Summary
Bill Gates criticized Elon Musk for his support of far-right politicians, including the UK’s Tommy Robinson and Germany’s AfD party, calling it “insane shit” and accusing Musk of destabilizing political systems.
Gates questioned Musk’s focus on divisive politics while managing global businesses like Tesla and SpaceX.
Gates also expressed concern about wealthy individuals influencing foreign elections.
Musk has faced backlash for controversial actions, including a Nazi salute.
I always forget Gates is one of the elite. Then I remember how ruthless and savage he was in the 80s.
Then I remember.
80s, 90s, and a few years into early 2000s. Gates ruthlessness lasted decades, destroyed many businesses and lives, and is mostly whitewashed thanks to his philanthropic efforts and a few reddit amas and some secret santa participation
Not to mention the destruction he did to computing as a whole. The nightmare of proprietary bullshit is something that he did not architect but he pushed heavily and lobbied for constantly. He had the position to push for interoperability from an early stake in computing, to set the stage for computers to have a strong precedent to work together. Instead he and microsoft made every effort to work against open standards. They would adopt open standards and extend them with proprietary extensions to intentionally ruin them. A lot of what is infuriating about modern tech can be traced back to precedent that microsoft set at his direction
Reminder despite every donation he has made his net worth is higher now than it ever was and this has essentially always been the case. His philanthropy, while objectively good, is a measured pr effort that does not impact his overall obscene wealth and basically never has
He’s still pushing ‘intellectual property’ as part of his philanthropy. The creators of the Oxford vaccine wanted to open source it and give it away for free. Gates opposed that and he got his way (partly because of the influence of the Gates Foundation). The delays this caused probably killed millions of extra people in the Global South (not sure if anyone ever did the maths on this).
Not shocking to hear, he’s a scumbag at heart. But now if you say that people will be like “uhhh how can you say that he’s donated so much money”
Then when you point out he’s donated literally 0% of his overall current net worth, his past (and current, apparently) behavior has arguably as much humanity if not more than he has offset, etc you’ll get whataboutism. “What have you done??”
I don’t want philanthropy to be contingent on the whims of billionaires. Gates has done a lot but it still has major issues, there is no real transparency, and it’s still authoritatively controlled because he has a great deal of influence over his foundation. The even bigger issue is that he is by far the exception. Other billionaires donate minimally only to maximize tax benefits and only to issues they have been personally impacted by.
The other day I was with people who were watching a football game. The eagles won and I asked why the owner gets to speak first at the trophy ceremony, let alone at all, given it was the teams effort. This led to a whole discussion but one thing that came up was how he donates so much money to autism research because he has a grandson with autism. This was meant to appeal to me because I have a background working in autism research and I work with people with autism a lot.
all I could think is “how fucked up is it that we have to hope that an obscenely rich person personally experiences the issue for them to decide to bequeath funding?” This inherently means that things with a much higher rate of prevalence, like autism (1 in 36, roughly) or dementia (prevalence varies widely by age range (2% to 13%) but ~10 million cases per year), will get tons of money. But what about far less common things? I’ve worked with people who have extremely rare conditions. Angelmans syndrome, prader willi, chromosomal deletions, (rates of 1-2 per 10,000) or extremely rare things like hellers syndrome (rates of 1-2 per 100,000).
This is why we fund things like NIMH, so that money can be fairly dispersed to ensure that all things are researched. Teams of people research what needs to be researched. This isn’t even just about equity; sometimes researching lesser known disorders leads to discoveries that are applicable in a broader context
But instead we let a few oligarchs hoard money. Most of them don’t bother to fund this stuff at all and they few that do only bother to do so when it’s something personally relevant to them. We have no say in the matter.
‘Global South’ sounds like some right-wing term. LMIC (low middle-income country) is better.
His philanthropy, while objectively good, is a measured pr effort that does not impact his overall obscene wealth and basically never has
Like with the some billionaires.
Untrue. Most don’t engage in actual philantropy at all, but donate only to causes that will directly benefit their bottom line, such as sectors that depend on their products, or for scholarships in fields where their companies hire heavily. That isn’t actually donating. It’s just tax-exempt investing. In this sense, Gates is a cut above other billionaires.
His actions merit a freshly sharpened blade on his guillotine. Musk can have the rusty one that we’ll need to drop thrice to get the job done.
His philanthropy, while objectively good,
I wouldn’t even go that far.
Say you have a crazy idea that education would be better if kids went to school blindfolded so they wouldn’t be distracted. You then use your vast fortune to arrange for that to be tried out on a bunch of kids for a few years. It’s a disaster. It sets those kids back for years. You realize it’s a disaster, so after a few years you abandon the project.
In that case was your philanthropy objectively good? Or was it probably bad?
