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

An interview with Bill Gates

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 171 posts

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#71

Post by ivanca »

Xylakant wrote: post #45
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #9

He's right. Poverty, disease and basic things like that are things about _survival_, the internet is not. But mainly, the title is provocative and misleading. The article clearly states, he was asked a leading question "asked whether giving the planet an internet connection is more important than finding a vaccination for malaria", and he answered. The title makes it seem like he went out of his way to make the compa…

> He's right. Poverty, disease and basic things like that are things about _survival_, the internet is not. I'd say he's at least partially wrong. Diseases are often cause by lack of knowledge and education, outburst can often be contained with good means of communication. I know people doing projects that use the internet (or cellphone text messages) to allow remote villages to better manage the available health res…

It's an egg-and-chicken problem then; you cannot manage the "available health resources" if those are nonexistent, so having those is a priority and that is more similar to what the BMGF is already doing.

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#72

Post by Volpe »

Qom wrote: post #61

Disclaimer: I am not a STEM guy so don't go calling me an elitist. This might seem like a callous view but I think it's better to invest money on helping the scientist caste (wherever they might have been born) than to simply cure a bunch of random people. In the movie Elysium (2013), they send magic machines to help the masses, which achieves nothing since they are just as poor as before but a bit healthier. I left…

There is more than enough money and resources to go around. It isn't a supply problem. We have heaps of everything. So being able to synthesise it wouldn't change that fact.

The problem is we suck at distributing it. We have a system that allows the super rich (and thus super poor) to exist.

If we could magically create any object we like, the rich/powerful would make sure they had a monopoly on that technology so they could maintain their richness/power. There is a great talk given by G.A Cohen against capitalism that illustrates this point wonderfully[1]

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA9WPQeow9c [Video]

EDIT:

Sorry just saw your strange reference to Newton as well. You are saying technological advancement is more important than people, and we should prioritise advancement over people... why? Why should we advance technology for technologies sake?

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#73

Post by Qom »

Volpe wrote: post #72
Qom wrote: post #61

Disclaimer: I am not a STEM guy so don't go calling me an elitist. This might seem like a callous view but I think it's better to invest money on helping the scientist caste (wherever they might have been born) than to simply cure a bunch of random people. In the movie Elysium (2013), they send magic machines to help the masses, which achieves nothing since they are just as poor as before but a bit healthier. I left…

There is more than enough money and resources to go around. It isn't a supply problem. We have heaps of everything. So being able to synthesise it wouldn't change that fact. The problem is we suck at distributing it. We have a system that allows the super rich (and thus super poor) to exist. If we could magically create any object we like, the rich/powerful would make sure they had a monopoly on that technology so th…

>Sorry just saw your strange reference to Newton as well. >You are saying technological advancement is more important >than people, and we should prioritise advancement over people... >why? Why should we advance technology for technologies sake?

That's not what I said at all. On the contrary, I'm saying that if you want to help people technological progress will be vastly more efficient than anything else, and particularly aid programs. I don't care about progress for its own sake, nobody does. I'm saying that some people are objectively more valuable than others in the long term and that we should help them instead of helping huge numbers of less productive people. A single great invention could save all those people better than any amount of aid money.

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#74

Post by Qom »

Xylakant wrote: post #45
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #9

He's right. Poverty, disease and basic things like that are things about _survival_, the internet is not. But mainly, the title is provocative and misleading. The article clearly states, he was asked a leading question "asked whether giving the planet an internet connection is more important than finding a vaccination for malaria", and he answered. The title makes it seem like he went out of his way to make the compa…

> He's right. Poverty, disease and basic things like that are things about _survival_, the internet is not. I'd say he's at least partially wrong. Diseases are often cause by lack of knowledge and education, outburst can often be contained with good means of communication. I know people doing projects that use the internet (or cellphone text messages) to allow remote villages to better manage the available health res…

Note that internet does not necessarily help education. Most people waste their time on the internet, including most of us on HN. You can have as much info available to you as you want, if you go in the wrong direction or take no real action then it will all be for naught.

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#75

Post by spiritplumber »

mistermann wrote: post #49
spiritplumber wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how, that's the thing. Do I do a video time lapse? It's a bit boring to watch someone NOT being bitten by mosquitos.

Can you explain what it is?

An antbot attachment that causes mosquitos to stop flying, so they are easy to kill on the ground. I am working on having the antbot also kill the mosquitos without being piloted.

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#76

Post by Volpe »

Qom wrote: post #73
Volpe wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is more than enough money and resources to go around. It isn't a supply problem. We have heaps of everything. So being able to synthesise it wouldn't change that fact. The problem is we suck at distributing it. We have a system that allows the super rich (and thus super poor) to exist. If we could magically create any object we like, the rich/powerful would make sure they had a monopoly on that technology so th…

>Sorry just saw your strange reference to Newton as well. >You are saying technological advancement is more important >than people, and we should prioritise advancement over people... >why? Why should we advance technology for technologies sake? That's not what I said at all. On the contrary, I'm saying that if you want to help people technological progress will be vastly more efficient than anything else, and partic…

Why are they more valuable? You are saying they are more valuable because they provide more technological advancement.

I guess my question is: Why are you trying to measure the 'value' of one (or many) human lives? Why are we not all equal?

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#78

Post by k-mcgrady »

Title should be changed.

The actual title is: "An exclusive interview with Bill Gates".

The submitter has editorialised it ("Bill Gates says putting worldwide Internet access before malaria is 'a joke'"). The small part of the interview the current title is referring to is this:

"asked whether giving the planet an internet connection is more important than finding a vaccination for malaria, the co-founder of Microsoft and world’s second-richest man does not hide his irritation: “As a priority? It’s a joke.”"

He doesn't say connectivity isn't important. He just thinks that is isn't as important as finding a cure for malaria.

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#79

Post by acd »

We could use the moon as an Internet Relay, so you bounce lasers off the moon latency will be around 1.2 seconds. IRC :)

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/10/nasa-internet-lase...

Solar planes and low orbit satellites could also be used as bounce points from earth uplinks.

http://www.o3bnetworks.com/o3b-advantage/service-coverage http://titanaerospace.com/platforms/solara-50/

Re: An interview with Bill Gates

#80

Post by spiritplumber »

ehsanu1 wrote: post #42
spiritplumber wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how, that's the thing. Do I do a video time lapse? It's a bit boring to watch someone NOT being bitten by mosquitos.

Post an explanation + clear diagrams of how it works somewhere, and your process for making the prototype with pictures of it. And details about the cost/parts etc. Then drum up some interest. Get some blogs to write about it, then hopefully bigger media. Works better if you can point out something unusual - eg if you were 15 years old, that would work really well for you here, or if you can put a concrete estimate t…

Thanks, I will try to do that. The only unusual thing about me is that I scooped Google once, and they acted weird about it. I'm twice that age though :)

Right now I am trying to figure out how to get a proper medical study done that this stuff doesn't affect people.

Post reply on HN