Bill Gates, Hero • Hacker News Board

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#151

Post by arohner » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:07 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #41

Gibbon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the wealthy I know are not against charity or giving away their wealth.. they are against an inefficient government deciding on how that should be accomplished.

Surely you're not talking to the same wealthy that I've been. What do you think will be the repsonse to, say, a 50% tax rate on the wealthy that they are able to distribute as they see fit (with strict controls such that it doesn't end up back in their own hands, or their family's)? Yeah, good luck with that. I see the "but government is inefficient" argument a lot - it would have some merit, if there's even the slig…

You're forgetting that people can have principled objections to the role of the federal government.

I'm not rich, and I'm grumpy about what my 20% federal taxes are going to. The financial and GM bailouts, "homeland security", ag subsidies, congressional pork, federal taxes to pay for local schools, "war on terror", "war on drugs".

If the gov't was efficient in the things it did, and did the things I believe it should, I wouldn't complain about my taxes at all. But the combination of being inefficient and misguided is one of the largest wastes of human productivity ever devised.

This is a bigger waste than building the pyramids by hand.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#152

Post by mattmaroon » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:14 PM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #119

mattmaroon wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your comments its clear that you're zealously anti-capitalist and, as a result, anti-Microsoft, so you're simply not applying logic. Bill Gates did his legal duty. When you run a corporation you have a fiduciary responsibility to it. He would be doing something immoral if he didn't do what was best for Microsoft. The theory behind free market capitalism is that enough companies doing the same will average out to…

Bill Gates did his legal duty. When you run a corporation you have a fiduciary responsibility to it. He would be doing something immoral if he didn't do what was best for Microsoft. Interesting. In the 1970s, ITT's CEO Hal Geneen gave $700,000 to Jorge Alessandri to help him beat Salvadore Allende in the Chilean Presidential Election, correctly believing that ITT's financial interests were best served by defeating Al…

Well, there's a line for sure. If Microsoft has done anything like funding coups it's not in the standard litany of complaints. It's more like "they saw Netscape and ran it out of business by building their own browser" or "they ate all of Apple's market share". That's not evil, it's exercising fiduciary duty. Same with vendor lock-in. Unless I'm just not understanding the argument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft) it's quite a ways off of hiring CIA hit men.

I don't disagree with you about the restraints on the free market, and us technically not being one. Microsoft probably did cross some lines there, and they paid for it dearly. I just don't think that's what the argument is really about, for if it were, people wouldn't be so religious about it. You can detect a zeal when words like "ruined lives" come into the argument and realize that the sentiment at some point long ago was divorced from logic.

By best results I mean better than the results of any other economic system.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#153

Post by kmfrk » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:18 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #117

sutro wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe this is getting upvotes. Destroyed lives? Please. Get some perspective. And check your history. The guy bootstrapped Microsoft using nothing but sweat equity -- no investment, no inheritance -- working for years in very meager circumstances in New Mexico before getting some traction and moving to Washington. In short he lived the dream that many of us aspire to, and has probably helped his fellow man…

> and has probably helped his fellow man more than any single individual on the planet. I was with you until that point. Gates didn't help anyone before helping himself. It's easy to be altruistic, to "do the right thing" with a billion dollars in the bank. I know a lot of businessmen that would not consider entering the kind of shady plans he devised to further Microsoft's (and his own) interests. Those are the real…

I think we should do away with calling Gates's actions altruistic. What (significant) does he have to lose, or merely risk, by doing what he does?

It's a good thing, but I don't think it's deserving of altruism.

But being less than altruistic can still be very laudable.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#154

Post by mattmaroon » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:21 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #64

lionhearted wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's not forget, Bill Gates was handed a 0th birthday gift of $1 million from his grandfather, the keys to his private middle school computer (the same one Stanford had), and a free ticket to do business with IBM because his mother already knew its chairman. The rest of your post is very insightful, but this part above strikes me as petty - I was low born myself, was given almost nothing except birth in the USA in…

I think his point is that Gates was given some very generous gifts and, with them, "he fucked anyone who got in his way", "usually to the detriment of the industry".

