don't. They're flying in my one of my fellow workers ...
Me: Huh ??
"He who questions training trains himself at asking questions." - The Sphinx, Mystery Men (1999)
Actually, Kodak's in the digital photography game, too. They make some pretty sweet cameras.
darius
darius
>>Diseases are nature's way of thinning out the weak. >In 30-50 years, we can make a population completely dependant upon us for survival. All because of a little humanitarian effort.
Already happens at home... the welfare population that grow up on welfare and become new welfare recipients.
So, Bill has decided to spend all this money to eradicate HIV and Malaria. All very noble, but will throwing money at the problem actually do any good? Bill's announcement was especially well timed, as it conincided a new ESR essay on originality http://wn.net/daily/esr-original.html.
ESR argues that you can't buy innovation. To paraphrase:
"People who innovate essentially do it because they are clever and capable of original thought,
not because they have huge amounts of money thrown
at them. Developing these ideas can swallow up huge amounts of money, but it won't get you that original grain of originality."
Microsoft, as Slashdotters know all too well, likes to take the innovation shortcut, which is to wait for someone else to do all the hard work, and then buy up the results.
So how will the Bill/Microsoft approach work when attacking these great scientific challanges?
Throwing money at HIV, or any problem about which we have insufficent knowledge, will not make it go away. You have to wait for some scientists to do the basic research, and come up with a breakthrough, which in all probability will be in a totally different field from the one where the cash got ploughed in.
So, the Bill Foundation might be a nice publicity stunt, but wonder who much real difference it will make? Of course, they can always "Embrace and extend" the real breakthrough, if it comes...
But in the words of Eric Raymond, neither has Linus. Don't get me wrong - I love Linux to pieces, but it's not exactly an original thought. The entire system has been a Unix workalike since day one. It's a good workalike. It's even better than a lot of the originals, but it's still nothing new.
So MS has "embraced and extended" - so have we. Half of the free software out there was built on the source code of other programs. It's not a Bad Thing(tm).
-------
Well that's the big argument that people make right now. They say, "Well it'll still be GPL, so there's no way Suse or RedHat or Microsoft can ruin it for us". But that's not the point.
Just because it's GPL doesn't mean you'll want to use it. Just like everything else that works its way from the underground to the mainstream, Linux will lose it appeal to the people who originally made it popular and when that happens (and believe me, it will) those undergrounders will move on to the next big thing.
You hit the nail on the head when you said Hurd, because that's exactly what I was thinking about when I wrote what you responded to. When Linux becomes passe the same people who bash NT for crashing will begin bashing Linux for it's prehistoric architechture. It doesn't matter if the OS works fine for what it does (look at NT), people will still use propaganda to make it seem worthless and even evil.
The cycle is so simple, and yet people never see it.
------
I agree, throwing money at a problem doesn't make it go away. Look at East Germany or Sicliy, how many billions in aid has been poured in there. Self help is the only help!
Sorry we can't be perfect like that...
So, if you had billions of dollars, would you just give away that much, for the sake of that "warm, fuzzy feeling you get inside"? Think of all the other things they could be spending that money on - expanding the corporation, hiring more programmers to fix all the problems in Windows, and the list goes on.
So, what do you do? Do you just give away the money all at once? Or do you wait until it will benfit you and others at the same time, then give it away? What's so wrong about that?
Here in Seattle (and over on the Eastside, aka Redmond) we've got a fair number of these Slacker millionaires. Some live the high life, but most are the people who ride the bus and take their yacht out when the weather's nice.
Some glom on to fame, by buying their way in to parties with acquisitions of theaters and so on, but most seem to be pretty level headed people. Of course, they don't get as much press as the Nouveau Riche Slackers who flaunt their wealth all the time.
Kind of like those E*Trade commercials, really.
Will in Seattle
Face it, even Al Gore gives more of a percentage of his total income and wealth than Bill G. On a proportional level, Bill G is just starting to behave in an almost human fashion, after years of being a piker.
Think about it, he has $100 billion. His value rose by more than $40 billion last year. If he gave away $1 billion, it would only be 2.5% of his increased wealth. When it gets into the multi-billions per year, I'll give him credit for philanthropy.
Will in Seattle
I know how lucky I am. Unlike most Americans, I didn't live my entire life in the same sheltered American town. I'm a third generation US citizen, and was born a military brat. I've lived in foreign countries (okay, well, the Netherlands are still first world), and I've visited plenty of places that aren't anything like the typical concept of America (both in America, and abroad)
And personally, yes, I've actually thought of killing myself quite a few times. And 'first world nation' only applies to some of the people living here. Go to any slum area of your largest nearby city, and ask people living there how well they enjoy it.
