3. Drop Memory Stick Duo and use Compact Flash. Lets face it... I'm a Clie owner myself. CF is the better of the two. It's price per MB is much cheaper. Not to mention you can buy them anywhere, and they are improving in capacity and speed.
I wondered the same thing, but if the UMD disc format is opened up and cheap enough, then you could burn things to those. That kind of eliminates the need for a large memory stick. Maybe that is their plan...?
Actually, after I posted this, I did that - searched for "RMS" on Google and MSN's image searches. In the first page, there was only one picture of Richard M Stallman on the MSN search, while the Google one was full of them.
Now whether or not that is a good thing, I'll leave up to the reader....:-)
Never write anything in a letter, e-mail, diary, memo or any other quotable medium that you dont want the other guys lawyer holding up in court.
I am feeling a bit optimistic today, but I would rather that everyone write everything down. That way, the scumbags will be obvious and you can get a more honest view of things. It is like saying "don't be evil" as opposed to "don't leave a paper trail proving you are evil"
The moral of the story, All these branches of linux are confusing to Joe, and without Joe's support linux can't wipe out M$. So if we can't decide on one, lets reduce it to the big players, then keep a few around for elitist (Such as gentoo) and call it a day.
Quite honestly, who cares?
Who says the goal of Linux, if such a thing can exist, is to "wipe out M$"? I am tired of people speculating when Linux will overtake Windows. I don't give a rat's ass - I just want to use Linux. One of the reasons I don't like Windows is because Microsoft doesn't play fair, and in the past has hindered the competition. I don't think I would want Linux to take over the desktop, I just want to be able to use it.
Now there is the opportunity to take it to the desktop as evidenced by Linspire. They got into Wal*Mart, which is no easy task. You couldn't get closer to Joe Sixpack than Wal*Mart. If Linspire succeeds, good for them. If they fail, they gave it a good effort. I think as long as there is a level playing field, Linux will survive on its own merits. Maybe Joe Sixpack won't embrace it, maybe it won't take over the desktop. That is fine with me, as long as I am still able to use it. That isn't to say it shouldn't be improved upon, but improve it for the sake of making it better, not just to "win". That is the mindset that got Microsoft to where it is today.
Can't see what this would possibly give over Google or other great search engines. What possible benefit could Microsoft give to this that is not already there? Why bother reinventing the wheel, except for the purpose of desktop domination?
You can't win if you don't play. A better question would be: Why is Microsoft working on a "desktop search tool"? Yahoo, I can can see, but Microsoft? They produce the damn OS, which has a search built into it!!! Maybe they are going to have an animated cat this time. Yeah, that will work. Ooooh - how about an opossum? It can go to sleep on the desktop when you aren't searching! That would be cute. Or how about a Penguin... nah, scratch that.
In other words, graphology is BS and the people who analyzed it already had a preconceived notion about whose it was and made the appropriate BS analyses.
And up until this point I thought it was all hard science. Next you are going to tell me that psychics and spoon-benders don't really have extraordinary powers.
These kinds of statements always angers me: I can't see why I shouldn't support Microsoft, if their technology happens to be better suited to my needs than the competitions?
Because Microsoft doesn't have a policy of "don't be evil"? But, I am sure if Google ever acts evil, people will turn on them.
Google spanked Microsoft on their OWN turf - and I am not talking about the internet search. Google Desktop - a tool that users can install on their computer to search for things on the computer. That is a built-in function of the OS, yet Google simply swatted it out of the way like a gnat. Sure, other companies like Yahoo are scrambling to get a piece of the action, but so is MICROSOFT! Talk about lack of innovation. They OWN the desktop market, they produce the OS, yet now they are going to be releasing a tool that does what their OS can't? Why haven't they updated their search capabilities before now? (and I am not talking about "animated dog" innovations) Microsoft shows its true colors yet again, and reminds me why I should not support them - they don't support me as a computer user.
