Using the many $billions you already have to make more $billions by escaping what little laws might restrain them, that results in harming the health and education (and therefore everything else) in the lives of many millions, perhaps billions, of people - mostly the planet's most vulnerable and already unhealthy/uneducated - that makes you an EVIL guy.
Which we already knew Gates is, having lived with him butchering our own IT industry for a couple of generations now.
He's just a guy managing his money by harming others - at every level. I wouldn't do that with my money. In fact I do otherwise with my money. And I don't have $billions already, so spending mine charitably actually subtracts from the minimum adequate lifestyle I might otherwise have.
You like his educational investments the most. I'm not surprised that your education leaves you unable to see that he's evil, and that other people wouldn't do what he does. I expect Gates' work is making as many people like you as possible, to perpetuate the harm.
Until the US government got involved, running US healthcare strictly as a business left millions of us to get sick, stay sick and die, without preventive or responsive care available. That left many millions of other people to stay trapped in a sick home, unable to live fully, work properly or contribute economically or educationally.
Since the time the US government got involved in a coordinated way, through Medicaid and Medicare, the large majority of the population has been freed from the worst afflictions, healthwise and otherwise. Meanwhile the expanded healthcare economy has completely transformed health science and practice.
You and your fellow "libertarian" corporate anarchists would return us to the bad old days. Next you'll tell us war is good for the economy, so we should have more of what ruins us.
The money is supposed to come from people who selflessly give money and time out of compassion to help others, not to make a profit. That's why charities in the US are almost always non-profit organizations.
You think otherwise, because you are an autistic narcissist. Every time you post something on Slashdot, especially when you start the discussion, you demonstrate the precisely inhuman way to act.
C is basically logic algebra. Its syntax and computing model are the essence of iterative processing. It's a great lingua franca (universal language spoken by all, even if it's frequently far from the best in expression). Most programmers and machines speak it.
If C didn't exist, we'd have to invent it. All hail the almighty C!
Has ICANN ever had any clue about what it's doing? It is the keymaster to the modern Fort Knox, and it has always been supremely incompetent in every way.
How is it possible for "typo domains" to scam millions every year by violating legitimate trademarks? Why would you expand the top level domains without ensuring they segregate names into sites that don't conflict with each other, which is the only purpose of a namespace, thereby ensuring that names in the different TLDs do conflict and confuse the consumer?
ICANN is a gang of dangerous morons. They're creating a competence vacuum that tyrannies like China, Russia, Iran and the corporate taliban in the US are using to seize control of the Internet to destroy its freedom.
Yes, he tool sole credit for what he actually did: he took the initiative to get the funding for specific programs. He didn't just spread the use of the Internet; his funding created the Internet. During the "Reagan Revolution", when "Conservatives" like the ones you're still voting for were dismantling any public investment within reach (as long is it wasn't the sacred military).
If Gore had said anything more to "clarify", you and your fellow Republicans would be calling him a windbag for saying another sentence. "No one would disagree"? There isn't a sentence mathematically possible that Al Gore could say about anything that you Republicans wouldn't disagree with, in unison, 24x7 on thousands of monopoly news propaganda channels.
He didn't speak improperly. He didn't have to share credit for getting the programs approved and funded. That was leadership, it was hard work, "Conservatives" like you tried and failed to stop it. He was running for president, when it's time to take credit for the work like that. And in fact he won that election, though "Conservatives" like you and the ones you always vote for did nothing but steal it, just like they pick the bones of everything within reach.
People like you make things like the Internet rare. People like Gore make things like the Internet.
AOL didn't charge a fixed price for Internet access. AOL charged by the hour for years after offering Internet access. In fact it remained one of the last ISPs to charge by the hour, or for any usage rate, until the mobile monopolies could finally get into that racket.
AOL wasn't "on the Internet", it was just gatewayed to it. But AOL's people were thereby "on the Internet", and their flood of stupidity ruined the aboriginal Internet culture. They could post directly to Usenet and the Web; the posting sites changed to feed their appetite, and the idiocracy took over.
Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part):
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
Gore saw the 1980s "Information Superhighway" and saw the future. His leadership got the Internet protected and funded as one of the great Federal programmes of all time, along with the Apollo programme. Without Gore the Internet today would probably be either long dead, or still some obscure government system only Feds and giant corporate cronies use (eg. solely to spy on you). The Reagan/Bush recession wouldn't have ended under Clinton/Gore with the greatest wealth creation of all time. You wouldn't be reading this on Slashdot.
The Internet is one of the things that fulfills America's promise. Thank Al Gore for being among the few who recognized its value back among the blips and bleeps, and among the fewer who actually did anything about it.
That didn't work even when the country and the world was relatively tiny and powerless, under the Articles of Confederation.
Without a strong central government, states would war on each other, cut deals with foreigners to invade and exploit other states, and basically look like Europe's history for the past 1000 years. And Africa's, and Asia's, or maybe just South America's.
Dead members are vacancies; the surviving members can hold a quorum or ignore it if they're in the chamber.
10 (or any number of) members who are present can vote without requesting a quorum that all the other seats are vacant because the other members are incapacitated by virtue of being unable to stand in the chamber.
There is therefore no actual lower limit to the number of members necessary for a vote.
Besides, any emergency that dire is going to see the rules standing small chance of being followed anyway. It'll be mostly chaos. Members who survive aren't going to be in the chamber voting, they'll be using whoever will obey them to get to safety (or to kill the rest, if that's what the emergency is).
The military doesn't need a coup. The military and CIA fucking murdered Kennedy, and nobody even lost their fucking job. The military has spent all our money since it started the country in the Revolution.
Yes, that's what happened in Egypt. Yes, that's how we do it here, except slicker. But it's not like there was some previous regime that wasn't a plaything for the US military and its endless, needless, expensive and practically always losing wars.
So what if the "10th in line of succession" has a seizure and his bodyguards lose him? So what? There are 9 other people before he matters to more than his family and his next morning's Commerce meeting. If those 9 are all out, then there's an 11th. There's an Acting Commerce Secretary. Who cares?
This is all bullshit. You can tell, because the bullshit is pushed by James Carafano, who wrote _Winning the Long War_ about how to defeat terrorism - and has helped the US get beaten by terrorism like nothing in our centuries of endless war. I argued with this jerkoff in a lobby of an NYC theater where he'd spent the previous two hours spouting bullshit about the US spending every last penny and life fighting his bullshit "long war". And he's done nothing but lose.
America is drowning in bullshit like this. Endless bullshit from a line of bullshitters like Carafano that's endless only because they get right back in line after bullshitting us and collecting their check.
This is a democracy. It depends on people swallowing this bullshit to keep the bullshit flowing. Stop believing it. Stop the endless war, the endless excuses for treating the country like it has to be at war every second of every day, every man, woman and child. Stop it already. It's bullshit.
China is doing now what the US government did 50 years ago: in 1962 we were launching people into orbit, just as China is now doing. China is doing it on foreign (Russian) hardware it bought and copied.
Meanwhile the US is using foreign launch HW in a partnership that is far beyond what China is capable of either technologically or politically. Meanwhile the US regulations have actually created a private space industry that investors are pouring into, while protecting both safety and the public investment.
You, Anonymous carping Coward, are the definition of "behind" - especially in the colloquial sense of the word.
NASA has landed several missions on Mars, even as Russia and China have tried and failed over and again. The US continues to launch and maintain both space telescopes and other kinds of probes. Most recently NASA has fostered development and launch of a private space industry, with quite a lot of work by the government to get it going.
The US has done quite a lot, even without a credible foreign competitor. A foreign competitor, as well as private "coopetition", will sharpen NASA's strong work even more. The problem for NASA has been that Republicans, from Bush/Cheney through their rump Congress that still sets the agendas, have hijacked NASA for military/spy work that doesn't spin off to anything, except some actual security and a lot of blowback.
So really you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure you'd say a lot more, too. But you shouldn't say anything until you learn what is actually going on.
The best scenario for Americans is one where China and private US corps compete to best exploit space. While the American people continue to run NASA for the science and public interest that neither China nor corps will share with anyone else. NASA can be a tool of US industrial policy, just as all of China's government and private businesses are for China.
The American people should make sure that we keep the advantages US businesses have, like tight connections to NASA and other American investments. When US corporations are bought up by Chinese businesses, investors or government actors, those corps should lose their American advantages that Americans pay (and have paid) for.
