Print 71 comment(s) - last by timmiser.. on Dec 8 at 1:57 PM

The Gates Foundation focuses on problems of our century

This month, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation announced that within fifty years of the death of the Gates, it would spend all of its assets. The goal for the foundation is to spend the assets in this century improving the foundations and addressing problems in preparation for the next century. The Foundation said this century would be an important focus to address such things as poverty, AIDS and other situations and issues.

Bill Gates earlier this year announced his inevitable step-down from his day to day role at Microsoft to focus more on the Gates Foundation. While many industry insiders were surprised by the announcement, Bill has been increasing his donations over the years leading up to this point. "Global development is a gigantic problem," said Gates at a philanthropy meeting in New York.

In June of this year, Warren Buffet announced that $44-billion of his total wealth will be given to the Gates Foundation. The large gift will be dispersed in phases and not all at once. Gates mentioned previously that he too will be using much of his wealth for philanthropic causes.

Because Bill and Melinda have decided to focus the foundation’s work in the 21st century, we will be spending all of our resources within 50 years after Bill's, Melinda's, and Warren's deaths. The decision to focus all of our resources in this century underscores our optimism for making huge progress and for making sure that we do as much as possible, as soon as possible, on the comparatively narrow set of issues we’ve chosen to focus on.

The foundation will also be split into two, one part handling the assets and the other part doing the actual programs and work. Bill and Melinda as well as Warren Buffet will serve as trustees for the program foundation. Only Bill and Melinda will be the trustees for the asset foundation. Buffet stated that he does not want to be involved with the money or how it is spent.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Well done
By FightingChance on 12/6/2006 4:29:32 PM , Rating: 4
Sounds good to me, let us hope that all of these funds get to the programs and people who need them and not into the pockets of embezzlers. It will be a mighty task indeed to steer the direction of this kind of funding without it running off private bank accounts.

What do you all think that the money should go towards? Personally I'd like to see alternative energy generation and research, and waste reclamation and recycling addressed.

RE: Well done
By ksherman on 12/6/2006 4:46:13 PM , Rating: 3
It will more likely be going towards the development of 3rd world countries.

RE: Well done
By decapitator666 on 12/7/2006 3:57:23 AM , Rating: 2
Or maybe he could donate a little of his money to make Microsoft software affordable to the level where poorer people are not longer forced to use illegal versions of the software? ;-)

RE: Well done
By marvdmartian on 12/7/06, Rating: -1
RE: Well done
By rcc on 12/7/2006 5:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
And that is sad why? Because you don't have it?

RE: Well done
By exdeath on 12/7/06, Rating: 0
RE: Well done
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 10:16:32 AM , Rating: 2
Check out the recent 'progress' in Somalia for an example.

RE: Well done
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 10:30:20 AM , Rating: 2
Many of the problems are fundamentally cultural. For example many in Africa believe that raping young kids will purify the soul and cure AIDS.

Tell me what amount of money or compassion is going to make AIDS in Africa go away if we aren't willing to 'reeducate' the people and drastically change and reshape their culture to stop those kinds of behaviors?

But if we did, some would argue that we have no right interfere with other cultures, and that is a valid view as well. But contention arises when those same people will complain and whine all day that it's not right, that we just *have* to do something.

So I ask again, what can you do? Nothing really.

And if anybody thinks just sending food or money is going to change anything, you are foolish. The people intended to receive relief will continue to starve and die while warlords live in palaces and cache weapons and supplies in order to suppress and control the people.

RE: Well done
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 10:39:25 AM , Rating: 3
While it's admirable to want to help people, all you can do is offer them the chance and opportunity by getting them on their feet once or twice or even tree times and showing them the direction so that they may attain self sufficiency. It’s unreasonable to believe you can support them indefinitely and be there every time they fall.

If they can't walk that path because of culture or religion, then we have to move on and make better use of those resources. The cold hard fact of the world beyond our control is that all resources are limited and they have to come from somewhere. There will always people elsewhere that want or need those resources as well. If you want to give hand outs, give them to those who will make the most effective long term use out of them.

RE: Well done
By jp7189 on 12/7/2006 12:33:20 PM , Rating: 3
A few from my family are missionaries in Africa, and as one example it takes about $800us to build a well in a village to provide convenient access to clean [healthy] drinking water which does wonders for the people.