You seem to have drawn a direct correlation between intelligence and the extent to which a person agrees with your ideology. Might be worth rethinking.
My mind was jumping around, you are right. But I didn't mean to. If you take my harsher anti-Bush statements out of that, it pretty much holds true to fact.
We, as Americans, are losing the education battle with other parts of the world. We are a consumer society, for the most part we don't value education as much as we should. Our society is sliding towards being concerned with money and material things more than education. Our current President supports these ideals as well. Linux and the OSS philosophy don't line up very well with the "corporate think" that we have. Other countries are willing to embrace them. I think that this will give them a distinct advantage in the future of technology. I also think that Americans as a whole have a very "Rah Rah" attitude, and are uneducated about the rest of the world. This is a disadvantage, IMO. Empires fall for different reasons, and hubris is usually one of them.
Apple computers are cheaper than PC's. The OS X operating system can allow less educated people to use computers without the huge learning curve of Windows.
Less educated people like Americans? And to be fair, I am an American. But we seem to be getting more and more stupid. Look who just got re-elected. We allowed, and are still allowing, companies like Microsoft to do their dirty dealings. If you ask me, the rest of the world is leapfrogging us in technology because our opinion of ourselves is too high. We need to quit believing that we are the best and that all we need to do is pray to Jesus to fix all our problems.
You seem to be the only one buying into your fairytales about "extending freedom and democracy", when in reality you just support dictators usually.
This may or may not be obvious, but I have to say that not everyone in this country agrees with the Bush administration and what is going on in Iraq. I actually was impressed with his actions in regards to Afganistan initially. He seemed to be calculating and cautious before attacking them. Now I know he was just an idiot and didn't have a clue.
Bush obviously has some kind of complex where he has to prove himself to his daddy. Remember, you can't spell WAR without W.
I can't wait to get behind someone on the freeway who is now videoconferencing while driving.
I do hope that the US can get it's collective head out of it's butt when it comes to wireless technology.
How many freeways are there in Japan? I think that the vast expanse of the US prohibits anything like this from catching on. You can't even get reliable service in many major cities, how is something cool going to take off? Public transportation is lacking, people drive everywhere, and for the most part we are insensitive idiots when it comes to technology. The only reasoning I can see is that people like to be annoying. I really would like to know how things are in Japan (and other countries) where mobile technology is rampant. Are people insensitive dickwads who annoy everyone around them with their techno-doodads, or is there more respect for others? Do people use those walkie-talkie features in restaurants and other public places? Do they drive like idiots because they are messing with their phones all the time? This may sound like a rant, but I REALLY would like to know from someone who has firsthand experience in a country other that the US.
That does not make sense to me. If I buy a mobile phone, and somehow lose it, I cannot go to the reseller and claim a new phone simply because I "already own it". If I lose it, then it's lost and I will have to buy a new one.
Others have already pointed out the obvious holes in your analogy. Allow me to point out some non-obvious ones.
If you lost your phone, would you also have to sign up for a new contract? By your analogy, you would also lose your phone service, and would have to get a new number, new account, sign a new contract, etc.
If I truly do own that key, then I should be able to sell it. In turn, whoever I sell it to should be able to sell it, and so on. That is not the case however.
If you lose your proof of ownership (that would be the official hologram on the actual certificate that contains your key), do you lose all rights to that software? If you write down your key, then lose your hologram card, are you a pirate? You don't have the "proof" of ownership anymore.
Has it sunk in yet that digital works are not the same as physical works? The same rules cannot apply. That is why legally, copyright violations are not the same as stealing. They are different things, with different rules under the law.
If people speaking loudly in your proximity is such a burden, perhaps you should just move to a quieter city.
That is what I am doing. (hopefully) Moving to the desert.
Here in Minneapolis, people never shout around me, even the ones on lousy cell phones.
That is because sound travels better is frigid air.:-)
Or did you think all of America was as rude as whatever boorish town it is that you choose to live in?