Playing it that way is also best for humanity as a whole.
No. Anything that has been exhaustively tested but not falsified is a scientific fact. The Moon's orbit around the Earth is a scientific fact. The equal and opposite reaction of a bullet flying from an exploding gun cartridge's action is a scientific fact.
Please leave "ultimately unknowable" to the solipsists.
No, the geocentric theory was not science the way we practice it today. It was biblical theology, dressed up to look like what passed for science before science was science.
Yes, in the future we'll have even better science about climate. It will be more precise, but the accuracy of current climate science saying "human pollution is increasing the Greenhouse Effect, overall warming the Earth and changing the climate" will not be changed. Because current science is good enough to state facts, even if their precision can always be improved. We can tell the difference between -1, 0 and +1, even if we can't always tell the difference between +1 and +1.1 .
Of course we should also debate and challenge the science, especially science this important. That's how we make both the facts more precise and the science itself better at investigating. But there's not going to be any disproof of climate change science. This isn't 1955, when the science wasn't based in enough data and repeated studies to be reliable. It's reliable.
Saying that there shouldn't be controversy about whether humans are changing the climate with our pollution isn't dogma. It's merely recognizing scientific fact. And defending it from the people who will say anything to undermine it, though they can't say anything scientific.
Finally! Someone finally realized that since the climate has changed before, the fact that humans are changing it now into something we can't live in, and could stop changing and get all those other benefits, should all be ignored. There was an Ice Age! Dinosaurs! How come we never thought of that?
Now all the climate scientists can quit and go do something fun for a change. You're a genius! How come you never said anything before?
So you're a 12 year old posting BS from your basement? Science from before your birth is OK for you to get wrong when you cite it about other science you get wrong, but others getting it right are "crotchety old men"?
You're an idiot. I don't care how old you are. Shut up.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the article. That is precisely the scam Gates is running that the article points out.
Using the many $billions you already have to make more $billions by escaping what little laws might restrain them, that results in harming the health and education (and therefore everything else) in the lives of many millions, perhaps billions, of people - mostly the planet's most vulnerable and already unhealthy/uneducated - that makes you an EVIL guy .
Which we already knew Gates is, having lived with him butchering our own IT industry for a couple of generations now.
He's just a guy managing his money by harming others - at every level. I wouldn't do that with my money. In fact I do otherwise with my money. And I don't have $billions already, so spending mine charitably actually subtracts from the minimum adequate lifestyle I might otherwise have.
You like his educational investments the most. I'm not surprised that your education leaves you unable to see that he's evil, and that other people wouldn't do what he does. I expect Gates' work is making as many people like you as possible, to perpetuate the harm.
Until the US government got involved, running US healthcare strictly as a business left millions of us to get sick, stay sick and die, without preventive or responsive care available. That left many millions of other people to stay trapped in a sick home, unable to live fully, work properly or contribute economically or educationally.
Since the time the US government got involved in a coordinated way, through Medicaid and Medicare, the large majority of the population has been freed from the worst afflictions, healthwise and otherwise. Meanwhile the expanded healthcare economy has completely transformed health science and practice.
You and your fellow "libertarian" corporate anarchists would return us to the bad old days. Next you'll tell us war is good for the economy, so we should have more of what ruins us.
The money is supposed to come from people who selflessly give money and time out of compassion to help others, not to make a profit. That's why charities in the US are almost always non-profit organizations.
You think otherwise, because you are an autistic narcissist. Every time you post something on Slashdot, especially when you start the discussion, you demonstrate the precisely inhuman way to act.
C is basically logic algebra. Its syntax and computing model are the essence of iterative processing. It's a great lingua franca (universal language spoken by all, even if it's frequently far from the best in expression). Most programmers and machines speak it.
If C didn't exist, we'd have to invent it. All hail the almighty C!
Has ICANN ever had any clue about what it's doing? It is the keymaster to the modern Fort Knox, and it has always been supremely incompetent in every way.
How is it possible for "typo domains" to scam millions every year by violating legitimate trademarks? Why would you expand the top level domains without ensuring they segregate names into sites that don't conflict with each other, which is the only purpose of a namespace, thereby ensuring that names in the different TLDs do conflict and confuse the consumer?