And as to Gates, I could care less about him. If you noticed, most of my complaints are against the Catholic groups out there that started doing this long before Gates wanted to join in.
I'm a strong supporter of euthenasia (if they don't want to live, don't make 'em), and have had a living will since I was 16, which lists the loss of any two limbs as reason enough to not prolong my life. I believe in the death penalty, and I believe that we should do more to clear out the Lifers that are presently in prison.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Damned people, thinking they're helping out. Oh, we're going to be good little catholics, and go over there, and vaccinate all of these people, and convert them to catholicism, so they'll be saved when they die.
They're killing them! Nature works on a system of checks and balances. If it weren't for people being the ignorant bastards that they are, the entire population of these third world countries might not be starving. (hmm....what happens when you halve the death rate in an area with an average of 5-7 children per family? Population boom. And can the local agriculture support it? Hell no.) And it's even better when it's the Catholics doing it, as they're opposed to contraceptives, also.
Personally, I think Star Trek had one thing right -- the prime directive. Don't mess with other civilizations. They'll evolve on their own. (well, assuming greedy bastards don't go in there to exploit their resources, like in Brazil, or end up daming up the rivers, and crap like that.)
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
No way. Just give me a kayak, beer, camping equipment, and some warm weather. You'd never see me again.
Well, I can't speak for anyone else here, but I sure don't intend to quit using Linux 'because it's getting popular'. As more people use Linux it will have more support, more enterprise applications, and more games.
My beef with Windows is simple. I want something stable, and I want something free. Windows is neither. Gnu is both. That's it. I don't like rebooting every few hours, I don't like draconian end user agreements, and I don't like every word document or spreadsheet I make generating a secret ID hash in it. It's none of MS's damned business which program I used to make it, what my ethernet card # is, or what OS I have.
I will choose Free Software-high quality, privacy, and no binding agreements (except, of course, that I do not infringe upon the freedoms of others).
I'm a gnu world man.
Actually, Gates is doing just that. check out the Stata Center (which may house the FSF)
Does anyone else recognize the similarity between curing AIDS and Windows? Why does he want to spend so much money to fix something that can be prevented? Aside from those who got it via blood transfusions etc. (I imagine a small number these days) AIDS proliferates because of stupidity in the form of unsafe sex and drug abuse yada yada yada... So It is just like building a workaround in your code rather than fixing the cause. I mean, this is probobly the meat and bones on W2K afterall.
So why not spend valuable research time and money on something that kills so many more people a year (no... not Windows) like Cancer. You don't have to be stupid to get it, you just get it.
What do you think?
-capt.
A story over at Blue's News:
l ay=19990802&topic=everything#Gates to Charities: Not So Fast!_Monday
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/blammo.pl?disp
suggests that the "unrelated story" may not be entirely factual. It seems to be true in intent perhaps, but then Windows is intended to be bug free too...
Jim
"and how much have Mr. Raymond and Mr. Stallman given to charity? In my league? I think not. I am a GENUINE Nice Guy(tm) and I give people what they want for free: money, not software or a source code or anything silly like that!!! Hey, I don't CARE how much cooler Linus Torvalds' hair is than mine, did HE give away 90 trillion billion dollars to ANYONE? . . . ."
;-)
Seriously though, good for him. I'm glad he's spending it responsibly and for some sort of noble goal, regardless of secondary motives. Hey, no AIDS WOULD be a nice thing . . . unless of course it just mutates into MS-AIDS(tm) . . .
Bad things often happen to good people,
It is up to them to see that they remain good.
"I agree that it's a good thing that he is donating to charity, but a company that does something damaging and then makes a big show of donating to charity (or, as Kodak is doing here, of reminding people about past donations) just doesn't sit right with me, somehow."
Funny thing is, Gates doesn't make a huge deal of it. Did you know a few months ago he gave over $5 billion dollars away? Or even more recently, $100 million to AIDS research? Probably not. It only appeared in a few news outlets, because Gates and MS didn't make a big deal of it. On the other hand, when Ted Turner gave away $1 billion (over 10 years), he was on the cover of every news magazine in the country. That's not to diminish Turner's donation, of course, just to say that Gates' donations are not exactly all about bragging.
Yea, but I bet you wouldn't trade your 75+ year lifespan if we hadn't cured all of the diseases they we already have. Don't forget how damn lucky you are to live in a first world nation.
Did you actually think about what you were saying, or was this just your opportunity to slag Gates?
I know Gates is no saint in the business world, but I applaud him for his charitable contributions.