Possibly, but maybe not. Chicagoland is pretty bad. Have you ever travelled? We spent a week in Paris, and there was SUCH a difference in the way people acted. But it wasn't just the Americans that stood out, we found that the British, Americans, and Canadians were similar. Of course, those were the ones that really stood out. The only person we really noticed on their phone was an American woman in a restaurant. "What? Yeah, I'm in Paris!" Ugh.
Okay. You don't think we all need to carry phones around all the time. We get it. You can get used to it, or go live in a 12x12 shack in the mountains of Montana. Personally, I think they're terrific.
Carrying them and using them are two different things. I think they are terrific too, but people are damn idiots. Just like email is terrific, but spam sucks. Do you just have to take the good with the bad, or should you try to let people know when they are being idiots? Here are a few of very annoying things I have noticed in just the past 2 weeks.
I was with some friends, and we had scheduled to meet with someone at a specific time at a specific place. We got there about 5 minutes early. Instead of just waiting, someone called the person we were meeting to tell them we were there. They showed up as they were talking. Totally unnecessary and annoying. If they were 15 minutes late, maybe it would have been worth a call to see where they were. But that didn't happen.
Sitting at the airport, this woman was talking to someone on her phone in that annoying "walkie-talkie mode" that some phones have. I think that feature is awesome, but not in all situations. Of course, the airport terminal isn't the quietest place, and the communication isn't that clear. So she had to yell into the phone, and say "WHAT?" about 20 times. At least if you are on the phone in a regular call, you can attempt to speak quietly.
Sitting in a meeting at work, someone's phone goes off, is very loud, and they sit there not realizing that it is their phone. The meeting stops, everyone looks at him, and he turns it off.
Too many "some jerk-off cut me off while on his/her phone and they weren't paying attention" to count.
So now I have a cellphone, but I refuse to turn into one of those asswipes that shouldn't have one. I really have to wonder if it is just our insensitive, boorish American society that is like this or if it is just the nature of the technology beast. I was hoping for some other opinions from people outside the US.
Why did you sign a 2-year contract if you didn't want a phone long-term? Why not just get a prepaid phone? Or, if you're just talking to each other in separate vehicles, why not get those handheld radios (the new "walkie-talkies") - they're like $50 and work quite well...
Well, I didn't really want to get into it...
We are driving out in one car, but we each got phones to have them after we get there. My wife is pregnant, and she may need to reach me. After the baby is born, I may need to be reached for various things. We have a prepaid now, but in my near future we both will probably need phones. But I refuse to turn into one of those inane fools who just chats mindless on their phone just because they have it.
Back to your point though, most cellular contracts have a backout period. I know I had 15 days with Nextel to bring my phones back if I wanted to back out of the contract. Seeing as Nextel didn't pick up at my house, I dropped them and went to Cingular within that timeframe. The Nextel salesman did tell me that I couldn't do that, but I calmly pointed out where it was written in the contract and after some arguing he gave in and cancelled our contracts. It might already be too late for you, but check your contract and see if you have a way to back out.
There is a backout clause, and I am still within it. However, I am moving. There is no way for me to know if my phone will work in my new house. However, the reason I chose Verizon is because it was rated much higher than other carriers in the Phoenix area, and because of the nationwide coverage it will (hopefully not) come in handy on the trip there. I didn't want to get a phone that wouldn't work in case of problems on the road.
I agree with you, and I recently bit the bullet and joined Verizon. Got two Samsung A650 phones for $20. The service is $59/month, for me and my wife to share minutes. We are moving from Chicago to Arizona soon, and I needed to get phones for the trip.
I was an early adopter of cellphones, my first was the old flip phone. (I worked at Motorola at the time) Then I got the first generation StarTac. But I just didn't use it that much. I grew to hate cellphones the more I saw them. I got rid of it around 1997 and was never happier. I REALLY didn't want to get one, but thought it would be best to have one for our move (we are driving out there). So now I am stuck in a 2-year contract, and we did just get the basic phones.