Build a school and train a few from the community to be teachers.. heck just translating books in to native languages is a big project to undertake.

I'm not suggesting they just hand out food, but rather improve the infrastructure to be more productive for themselves.


RE: Well done
By HmmSureYNot on 12/7/2006 11:33:41 AM , Rating: 2
Very well put, could not agree with you more..

How bout you fix the problems in your own country before dumping it on countrys that could care less about were it is coming from

RE: Well done
By Clienthes on 12/7/2006 12:50:21 PM , Rating: 3
That's why you help them develop infrastructure.

That's how you "teach a nation to fish"

If 3rd world countries develop economically, everyone benefits in the long run.

RE: Well done
By timmiser on 12/6/2006 4:51:37 PM , Rating: 2
Gates' main focus is on the USA education system. Bill doesn't like the idea that he has to go overseas to places such as India to hire the best minds in the tech world.

So in essence, it is in fact going to the developement of alternative energy because it will help create Americans who will be smart enough to invent it.

RE: Well done
By FITCamaro on 12/6/2006 7:38:36 PM , Rating: 5
If all the best minds are in India, why are most things designed and developed here in the states? Don't take that as a knock against the intelligence of people in India, but the US has far more innovation.

Anyway, it's stuff like this that makes me hate people who bitch about how Gates only cares about money and is robbing us with the cost of Windows and Office. Yes they're expensive but its not like Bill Gates is just sitting in a vault somewhere counting his money.

RE: Well done
By timmiser on 12/8/2006 1:57:39 PM , Rating: 2
The best minds are not in India but the better domestic education system is in India. The reason the Indians come here is because here is where the money is.

RE: Well done
By Mazzer on 12/6/2006 4:52:25 PM , Rating: 4
I would like to see it rebuild/protect the rain forest as well as be used to reforest areas. Defiantly renewable resources too.

I find it funny though. 44 billion isn't a huge sum. The Iraq war has cost us what? 300+ billion dollars over 6 years. What the gates spend over the next 50 years the government could match in a little over, what, less then a year? Most of us say thats a lot of money and it will do a lot of good. I mean one man giving away so much is pretty spectacular, it is just that so much money that exists today could be spent on what the Gates are trying to do. Theoretically if our government wasn't full of a bunch of...ya...We could solve so many problems. Anyway I hope what they are doing inspires others to contribute in the way they have.

RE: Well done
By djcameron on 12/6/2006 5:17:25 PM , Rating: 3
The US Government spent $406 Billion just in interest on the national debt in FY 2006.

RE: Well done
By creathir on 12/6/2006 6:19:31 PM , Rating: 2
Ah yes...
Removing the dictator was not worth it at all, was it...
How about helping to securing the middle east?? Putting Iran in a nice spot between Afghanistan and Iraq...? (Before... we would have had to leave from Saudi Arabia...)

I suppose you are right... it was not worth it...
It was not worth the death of a good friend of mine...
It was not worth anything...

The freedom of millions was not worth it...

You're right... the money was mis-spent...


The problem with your assertion, is that our government, is not a socialist fuzz ball like you would like it to be...
I will fight that until the day that I die.

Hand outs never did ANYTHING for ANYONE. Period.

- Creathir

RE: Well done
By The Arete on 12/6/2006 7:16:29 PM , Rating: 1
Sure they are free if you consider, death free.

Such a large price to pay. I'm not commenting only of the lose of the U.S. and their troops, reporters. What about the Iraqis.

2,890 American lives (as of December 2nd, 2006
392,979 to 942,636 Iraqis Dead.
$379 billion dollars.
No weapons of Mass Destruction.
A government on the verge of Civil War.

Tell me again how you define success, and the worth of it. Whichever side your on. War is costly, not in money but people's lives. You can't estimate their worth. It makes me said when people try to justify war: justify killing more people. I'm proud of our troops, for staying out there, and for protecting our nation. But at what cost, I'm afraid to even know.

RE: Well done
By hubajube on 12/6/2006 7:20:36 PM , Rating: 4
Sure they are free if you consider, death free.
"It's better to die on one's feet then to live on one's knees."

RE: Well done
By The Arete on 12/6/2006 7:25:24 PM , Rating: 3
Point Taken. I'll concede that.