This does not surprise me at all because it fits in with Gates' personality. Everything I've read about he says that he is not a greedy guy. He is a power-hungry guy. Those are two very different things. I suspect that he'd give a lot more money right now if that didn't mean selling more shares (and thus giving up control (power)) to get the cash.
The cake is a pie
Holy cow! I went to high school with Hal. I even helped out at Hal Aide at Gregs house all those years ago, and he used to call my BBS. I have to say it though - people were willing to pull together for him then, and it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. Way to go, Hal. I hope all is really well.
(waiting for my options to vest)
wfrancis@anticlockwise.com
I'd like to see Bill donate all of his cash to FSF/GNU. Then we'd have a kernel that ROCKED, and the stigma of M$ sucking would be gone...
Why doesn't he donate his money to create an operating system that doesn't crash every 10 minutes.
I'm only 15, so if Gates pulls off this world with out AIDS thing I think it'd be really kewl...
not that it would matter for me, but....
One thing I don't understand is Gate's connection with aids...
Why does he care about AIDS, and not a more sympethetic cause like blind 3 year olds?
...and deliberately making sure that if his daughter wants to be *really* wealthy just like her pop, she'll have to be either pretty cunning with what she *does* inherit, or found another company. She'll be well-off, but not disgustingly so.
It's not that unusual for the self-made wealthy to prevent inheritance of most of their fortune with the intent of not raising a wealthy slacker who never has to work or even think.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
I agree whole-heartedly.
:)
It also tends to amaze me that alot computer professionals don't seem to get the TRUE point of software. Use the best tools to get the job done in the best way, in the least amount of time (without compromising the best part...). Whether it be a MS product, freeware, etc. In my opinion, limiting yourslef to one OS or one line of products means your limiting your skill-set...course this is open to de(flame)bate.
As a VB programmer, I find myself continually shunned in certain elements of the "community" for my use of MS products. Sorry, but I guess I owe my job to Gates. Not to fill the man's already super-inflated ego, but Microsoft made the personal computer TRULY marketable with an astounding saturation. Not an opinion, just a fact. True the ethics of their business practicies may be in question, but what was the phrase? "Dog eat dog"? I think alot of professionals, even the Linux supporters, owe their positions to a company that made joe-shmo buy a hunk of silicon, jack it into the wall and plug in to the net.
Gotta respect that.
Jonny Angel
Jonny Angel
rebel rousing technobilly
People keep complaining that he is taking so long to give away his money, without realizing the fact that there is a much better net-gain for society if he keeps investing his wealth now, creating more jobs, more companies, etc.
John Stossil covered this very point on ABC's special on GREED. And he ended upsetting Ted Turner in the process. There is a certain level of skill required to manage money, and just blindly giving away his money at this point in time would be a huge waste -- like if Gates gave every American a gift of $400, it wouldn't make a dent society's well being. Most people who win the lottery squander it. If you gave every homeless person $1million, or ever yheroin addict
$1million, or even every politician or charity
manager $1million, it isn't the same as Gates managing that $1million.
Frankly, if Gates set out to dominate the biotech market, and cure AIDs and Malaria, I'd feel much better than some non-profit managing it, because his track record is one of making deals and getting things done.
A second point, Gates' wealth is only worth $100bil on paper, if he cashed it all in, it could drop significantly in value.
If Ted Turner wants to give away 33% of his net worth (keep in mind, it's over a 10 year period), that's his mistake, but don't blame Bill because he isn't experiencing as much *pain* or *suffering* as Turner. Why should the value of someone's charity be based on how much *pain* they suffer?
Oh yeah. The 'masses'. If i got about 3 bucks back i would consider that the masses. But its a chairity, and if i could give 90 billion tax deductible dollars away, your fucken right i'd do it too.
After all of these years fleecing the unwitting masses. I think its a good idea for Ol' Bill to give back some dough. I think its so he can fell warm and fuzzy inside, like 90billion worth of fuzzy...
I'm pining for the fjords...
So why not spend valuable research time and money on something that kills so many more people a year (no... not Windows) like Cancer.
Cancer may kill more in the U.S., but in Africa, AIDS is epidemic. (Oh, and by the way, a high percentage of those cancer deaths are likewise preventable -- lung cancer from cigarette smoking.) 1.4 million people in Africa died from AIDS last year. The cost is staggering, in terms of caring for the dying, lost productivity from the young adults killed by it, the large number of orphans created, etc. And the number of cases is expected to rise.
Furthermore, with AIDS, you have the fear of possible mutation. What would happen if a strain of AIDS became airborne, like Tuberculosis, or could be passed through bodily fluids? It wouldn't take long for it to get from Africa to New York.