Another way to look at it is that Gates used his very generous gifts to give 100s of thousands of people jobs, make PCs affordable for small businesses and common people, then went on to give away enough to charity to become the greatest philanthropist in history.

Meanwhile the people who vilify him worship Steve Jobs, who has broken plenty of laws himself (backdating is fraud), done most of the things that have inspired such loathing when Microsoft did them (and only didn't do the rest because he didn't have the necessary market share) and by all accounts hoards his money along with black mock turtlenecks. It's rather hypocritical to type about how evil Microsoft is on your Macbook Pro.

You see what you want to see I suppose.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#155

Post by sutro » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:43 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #117

sutro wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe this is getting upvotes. Destroyed lives? Please. Get some perspective. And check your history. The guy bootstrapped Microsoft using nothing but sweat equity -- no investment, no inheritance -- working for years in very meager circumstances in New Mexico before getting some traction and moving to Washington. In short he lived the dream that many of us aspire to, and has probably helped his fellow man…

> and has probably helped his fellow man more than any single individual on the planet. I was with you until that point. Gates didn't help anyone before helping himself. It's easy to be altruistic, to "do the right thing" with a billion dollars in the bank. I know a lot of businessmen that would not consider entering the kind of shady plans he devised to further Microsoft's (and his own) interests. Those are the real…

No, what's easy is to sit here from our current vantage point and call what he did easy. So what if he had an upper-middle-class family willing to put him through college. He walked away from that when he dropped out of Harvard and lit out for the middle of nowhere with no significant funds or support system to bootstrap a "software company" before such a thing even existed. He wasn't given his fortune, he built it himself, painstakingly, with decades of hard work and sacrifice. And because he didn't always play nice with competitors you and the other holier-and-smarter-than-thou HN commenters want to call his incredible accomplishments "easy." Whatever. He has achieved more, not just as a philanthropist, but as a hacker-entrepreneur, than anyone on this thread ever will.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#156

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:44 PM UTC

kmfrk wrote: post #153

rbanffy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and has probably helped his fellow man more than any single individual on the planet. I was with you until that point. Gates didn't help anyone before helping himself. It's easy to be altruistic, to "do the right thing" with a billion dollars in the bank. I know a lot of businessmen that would not consider entering the kind of shady plans he devised to further Microsoft's (and his own) interests. Those are the real…

I think we should do away with calling Gates's actions altruistic. What (significant) does he have to lose, or merely risk, by doing what he does? It's a good thing, but I don't think it's deserving of altruism. But being less than altruistic can still be very laudable.

I am not against Gates giving nearly all of his money away to charity. I am only against considering this very atypical episode represents what Gates is.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#157

Post by raganwald » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:47 PM UTC

mattmaroon wrote: post #152

raganwald wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bill Gates did his legal duty. When you run a corporation you have a fiduciary responsibility to it. He would be doing something immoral if he didn't do what was best for Microsoft. Interesting. In the 1970s, ITT's CEO Hal Geneen gave $700,000 to Jorge Alessandri to help him beat Salvadore Allende in the Chilean Presidential Election, correctly believing that ITT's financial interests were best served by defeating Al…

Well, there's a line for sure. If Microsoft has done anything like funding coups it's not in the standard litany of complaints. It's more like "they saw Netscape and ran it out of business by building their own browser" or "they ate all of Apple's market share". That's not evil, it's exercising fiduciary duty. Same with vendor lock-in. Unless I'm just not understanding the argument ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crit…

the standard litany of complaints

That phrase is sufficient to earn an upmod all on its own. Reading your reply, I immediately thought of people huddled in a church listening to the Vicar preach against Microsoft's evil. But it isn't a passionate speech full of fire and brimstone, it's a standard reading that he has given so many times, his voice is now a monotone and the parishioners know every word by heart.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#158

Post by rbanffy » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:47 PM UTC

mattmaroon wrote: post #154

rbanffy wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think his point is that Gates was given some very generous gifts and, with them, "he fucked anyone who got in his way", "usually to the detriment of the industry".

