Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 344 posts

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#31

Post by melling »

SEJeff wrote: post #22
onewaystreet wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect it would have been much better for them to simply partner with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Based on what? The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has plenty of money. Better for the Zuckerbergs to focus on other areas.

Based on the Gates foundation's existing accomplishments on eradicating diseases, of which Malaria and Polio are shining examples. While we've had Polio vaccines and Malaria pills for years in much of the western world, much of the poorer parts of the world aren't so lucky. So instead of duplicating something that already exists and works well , partner with them and get it done faster together. References: http://ww…

They aren't duplicate efforts. You keep missing that point.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#32

Post by jonknee »

nenadg wrote: post #15
dewitt wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strange reaction. Hasn't the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation been one of the most successful philanthropic organizations of all time? I thought they've saved millions of lives fighting malaria alone? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundat...

There is literally nothing on that article about how many lives their initiative saved. Just standard corporate propaganda about how much they spent on this and that. If I've spent 80 millions on Vaccines does that mean that I've saved hundreds of lives? No. I don't want to be a truther here, nor I'll paste links that would confirm partial statement wrapped inside my question, but it would be great if one could be op…

> There is literally nothing on that article about how many lives their initiative saved.

Well it's impossible to know exactly, but with statistics we can estimate that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has saved millions of lives. 7 million is the current estimate for just the vaccination program:

http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/infographic-...

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#33

Post by _RPM »

limeyy wrote: post #24

I wonder why, all these billionaires first want to make billions, and then do philanthropy. How about making their services/business/products more affordable with which they are making all this money with in the first place? For example: MS Office used to cost 4-500 euro for the average home user a few years ago. That was ridiculous. If you have a small shop and 2000 Facebook page likes, Facebook rips you off each ti…

The Government gives incentives for charity donations via tax benefits.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#34

Post by nenadg »

dewitt wrote: post #7
nenadg wrote: post #4

Oh that's just great, another billionaire philanthropist curing all diseases. Like Gates did. I don't know whether their passion loses momentum inside 'initiative/fund' or it was doomed to be opposite of it's cause from the start?

That's a strange reaction. Hasn't the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation been one of the most successful philanthropic organizations of all time? I thought they've saved millions of lives fighting malaria alone? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundat...

Also, Polio was near extinction before Gates jumped in and collected the ovations for finishing job.

http://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ourworl...

That's great what they've done, but saying they've eradicated polio is brutal exaggeration.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#35

Post by harryh »

limeyy wrote: post #24

I wonder why, all these billionaires first want to make billions, and then do philanthropy. How about making their services/business/products more affordable with which they are making all this money with in the first place? For example: MS Office used to cost 4-500 euro for the average home user a few years ago. That was ridiculous. If you have a small shop and 2000 Facebook page likes, Facebook rips you off each ti…

You'd really rather have a cheaper MS Office than eradicate polio from the world?

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#36

Post by tschellenbach »

This is great. Great achievements as a startup founder and now philanthropy.

For those comparing this to pharma companies. Pharma companies invest in drugs that they can make money with. It sounds as though this $3 billion is aiming at more general research and making it publicly available.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#37

Post by mliker »

limeyy wrote: post #24

I wonder why, all these billionaires first want to make billions, and then do philanthropy. How about making their services/business/products more affordable with which they are making all this money with in the first place? For example: MS Office used to cost 4-500 euro for the average home user a few years ago. That was ridiculous. If you have a small shop and 2000 Facebook page likes, Facebook rips you off each ti…

You wonder why, yet these billionaires aren't wondering, they're doing.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#38

Post by jblow »

nenadg wrote: post #26
stanleydrew wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your opinion is probably interesting and potentially valid, but your tone in the original comment is limiting your ability to communicate effectively. Less sarcasm would serve you well.

sarcasm is better part of life, it's not limiting it's enriching :) I fail to understand why people hate it?

It's the sarcasm tied to apparent lack of desire to discover or communicate actual information.

There are entire organizations devoted to assessing the effectiveness of various kinds of charity and measuring how many lives they save (e.g. http://www.givewell.org/ and https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/), and their reports can be found within 20 seconds of googling, less time than it took for you to type your based-on-no-actual-information sarcastic judgement.

Sarcasm plus knowledge would be fine.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#39

Post by limeyy »

harryh wrote: post #35
limeyy wrote: post #24

I wonder why, all these billionaires first want to make billions, and then do philanthropy. How about making their services/business/products more affordable with which they are making all this money with in the first place? For example: MS Office used to cost 4-500 euro for the average home user a few years ago. That was ridiculous. If you have a small shop and 2000 Facebook page likes, Facebook rips you off each ti…

You'd really rather have a cheaper MS Office than eradicate polio from the world?

It's not that he made Office overpriced, just to eradicate polio.

Re: Zuckerberg and Chan aim to tackle all disease by 2100

#40

Post by yannyu »

limeyy wrote: post #24

I wonder why, all these billionaires first want to make billions, and then do philanthropy. How about making their services/business/products more affordable with which they are making all this money with in the first place? For example: MS Office used to cost 4-500 euro for the average home user a few years ago. That was ridiculous. If you have a small shop and 2000 Facebook page likes, Facebook rips you off each ti…

Mis-pricing your offerings, high or low, can ruin your chances in a market. There shouldn't be any particular connection between a company's pricing strategy and philanthropy, especially for a company selling something that isn't essential for people to live.
Post reply on HN