Education programs are being used in Africa to try to reduce risky behaviour as well, with some degree of success.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Let's take some generic civ, and we'll say that the average woman in that civ has 6 kids.
Many of them have that many kids because so few live to adulthood, and with that many you assure having someone to support you in your old age. Up the survival rate and the birth rate tends to go down.
In 30-50 years, we can make a population completely dependant upon us for survival.
We're all pretty much dependent on modern technology for survival. The land of the U.S. wouldn't support 250 million hunter-gatherers.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Bill Gates doesn't like to attack problems in a half-assed fashion; he wants to work on one problem at a time and attack it thoroughly. We know this from his business ventures; Microsoft generally doesn't give up until it wins. (or, more rarely, is thoroughly defeated despite vast expenditure of effort). What makes the company so successful is its focus: Gates picks his battles carefully, and doesn't attack unless he thinks the odds are good.
Apply this mindset to charitable efforts and it's quite easy to explain what we saw with Rockefeller and what we can expect from Gates. Gates will keep earning money until he gets bored or frustrated with his current path and retires from active service with Microsoft. After that, he'll start worrying about how to give the money away.
But I don't blame him at all for not spending or donating much money now. Giving away that magnitude of money is basically a full-time job. Think of your favorite charity. Could it handle a grant of, say, one billion dollars? Do they have the accounting resources, the banking resources, the talent, the scruples and common sense at all levels, to use it effectively? Could he just write them a check and expect good things to happen?
With great fortunes come great responsibility. Bill should keep doing what he's doing until he has the time and energy to focus on charity, and then he should think long and hard and carefully about how to donate money in a way that does more good than harm.
Good luck, Bill. You'll need it!
I play Nerd-Folk!
I suppose donating to charity is like motherhood and apple pie and all that sort of thing, but personally, I'd rather just see a half-decent operating system out of Redmond. That would help a lot more people than any charity.
D
----
Isn't Kodak hurting, though? I thought digital photography was all but killing their core business. I know I haven't bought film in over a year because of my digital still/video camera lets me take all the pictures I want without the bother and expense of film + developing.
D
----
Aren't you worried that Barnes & Noble or amazon.com would eat your lunch?
If I had a lot of money, I'd move to Newport Beach or Malibu, get a T1 line straight to my home, and try and figure out some inspiring Internet-based project, maybe some variant on the free web page community theme. I'd also buy a nice boat and do some sailing.
I could do the Internet part now, if I had the time to really think. The problem for me is really time and energy (and the cost of time), not raw dollars.
D
----
We may disagree with Microsoft's business practices. We may disagree with the way that Bill Gates made his billions. We may dispute that one man should be allowed to be that rich. However, the fact the Bill is prepared to donate most of his fortune to charity shows that he has at least some scruples. It's surely a Good Thing that the richest man in the world is prepared to use his billions to support a charitable foundation.
Maybe he is doing it to try to save face and look less greedy. On the other hand, maybe he's doing it because he wants to put his fortune to good use. We could sit and debate his motives for ever. The point is, he's doing it, and has made the right decision.
You're right about one thing - people here are waaaay to hard on Microsoft. We need to just calm down and realize that they are a company trying to make money, just like any other. And big deal, their products are flawed just like any other. What this really boils down to it propaganda.
/. you're either part of the solution or you're flaimbait. Anyone who praises MS or critiques Open Source gets moderated down. There doesn't seem to be any room to share.
Seriously - we've talked so much trash about MS here that it's become ingrained in our heads that they are the minions of Satan. People cry out "Microsoft is trying to get rid of company XYZ". Well of course they are, XYZ is their competitor. Just because it's against the law doesn't mean its not human nature. EVERYONE wants to get rid of the competition.
And what bothers me more is that the Linux Community as a whole seems to be showing this too. Here at
I'm about to get a new PC and with 27 gigs of hard drive space, you can bet your ass that I'm going to put Win98, Linux, AND WinNT on it. Because you know what? I enjoy some of MS's products. I'm writing this from IE5.0 and it's just flat out better than Navigator ever will be. Hell, Wordpad basically blows AbiWord out of the water.
Now I'm just ranting, but listen - I love Linux and I love Free Software even more. It's flexibility and freedom cannot be beaten. However - and this is for the "World Domination" people out there - you don't want what you're asking for. The day that 90% of the PCs on this planet run Linux is the day that you start running NetBSD. Or some other, less popular, OS.
Because the real driving force behind Linux isn't any of the crap that Raymond or Perens wail about. Don't kid yourselves guys, it isn't. It's the fact that NOBODY ELSE USES IT! It's the idea that you're trendy and the other fellow who runs MS stuff is just a "windoze luser". And when he finally becomes a "linux luser", you'll move on to greener pastures - I guarantee it.