Those are the kinds of experiments the Gates foundation has done. Because Gates is so insanely rich, he doesn’t have to bother with convincing people he has a good idea. He doesn’t need to run his ideas by education experts or psychologists, he can just run with them. So he does, and he fucks shit up, then he leaves.
Maybe Elon’s mommy will allow him and Zuck to have a chair jumping contest in the octagon.
I’d put money on Zuck, he seems like he might be able to jump a chair.
Shitty Person, but possibly good chair jumper. Maybe Zuck will do a Philanthropy run later in life like Bill?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-bill-gates.html
And unlike many others, Mr. Gates started the relationship after Mr. Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.
Bill Gates made his acquaintance with Jeffrey Epstein in 2011 when Epstein had been jailed for years for soliciting prostitution from a minor.
https://jacobin.com/2021/08/bill-gates-jeffrey-epstein-mistake-cnn-interview
They were two of the richest men on Earth, meeting after Epstein had already been convicted for child sex trafficking, very intentionally scratching each other’s back and bolstering each other’s charitable endeavors. The relationship between them — and what compelled both to build one — should be seen not as a lapse in judgment but as an indictment of billionaire philanthropy itself.
There’s plenty more out there if you look.
And how he fought tooth and nail against generic versions of the covid vaccines being allowed, likely leading to thousands if not millions of deaths and many more getting sick in poorer countries where most people can’t afford name brand drugs.
had he actually cared, he should have demanded and funded research into them to either prove his point or fix the problem.
Yeah, he was a real asshole 44 years ago. Glad people never change at all.
TIL that his blocking generic versions of the covid vaccines which led to the deaths of thousands if not millions in poorer countries where most people can’t afford name brand drugs happened 44 years ago 🙄
I can only repeat what I said before I anther comment. I’m not defending Gates. Of course there are things he should be criticised for. You bring up one example here.
What I am saying is, that you should not judge him on what he did four decades ago, but how he is acting today.
Yes. I don’t want to judge people by who they were four decades ago, but who they have become. I believe that every human has the potential to grow and learn.
Mind you, I’m not saying Mr. Gates is an angel now, or shouldn’t be judged. But I’d rather base ma judgement on the person he is now that on the person he was long ago.
Mr Gates actually has some power to do something about the crazyness and shittines of the world we live right now.
I don’t discredit his philanthropic work, some of the things he does is actually good, neither that he calls out the insanity, any sane person should do, but, and this but is as huge as the Titanic, Mr Gates, is able to do something about it, and has been for a long time before shit hit the fan tbh, actions speak louder than words, specially the lack of action lmao.
If Mr Gates really feel this way, he should do something about it, he has the money.
Money’s great and all, but where exactly would his spending help right now?
Trump’s brown-nosing billionaires have trillions between them, let alone foreign governments actively supporting the destabilisation of the western world.
The far-right has the market cornered on information & infrastructure control currently. Even Gates’ would struggle using his money to influence any meaningful change. It’s depressing.
Attacking their fragile egos of Nazis… Now that’s free and plentiful.
What are the rules on offering a reward and legal counsel/protection for someone providing verifiable information about things like how that anonymous Twitter employee said shit happened.
Tbh I don’t really believe that report, it’s too easy to just write shit up like that anonymously, but I don’t doubt there is some shady shit going on that money would maybe convince someone to leak legit data or knowledge on.
Money would also attract grifters who want to create fake scandals for the payoff. I agree with you that there is absolutely some reprehensible shit going down behind closed doors at Xitter, and at Meta too for that matter, but if Gates or anyone else offered a financial incentive to come forward, finding something that actually happened amid all the reports they received would be like finding a needle in a haystack blindfolded and without a magnet. Especially now that everybody has access to several LLMs to write the fake scandal reports for them. Yes, most would be easy to identify as fake, but someone would still have to take the time to read them. So-called AI detectors aren’t worth anything.
He actually does:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_Foundation
Meanwhile Muskyboi donates mostly to organizations that align with his business interests, such as those doing AI and STEM stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musk_Foundation
Dont mistake his philanthropy for some form of altruism. He setup the Gates Foundation for tax avoidance pure and simple. The fact he tries to do good with it is a side affect.
Okay? So he does good, your point being? He could’ve done what everyone else does in his place and don’t contribute.
You’re letting g perfect be the enemy of good.
your point being?
It’s not nearly enough, he does it to look good more than to actually do good, and he shouldn’t ever have had that much money in the first place
Don’t let someone doing a few good things make you think they don’t deserve to be killed, eaten, and their wealth redistributed
Bill Gates isn’t a good person
Sorry mate this dumb factoid doesn’t withstand even a moment’s scrutiny.
If you donate $10 you might save $3 in tax but you lost all $10.