Another way to look at it is that Gates used his very generous gifts to give 100s of thousands of people jobs, make PCs affordable for small businesses and common people, then went on to give away enough to charity to become the greatest philanthropist in history. Meanwhile the people who vilify him worship Steve Jobs, who has broken plenty of laws himself (backdating is fraud), done most of the things that have insp…

> give 100s of thousands of people jobs

Would have jobs with or without Gates

> make PCs affordable for small businesses and common people

Like I said before, Jobs and Wozniak did that, Jack Tramiel did that (even better than J&W).

> then went on to give away enough to charity to become the greatest philanthropist in history

He is the richest man in history.

> the people who vilify him worship Steve Jobs

False dichotomy alert! Not the case here. Jobs is flawed too.

> done most of the things that have inspired such loathing when Microsoft did them

Until now Apple is not guilty of monopoly abuse. Nothing even close to what Comes vs. Microsoft shows.

> how evil Microsoft is on your Macbook Pro

I use a Dell running Linux. At home I use an Acer. Running Linux too.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#159

Post by potatolicious » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 10:49 PM UTC

d2viant wrote: post #103

potatolicious wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you're not talking to the same wealthy that I've been. What do you think will be the repsonse to, say, a 50% tax rate on the wealthy that they are able to distribute as they see fit (with strict controls such that it doesn't end up back in their own hands, or their family's)? Yeah, good luck with that. I see the "but government is inefficient" argument a lot - it would have some merit, if there's even the slig…

Why are you implying that wanting to keep your wealth is wrong?

I'm not ;) It seems that many wealthy people are, though.

The point is, the whole "big, inefficient government" argument, IMHO, is more often used in place of simply "I want to keep more of my wealth", and while a valid argument in theory, in practice its confused usage has caused it to lose credibility.

The fact that so many people are unwilling to just come out and say "I want to keep my wealth", and instead try to divert the debate to some other tenuously-related argument shows that they themselves believe that wanting to keep your wealth is wrong.

Personally, I've yet to make my mind up in this regard. I would like to keep my wealth, but the myriad of things that tax money supports I find necessary. Personally I see nothing wrong with wanting to keep more of your wealth, but the fact that many rich people feel such guilt about it, and society's perception of it, seems to imply that we've already made a judgment, collectively, about this issue.

Re: Bill Gates, Hero

#160

Post by amalcon » Wed, Sep 15, 2010, 11:10 PM UTC

mattmaroon wrote: post #95

edw519 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...but this part above strikes me as petty... Sorry if it came across that way; that was not my intent. Everyone's starting point is relative. No one ever gave me the gifts that Bill Gates got. But then again, I've had gifts that 99% of everyone who ever lived couldn't imagine. With those gifts comes responsibility. Whenever I have an opportunity to use my gifts to do good things, I think of how proud those who made…

From your comments its clear that you're zealously anti-capitalist and, as a result, anti-Microsoft, so you're simply not applying logic. Bill Gates did his legal duty. When you run a corporation you have a fiduciary responsibility to it. He would be doing something immoral if he didn't do what was best for Microsoft. The theory behind free market capitalism is that enough companies doing the same will average out to…

I don't see how it's "zealously anti-capitalist" to suggest that people with advantages should use them in a way that enlarges the pie, rather than primarily working to redirect part of it to oneself. The theory behind free market capitalism is that the best way to enlarge your portion of the pie tends to align with the best way to enlarge the whole pie, so it's actually a pro-capitalist suggestion.

Whether or not Bill Gates did this is another question entirely.