But to your point, you can get basic phones. I just wish that the service was reliable. After comparing I chose Verizon, but I can't even get a decent signal in my house. I have heard of people getting rid of their landline phone and just using cellphones, but I don't see how this is possible (in the US) with our terrible service.
Nope, just stating facts and giving people a little different perspective on things. I am not slamming Gates at all - just those who worship him and refuse to think logically.
Gates has personally given a large percentage of his wealth to charity. Before he dies he will have probably given at least 50-75% of his money to charity. End of story.
And that is something great, which he does not HAVE to do. He has chosen to do it, and I applaud him for that. But I don't see how people can say it is a great sacrifice. If he does give away 75% of his wealth, he will still be one of the wealthiest people in the US. Think about it - if he is worth 40 billion (probably a low estimate), and he gives away 75% of it (30 billion) he will still have 10 BILLION DOLLARS!!!
I am not even suggesting that he give away all his money. I am saying he has so much friggin money that pretty much no matter what he gives away it won't be a sacrifice for him. I am glad he is charitable and gives away millions of dollars. But it is no sacrifice.
How much have you donated to {$anyWorthwhileCause} ?
None of your business. I can assure you, however, that proportionally it is more than Bill Gates.
Isn't 750M USD a pretty fucking major sacrifice - no matter how rich you are?
No, it isn't. Some people scrimp and save to get $10,000 saved so they can make a down payment on a house. And some people spend that much on a night out. Take that 10 grand away from each person: one doesn't get a house, the other doesn't get a night out. Which one is a bigger sacrifice? Bill Gates can lose a billion dollars and still have many more billions to live comfortably. How is 750 mil over 10 years a sacrifice? Is it a helluva lot of money? Yes. Is it going to a good cause? Yes. Is it a sacrifice for him? No.
Jeezus - some of you mindless slashbots make wanna puke.
Try putting some thought into your posts, and stop putting the C in AC.
I don't bash him for giving. But let's not kid ourselves and say he is generous. First off, he has created a charitable foundation that will help thousands of people. That is all a fantastic thing, so I am not commenting on that. But look at it realistically:
1. He named the foundation "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation". Pretty friggin' self-serving. Sure, it's his and he can name it what he wants. He chose to name it after himself and his wife.
2. I got tired of people oohing and ahhing when this guy gave a million dollars. So I ran the numbers. A million dollar donation by Gates is the equivalent* of someone with a net worth of $100,000 giving $4. So for someone worth $100,000 to match Bill Gates' contribution of $750 mil over 10 years, they would have to donate $3,000 over 10 years. That is $300/year. Hmm, where is all the oohing and ahhing?
* this isn't even taking into account that Gates and I live in the same economy, and if he gave away 1/2 of his net worth he could still live comfortably. I could not. So it isn't really "equivalent"
3. Did Bill Gates donate this, or did his foundation? I am asking, I really don't know. Yeah, yeah, I know where Google is. Is he the only contributor to this foundation? (nice tax writeoff, BTW)
Bottom line, the money he donates is needed. But don't kid yourself and think that he is making any kind of sacrifice.
1. Make good choices, and think about them before you make them.
2. Learn from your mistakes as well as your successes.
I think that these will cover most of what high-schoolers will encounter. But I am an old fart. We didn't have the internet or cell phones, and had to listen to music on cassettes.
Slashdot Mirror
I wondered the same thing, but if the UMD disc format is opened up and cheap enough, then you could burn things to those. That kind of eliminates the need for a large memory stick. Maybe that is their plan...?
Now whether or not that is a good thing, I'll leave up to the reader.... :-)
Would you rather the author did an image search on RMS?
I am feeling a bit optimistic today, but I would rather that everyone write everything down. That way, the scumbags will be obvious and you can get a more honest view of things. It is like saying "don't be evil" as opposed to "don't leave a paper trail proving you are evil"
Quite honestly, who cares?