The Gates Foundation might use a few cents from that $10 for fancy dinners for Gates and his wife or whatever but there are auditors to ensure that the money is used for the people they purport to help. Their records are public and I can assure you that if there were any wrong doing whatsoever the internet would be afire with every detail.
Nosferatu says Dracula has gone too far
Every single billionaire is a policy failure. By hoarding that much wealth, they are literally bad people. But that doesn’t mean they can’t do good things, or even give away what they don’t need, like the ex-billionaire Charles Feeney who redeemed himself and donated most of his billions, anonymously.
Oligarch Wars
I never expected the end to be so boring: White Collar Apocalypse. Wait, what collar colour are billionaires?
Disclaimer: >!I don’t actually think it’s “The End”!<
I have to question the judgement of Bill Gates when he calls Musk “super-smart”. Maybe if Musk started out with no money, that would be fair in some sense. I think he was just lucky and unencumbered by ethics or self-doubt.
Maybe if Musk started out with no money, that would be fair in some sense.
Why is this american obsession on weighting the value of men with the money they made? Musk is an idiot regardless of his money or how he made it.
I’m not sure what you mean. I’m not American, and I don’t place much value on enormous wealth accumulation. I’m just acknowledging that there is a difference between gaining enormous wealth with a hefty leg up from family wealth versus doing it from scratch, like growing up in poverty for example.
You can’t get that amount of money without exploitation. If you start from 0 it just means you have to actually work for it but end result is still the same.
Americans equal money with power, the more power you have, the more value, etc. That is basically it.
Its not just power, its ego and success. If McDonalds started paying 30$ an hour it would suddenly be a job that signaled success, despite nothing changing about the job duties.
Thats what’s happening here, elon is rich so he must be smart, and now people are jealous and emulate him. The OP is right though, money or not he’s an idiot.
Quite a lot of americans equate money with success and ability. Elon musk must be the smartest guy because dumb people dont make money like that.
I think its reverse engineering though, americans see his worth, and work backwards claiming all his choices are genius and well thought out.
It’s absolutely reverse engineering. People want to believe that the world is a meritocracy, and that means believing that those who have succeeded at meritful.
People avoid internalizing that the world is a kleptocracy, because that would mean having to confront that if they want to get ahead, they’ll have to actively amd knowingly fuck other people over, and most of us are not psychopaths
You can’t become the richest man in the world and the most powerful billionaire in the world by accident, even if you start with a golden spoon. Most millionaire child will just spend the rest of their life being spoiled and unconcerned with the world, very very few spend their money helping others and building society, but him? He spend his time and money resurrecting nazi and making those dystopian scifi real. That’s some insane dedication right there. Smart or not, dude is dangerous.
I think he is dedicated, dangerous and awful. I just don’t think he is smart. I’ve known people who achieved wealth, started successful businesses etc. They had domain expertise and ambition. But they also neglected and fucked up other critical aspects of their lives (like their relationships with partners and kids). I didn’t consider them to be smart. In my mind, smart implies a well roundedness, and the capacity for self reflection, and empathy. Musk just has the personality traits, and family wealth, to enable him to “succeed” in our current society.
not by accident, but certainly by luck, and then you can argue whether someone makes their own luck or not, musk hit the jackpot of being at the right moment at the right time and having the right skillset.
There are plenty of alternate universes out there where he became a nobody after paypal.
Bill Gates has also been riding an unearned “genius” appellation for decades. He didn’t make DOS. (His charitable work on vaccination is also questionable - iirc there were concerns over intellectual property rights)
The tide is turning against billionaires, and he’s just recognizing that Musk is making them all look bad.
Gates had two lawyers for parents, one of whom served on a board of directors with the CEO of IBM. IBM had been continually fighting an antitrust suit with the government for years, so they knew they had to tread carefully with the operating system for their first personal computers. It’s no surprise they hired Gates to do that work. Also, because of the antitrust case, they directed Gates to buy QDOS instead of buying it themselves. As for the contract that gave Gates a very sweet deal when it came to selling DOS to for non-IBM computers… I wonder if his two lawyer parents might have been involved in that contract.
It’s a compliment sandwich. You have to include the two pieces of compliment bread even if it’s bullshit or else you’ll be accused of not offering constructive criticism.
To be fair there are plenty of ruthless greedy people with zero morals out there but Musk is far more successful than any of them so something has to differentiate him. He might not be intelligent enough to recognise what a crigerworthy loser he is but let’s not pretend he isn’t smart.
Mate, he is on a very self destructive spiral doing those nazi salutes at the inauguration. That’s not a smart move. He’s let his fantasies get the better of him. If he was really smart he would shut the fuck up about politics. He has everything, And consequently he values nothing.
Smart can mean many things. My dentist is smart, but he is not well rounded. Most people aren’t well rounded smart.
Musk is a good investor, and expert con artist. He is smart in those ways.