ICANN is a gang of dangerous morons. They're creating a competence vacuum that tyrannies like China, Russia, Iran and the corporate taliban in the US are using to seize control of the Internet to destroy its freedom.
Yes, he tool sole credit for what he actually did: he took the initiative to get the funding for specific programs. He didn't just spread the use of the Internet; his funding created the Internet. During the "Reagan Revolution", when "Conservatives" like the ones you're still voting for were dismantling any public investment within reach (as long is it wasn't the sacred military).
If Gore had said anything more to "clarify", you and your fellow Republicans would be calling him a windbag for saying another sentence. "No one would disagree"? There isn't a sentence mathematically possible that Al Gore could say about anything that you Republicans wouldn't disagree with, in unison, 24x7 on thousands of monopoly news propaganda channels.
He didn't speak improperly. He didn't have to share credit for getting the programs approved and funded. That was leadership, it was hard work, "Conservatives" like you tried and failed to stop it. He was running for president, when it's time to take credit for the work like that. And in fact he won that election, though "Conservatives" like you and the ones you always vote for did nothing but steal it, just like they pick the bones of everything within reach.
People like you make things like the Internet rare. People like Gore make things like the Internet.
AOL didn't charge a fixed price for Internet access. AOL charged by the hour for years after offering Internet access. In fact it remained one of the last ISPs to charge by the hour, or for any usage rate, until the mobile monopolies could finally get into that racket.
AOL wasn't "on the Internet", it was just gatewayed to it. But AOL's people were thereby "on the Internet", and their flood of stupidity ruined the aboriginal Internet culture. They could post directly to Usenet and the Web; the posting sites changed to feed their appetite, and the idiocracy took over.
Any time you hear someone lying about "Al Gore said he invented the Internet", tell them they're lying:
Gore saw the 1980s "Information Superhighway" and saw the future. His leadership got the Internet protected and funded as one of the great Federal programmes of all time, along with the Apollo programme. Without Gore the Internet today would probably be either long dead, or still some obscure government system only Feds and giant corporate cronies use (eg. solely to spy on you). The Reagan/Bush recession wouldn't have ended under Clinton/Gore with the greatest wealth creation of all time. You wouldn't be reading this on Slashdot.
The Internet is one of the things that fulfills America's promise. Thank Al Gore for being among the few who recognized its value back among the blips and bleeps, and among the fewer who actually did anything about it.
Yeah, you're going to love the post-nuke anarchy even more than the merely corrupt democratic republic.
He was actually in charge there, as he was the most senior. The others above him weren't there to take charge. Until they did, he was in charge.
Haig was an asshole, but he was right about being in charge.
That didn't work even when the country and the world was relatively tiny and powerless, under the Articles of Confederation.
Without a strong central government, states would war on each other, cut deals with foreigners to invade and exploit other states, and basically look like Europe's history for the past 1000 years. And Africa's, and Asia's, or maybe just South America's.
Dead members are vacancies; the surviving members can hold a quorum or ignore it if they're in the chamber.
10 (or any number of) members who are present can vote without requesting a quorum that all the other seats are vacant because the other members are incapacitated by virtue of being unable to stand in the chamber.
There is therefore no actual lower limit to the number of members necessary for a vote.
Besides, any emergency that dire is going to see the rules standing small chance of being followed anyway. It'll be mostly chaos. Members who survive aren't going to be in the chamber voting, they'll be using whoever will obey them to get to safety (or to kill the rest, if that's what the emergency is).
The military doesn't need a coup. The military and CIA fucking murdered Kennedy, and nobody even lost their fucking job. The military has spent all our money since it started the country in the Revolution.
Yes, that's what happened in Egypt. Yes, that's how we do it here, except slicker. But it's not like there was some previous regime that wasn't a plaything for the US military and its endless, needless, expensive and practically always losing wars.
So what if the "10th in line of succession" has a seizure and his bodyguards lose him? So what? There are 9 other people before he matters to more than his family and his next morning's Commerce meeting. If those 9 are all out, then there's an 11th. There's an Acting Commerce Secretary. Who cares?