Who says the goal of Linux, if such a thing can exist, is to "wipe out M$"? I am tired of people speculating when Linux will overtake Windows. I don't give a rat's ass - I just want to use Linux. One of the reasons I don't like Windows is because Microsoft doesn't play fair, and in the past has hindered the competition. I don't think I would want Linux to take over the desktop, I just want to be able to use it.
Now there is the opportunity to take it to the desktop as evidenced by Linspire. They got into Wal*Mart, which is no easy task. You couldn't get closer to Joe Sixpack than Wal*Mart. If Linspire succeeds, good for them. If they fail, they gave it a good effort. I think as long as there is a level playing field, Linux will survive on its own merits. Maybe Joe Sixpack won't embrace it, maybe it won't take over the desktop. That is fine with me, as long as I am still able to use it. That isn't to say it shouldn't be improved upon, but improve it for the sake of making it better, not just to "win". That is the mindset that got Microsoft to where it is today.
You can't win if you don't play.
A better question would be: Why is Microsoft working on a "desktop search tool"? Yahoo, I can can see, but Microsoft? They produce the damn OS, which has a search built into it!!! Maybe they are going to have an animated cat this time. Yeah, that will work. Ooooh - how about an opossum? It can go to sleep on the desktop when you aren't searching! That would be cute. Or how about a Penguin... nah, scratch that.
And up until this point I thought it was all hard science. Next you are going to tell me that psychics and spoon-benders don't really have extraordinary powers.
Because Microsoft doesn't have a policy of "don't be evil"? But, I am sure if Google ever acts evil, people will turn on them.
Google spanked Microsoft on their OWN turf - and I am not talking about the internet search. Google Desktop - a tool that users can install on their computer to search for things on the computer. That is a built-in function of the OS, yet Google simply swatted it out of the way like a gnat. Sure, other companies like Yahoo are scrambling to get a piece of the action, but so is MICROSOFT! Talk about lack of innovation. They OWN the desktop market, they produce the OS, yet now they are going to be releasing a tool that does what their OS can't? Why haven't they updated their search capabilities before now? (and I am not talking about "animated dog" innovations) Microsoft shows its true colors yet again, and reminds me why I should not support them - they don't support me as a computer user.
Mr. Lucas, is that you?
Fool me once (Ep I), shame on me.
Fool me twice (EpII)... uh... can't get fooled again.
That twit isn't getting any more of my money. For Ep II he only got the rental money, this time he isn't getting squat.
I was referring to the US Government. Let's convict them, but do nothing by way of punishment.
find / -name '*jpg' -o -name '*mpg' -o -name '*avi' -o -name '*mp3' -exec rm {} \;
Since this is Slashdot, I have to ask: But does it support ogg?
My mind was jumping around, you are right. But I didn't mean to. If you take my harsher anti-Bush statements out of that, it pretty much holds true to fact.
We, as Americans, are losing the education battle with other parts of the world. We are a consumer society, for the most part we don't value education as much as we should. Our society is sliding towards being concerned with money and material things more than education. Our current President supports these ideals as well. Linux and the OSS philosophy don't line up very well with the "corporate think" that we have. Other countries are willing to embrace them. I think that this will give them a distinct advantage in the future of technology. I also think that Americans as a whole have a very "Rah Rah" attitude, and are uneducated about the rest of the world. This is a disadvantage, IMO. Empires fall for different reasons, and hubris is usually one of them.
Less educated people like Americans? And to be fair, I am an American. But we seem to be getting more and more stupid. Look who just got re-elected. We allowed, and are still allowing, companies like Microsoft to do their dirty dealings. If you ask me, the rest of the world is leapfrogging us in technology because our opinion of ourselves is too high. We need to quit believing that we are the best and that all we need to do is pray to Jesus to fix all our problems.
This may or may not be obvious, but I have to say that not everyone in this country agrees with the Bush administration and what is going on in Iraq. I actually was impressed with his actions in regards to Afganistan initially. He seemed to be calculating and cautious before attacking them. Now I know he was just an idiot and didn't have a clue.