-------
From the site:
William H. Gates Foundation
At the end of 1998, the Foundation had committed $133 million to organizations working in global health; $122 million to educational concerns; more than $42 million to community projects in the Pacific Northwest; and over $60 million to special projects and annual giving campaigns.
Gates Learning Foundation
The Gates Learning Foundation began life as the Gates Library Foundation in June 1997 with the mission of helping to bridge the "digital divide" between those who have access to computers and the Internet and those who lack such access. By the end of 1998, the Foundation had awarded grants of over $22 million to 1300 libraries in 28 states to bring Internet access to their patrons, as well as provide staff technical assistance and training.
Gates Center for Technology Access
The Gates Center for Technology Access (GCTA) is dedicated to ensuring that no one becomes "information disenfranchised." GCTA works to establish access to information technology resources in communities throughout the United States through partnerships with libraries, schools, and community organizations.
Check out the Lance Armstrong Foundation
kayaking
*grin* That's why I'd be likely to do it if I was independently wealthy and didn't care how much money I was losing. I'd love to stay in business to be a thorn in their sides.
But that's just me, and I'm a bit annoyed lately because a local bookstore folded thanks to B&N, Borders, etc. Fortunately, Blue Sunday (all used books, lots of good stuff, and wonderful coffee) is alive and well in my area. I just wish they weren't all the way the heck out in the only-accessible-by-car suburbs. I'd love to open a similar business in the middle of the city
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
*chuckles* My mom (a civil servant) is talking about taking "early retirement" and in her case that means 55 years old! This guy from AOL retired at the age my mom had me. Scary.
If I were in a position to retire that early, I wouldn't stay retired for long. My boyfriend and I have been talking about opening a bookstore for a while now, and that would make it a lot easier to do (not to mention, we could stay in business even if the darn thing started to lose money).
But hey, I'm only partially a slacker -- enough to be wasting some of my workday on
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
I agree that it's a good thing that he is donating to charity, but a company that does something damaging and then makes a big show of donating to charity (or, as Kodak is doing here, of reminding people about past donations) just doesn't sit right with me, somehow.
Kodak's founder put a lot of money into establishing music programs and dental clinics -- a local dental school and a well-known music college both bear George Eastman's name.
However, at the moment, I'd say that most of the Rochester area is substantially pissed at Kodak's current business practices. We're all well aware that George Eastman was a nice guy for giving all tihs money to things that still benefit our city. But Eastman's been dead for a while now, and yet the current powers-that-be at Kodak can still point to his good works even as they continue to close plants and threaten large layoffs in the name of "good business practice."
Sorry, I know I'm ranting. The point is that no matter how "generous" you are with a fortune, getting that fortune by stepping on other people does a lot of damage. It's all well and good to see the "reformed" Scrooge, but perhaps Tiny Tim would have been a healthy child in the first place if Scrooge had paid his father a decent wage to begin with.
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
They said that Bill Gates wanted to help third world countries, and cure diseases. Diseases are nature's way of thinning out the weak.
However, you don't reach epidemic proportions until you get too great of a population. So it's system of checks and balances.
By helping people live, we're killing off their entire civilization.
Let's take some generic civ, and we'll say that the average woman in that civ has 6 kids. Because of disease, only 2 of these kids will live to an age where they can reproduce. (so, on average, one more female). Which means, we're at replacement value.
We go and vaccinate all of the kids against Polio and whatever else, and suddenly, 4-6 of those six kids might live to reproduce. That's 2 or 3 females. Another generation, and what should have been 1 kid is now 4 to 9. One more, and it's 8 to 27.
And we're not talking American generations, with maybe 35-40 years before they have kids, we're talking about having kids at 15-20, because they'd be dead by the time they're 50.
But now that the kids live, the parents can't feed that many kids. So what happens? In most societies, the motherly instict is so strong that the mother gives her share to the children, so she's too weak to do anything productive. The kids aren't doing much better, and chances are, neither is the father.
In 30-50 years, we can make a population completely dependant upon us for survival. All because of a little humanitarian effort.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
I made a bunch of money in Silicon Valley, years ago. It was nice, I was able to quit my job, got rid of all my material possessions, and did the things I wanted to do.
:-) But too much working leads to stress and burnout.
Granted, I didn't get any where near the $1 million mark, so my spending wasnt that over the top.
After a while I found myself back working again as a consultant. Working was fun, for little blocks of time. In between there is travel, the only really fun thing in my life.
The money has only paid for a few things, more education, lots of travel, a place to live, extra time off every year.
But I still like working (maybe I should do some today, instead of slashdotting
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on