This is all bullshit. You can tell, because the bullshit is pushed by James Carafano, who wrote _Winning the Long War_ about how to defeat terrorism - and has helped the US get beaten by terrorism like nothing in our centuries of endless war. I argued with this jerkoff in a lobby of an NYC theater where he'd spent the previous two hours spouting bullshit about the US spending every last penny and life fighting his bullshit "long war". And he's done nothing but lose.
America is drowning in bullshit like this. Endless bullshit from a line of bullshitters like Carafano that's endless only because they get right back in line after bullshitting us and collecting their check.
This is a democracy. It depends on people swallowing this bullshit to keep the bullshit flowing. Stop believing it. Stop the endless war, the endless excuses for treating the country like it has to be at war every second of every day, every man, woman and child. Stop it already. It's bullshit.
Not funny.
China is doing now what the US government did 50 years ago: in 1962 we were launching people into orbit, just as China is now doing. China is doing it on foreign (Russian) hardware it bought and copied.
Meanwhile the US is using foreign launch HW in a partnership that is far beyond what China is capable of either technologically or politically. Meanwhile the US regulations have actually created a private space industry that investors are pouring into, while protecting both safety and the public investment.
You, Anonymous carping Coward, are the definition of "behind" - especially in the colloquial sense of the word.
NASA has landed several missions on Mars, even as Russia and China have tried and failed over and again. The US continues to launch and maintain both space telescopes and other kinds of probes. Most recently NASA has fostered development and launch of a private space industry, with quite a lot of work by the government to get it going.
The US has done quite a lot, even without a credible foreign competitor. A foreign competitor, as well as private "coopetition", will sharpen NASA's strong work even more. The problem for NASA has been that Republicans, from Bush/Cheney through their rump Congress that still sets the agendas, have hijacked NASA for military/spy work that doesn't spin off to anything, except some actual security and a lot of blowback.
So really you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure you'd say a lot more, too. But you shouldn't say anything until you learn what is actually going on.
The best scenario for Americans is one where China and private US corps compete to best exploit space. While the American people continue to run NASA for the science and public interest that neither China nor corps will share with anyone else. NASA can be a tool of US industrial policy, just as all of China's government and private businesses are for China.
The American people should make sure that we keep the advantages US businesses have, like tight connections to NASA and other American investments. When US corporations are bought up by Chinese businesses, investors or government actors, those corps should lose their American advantages that Americans pay (and have paid) for.
Playing it that way is also best for humanity as a whole.
No. Anything that has been exhaustively tested but not falsified is a scientific fact. The Moon's orbit around the Earth is a scientific fact. The equal and opposite reaction of a bullet flying from an exploding gun cartridge's action is a scientific fact.
Please leave "ultimately unknowable" to the solipsists.
Right, so there's never anything that's a scientific fact, because in the past rudimentary science was prone to assertions. Wrong.
No, the geocentric theory was not science the way we practice it today. It was biblical theology, dressed up to look like what passed for science before science was science.
Yes, in the future we'll have even better science about climate. It will be more precise, but the accuracy of current climate science saying "human pollution is increasing the Greenhouse Effect, overall warming the Earth and changing the climate" will not be changed. Because current science is good enough to state facts, even if their precision can always be improved. We can tell the difference between -1, 0 and +1, even if we can't always tell the difference between +1 and +1.1 .
Of course we should also debate and challenge the science, especially science this important. That's how we make both the facts more precise and the science itself better at investigating. But there's not going to be any disproof of climate change science. This isn't 1955, when the science wasn't based in enough data and repeated studies to be reliable. It's reliable.
Saying that there shouldn't be controversy about whether humans are changing the climate with our pollution isn't dogma. It's merely recognizing scientific fact. And defending it from the people who will say anything to undermine it, though they can't say anything scientific.
Finally! Someone finally realized that since the climate has changed before, the fact that humans are changing it now into something we can't live in, and could stop changing and get all those other benefits, should all be ignored. There was an Ice Age! Dinosaurs! How come we never thought of that?
Now all the climate scientists can quit and go do something fun for a change. You're a genius! How come you never said anything before?
You are stupid. Shut up.
So you're a 12 year old posting BS from your basement? Science from before your birth is OK for you to get wrong when you cite it about other science you get wrong, but others getting it right are "crotchety old men"?
You're an idiot. I don't care how old you are. Shut up.