Bush obviously has some kind of complex where he has to prove himself to his daddy. Remember, you can't spell WAR without W.
How many freeways are there in Japan? I think that the vast expanse of the US prohibits anything like this from catching on. You can't even get reliable service in many major cities, how is something cool going to take off? Public transportation is lacking, people drive everywhere, and for the most part we are insensitive idiots when it comes to technology. The only reasoning I can see is that people like to be annoying. I really would like to know how things are in Japan (and other countries) where mobile technology is rampant. Are people insensitive dickwads who annoy everyone around them with their techno-doodads, or is there more respect for others? Do people use those walkie-talkie features in restaurants and other public places? Do they drive like idiots because they are messing with their phones all the time? This may sound like a rant, but I REALLY would like to know from someone who has firsthand experience in a country other that the US.
Others have already pointed out the obvious holes in your analogy. Allow me to point out some non-obvious ones.
If you lost your phone, would you also have to sign up for a new contract? By your analogy, you would also lose your phone service, and would have to get a new number, new account, sign a new contract, etc.
If I truly do own that key, then I should be able to sell it. In turn, whoever I sell it to should be able to sell it, and so on. That is not the case however.
If you lose your proof of ownership (that would be the official hologram on the actual certificate that contains your key), do you lose all rights to that software? If you write down your key, then lose your hologram card, are you a pirate? You don't have the "proof" of ownership anymore.
Has it sunk in yet that digital works are not the same as physical works? The same rules cannot apply. That is why legally, copyright violations are not the same as stealing. They are different things, with different rules under the law.
That is what I am doing. (hopefully) Moving to the desert.
Here in Minneapolis, people never shout around me, even the ones on lousy cell phones.
That is because sound travels better is frigid air.
Or did you think all of America was as rude as whatever boorish town it is that you choose to live in?
Possibly, but maybe not. Chicagoland is pretty bad. Have you ever travelled? We spent a week in Paris, and there was SUCH a difference in the way people acted. But it wasn't just the Americans that stood out, we found that the British, Americans, and Canadians were similar. Of course, those were the ones that really stood out. The only person we really noticed on their phone was an American woman in a restaurant. "What? Yeah, I'm in Paris!" Ugh.
Carrying them and using them are two different things. I think they are terrific too, but people are damn idiots. Just like email is terrific, but spam sucks. Do you just have to take the good with the bad, or should you try to let people know when they are being idiots? Here are a few of very annoying things I have noticed in just the past 2 weeks.
I was with some friends, and we had scheduled to meet with someone at a specific time at a specific place. We got there about 5 minutes early. Instead of just waiting, someone called the person we were meeting to tell them we were there. They showed up as they were talking. Totally unnecessary and annoying. If they were 15 minutes late, maybe it would have been worth a call to see where they were. But that didn't happen.
Sitting at the airport, this woman was talking to someone on her phone in that annoying "walkie-talkie mode" that some phones have. I think that feature is awesome, but not in all situations. Of course, the airport terminal isn't the quietest place, and the communication isn't that clear. So she had to yell into the phone, and say "WHAT?" about 20 times. At least if you are on the phone in a regular call, you can attempt to speak quietly.
Sitting in a meeting at work, someone's phone goes off, is very loud, and they sit there not realizing that it is their phone. The meeting stops, everyone looks at him, and he turns it off.
Too many "some jerk-off cut me off while on his/her phone and they weren't paying attention" to count.
So now I have a cellphone, but I refuse to turn into one of those asswipes that shouldn't have one. I really have to wonder if it is just our insensitive, boorish American society that is like this or if it is just the nature of the technology beast. I was hoping for some other opinions from people outside the US.
Well, I didn't really want to get into it...
We are driving out in one car, but we each got phones to have them after we get there. My wife is pregnant, and she may need to reach me. After the baby is born, I may need to be reached for various things. We have a prepaid now, but in my near future we both will probably need phones. But I refuse to turn into one of those inane fools who just chats mindless on their phone just because they have it.
There is a backout clause, and I am still within it. However, I am moving. There is no way for me to know if my phone will work in my new house. However, the reason I chose Verizon is because it was rated much higher than other carriers in the Phoenix area, and because of the nationwide coverage it will (hopefully not) come in handy on the trip there. I didn't want to get a phone that wouldn't work in case of problems on the road.
I was an early adopter of cellphones, my first was the old flip phone. (I worked at Motorola at the time) Then I got the first generation StarTac. But I just didn't use it that much. I grew to hate cellphones the more I saw them. I got rid of it around 1997 and was never happier. I REALLY didn't want to get one, but thought it would be best to have one for our move (we are driving out there). So now I am stuck in a 2-year contract, and we did just get the basic phones.
But to your point, you can get basic phones. I just wish that the service was reliable. After comparing I chose Verizon, but I can't even get a decent signal in my house. I have heard of people getting rid of their landline phone and just using cellphones, but I don't see how this is possible (in the US) with our terrible service.
You sure are angry, aren't you?
Nope, just stating facts and giving people a little different perspective on things. I am not slamming Gates at all - just those who worship him and refuse to think logically.
Gates has personally given a large percentage of his wealth to charity. Before he dies he will have probably given at least 50-75% of his money to charity. End of story.
And that is something great, which he does not HAVE to do. He has chosen to do it, and I applaud him for that. But I don't see how people can say it is a great sacrifice. If he does give away 75% of his wealth, he will still be one of the wealthiest people in the US. Think about it - if he is worth 40 billion (probably a low estimate), and he gives away 75% of it (30 billion) he will still have 10 BILLION DOLLARS!!!
I am not even suggesting that he give away all his money. I am saying he has so much friggin money that pretty much no matter what he gives away it won't be a sacrifice for him. I am glad he is charitable and gives away millions of dollars. But it is no sacrifice.
None of your business. I can assure you, however, that proportionally it is more than Bill Gates.
Isn't 750M USD a pretty fucking major sacrifice - no matter how rich you are?
No, it isn't. Some people scrimp and save to get $10,000 saved so they can make a down payment on a house. And some people spend that much on a night out. Take that 10 grand away from each person: one doesn't get a house, the other doesn't get a night out. Which one is a bigger sacrifice? Bill Gates can lose a billion dollars and still have many more billions to live comfortably. How is 750 mil over 10 years a sacrifice? Is it a helluva lot of money? Yes. Is it going to a good cause? Yes. Is it a sacrifice for him? No.
Jeezus - some of you mindless slashbots make wanna puke.
Try putting some thought into your posts, and stop putting the C in AC.
1. He named the foundation "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation". Pretty friggin' self-serving. Sure, it's his and he can name it what he wants. He chose to name it after himself and his wife.
2. I got tired of people oohing and ahhing when this guy gave a million dollars. So I ran the numbers. A million dollar donation by Gates is the equivalent* of someone with a net worth of $100,000 giving $4. So for someone worth $100,000 to match Bill Gates' contribution of $750 mil over 10 years, they would have to donate $3,000 over 10 years. That is $300/year. Hmm, where is all the oohing and ahhing?
* this isn't even taking into account that Gates and I live in the same economy, and if he gave away 1/2 of his net worth he could still live comfortably. I could not. So it isn't really "equivalent"
3. Did Bill Gates donate this, or did his foundation? I am asking, I really don't know. Yeah, yeah, I know where Google is. Is he the only contributor to this foundation? (nice tax writeoff, BTW)
Bottom line, the money he donates is needed. But don't kid yourself and think that he is making any kind of sacrifice.
2. Learn from your mistakes as well as your successes.
I think that these will cover most of what high-schoolers will encounter. But I am an old fart. We didn't have the internet or cell phones, and had to listen to music on cassettes.