If you believe in "Give me liberty or give me death".

Alright, good point but what if those who died(aka civilians) didn't care about the supposed new Freedom we were giving them and just wanted to live in the peace that was afforded them under a dictator.

By no means am I saying it's right (dictatorship), suffering and oppression. But when do we get to decide for someone else? See what I'm saying.
I'm sure we liberated Iraqis, and some are happy. What about the others who died, or aren't so happy. Those who think we are just another dictatorial power ruling them. Be fair, we really haven't given them any reason to believe otherwise.

RE: Well done
By Mazzer on 12/6/2006 7:24:20 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't want to create some big war debate. I was merely saying that if we have that kind of money to spend over six years on a war why cant we spend that same amount on cancer? or AIDs? or Alternative Energy? Or education? Or Health care? All those things affect absolutely everyone in the world. The war in Iraq involves a certain group of countries and people.

RE: Well done
By The Arete on 12/6/2006 7:28:46 PM , Rating: 2
Don't know. Why can't we?

I understand. I was just commenting on the fact, one shouldn't be so quick to deem a War necessary, and a good use of our money and lives.

I think that sure, helping Darfur, and 3rd world countries is a good thing if done right. Alternative energy sources, they are all good uses of the money.

RE: Well done
By fxnick on 12/6/2006 9:05:58 PM , Rating: 1
war is a fact of life. humans for thousands of years have been waring with each other.
i don't get how people just constantly bitch about it. lives are lost, thats what happens in war.

and to the people that think everything can just be fixed by talking it, that ain't the way the world works.

RE: Well done
By TomZ on 12/6/2006 9:12:03 PM , Rating: 2
Does that justify war ("fact of life"), when it can clearly be prevented, and when in some cases it is totally unnecessary and a mistake (Iraq war)?

I think you would feel different if it were members of your own family or others that you care about that were being lost in these wars.

RE: Well done
By Clienthes on 12/7/2006 1:02:09 PM , Rating: 2
Assuming the US doesn't cut and run now, in 30 years find yourself a 50 year old Iraqi and ask him if the war was a mistake.

I'm not saying that I agree with the reasons we went to war. There were many valid reasons for it, but unfortunately some of them were spun in a way that was designed to gain popular support for the war, but ended up backfiring (WMD).

In the long run, what the US is doing will be a very positive thing, but only if we continue until Iraq is stable.

It is my friends and family. You are short sighted.

RE: Well done
By bernardl on 12/7/2006 8:54:19 PM , Rating: 2
That's of course assuming that the 50 years old man will not have been among the 200.000 - 400.000 civil victims of the war (notice that I not quoting the most pesimistic estimates that say 600.000).

How many years of dictatorship would it have taken to kill that many? How can you be sure that Saddam would not have vanished naturally within 5-10 years?

Besides, the most revolting part is that nobody really asked them what they wanted to do about it. The executive summary of this war could read "some guys in some offices in Washington decided that killing 300.000 Irakis would be a good thing for them."

And you seem to feel good about it.

Had the US really wanted to work in democracy in the Middle East if could have:

1. Stopped to blindly support the Saudi government,
2. Adopted a more neutral position in the "Israeli vs everybody else around" debate.

That would have cost nothing, not a single human life, and would have been far more efficient in the long run. We all know why this wasn't - and still isn't - being done.


RE: Well done
By The Arete on 12/6/2006 9:29:13 PM , Rating: 3
So is rape and murder. Are they justified too?

Because you think it's "a fact of Life", does not make it okay, or justified. Especially, as previously stated, when the war can be avoided altogethor.

Are there times of need. Maybe... I won't debate that, but I will debate the spending of countless billions on killing life rather than preserving it.

No one's arguing that war happens. We are deliberating what that money could be used for instead of war.
AIDS Research, Cancer Foundations, Alternative Fuels and resources, Foundations of Peace and Tolerance.

It's a dream for everyone to live peacefully, but one I'd glady pursue rather than just giving and contributing to and justifying bloodshed.

RE: Well done
By JNo on 12/7/2006 7:09:53 AM , Rating: 4
For all you people who keep mentioning alternative fuels and cancer, I'm not saying that they are not worthy causes, but please understand that cancer is primarily a *western* disease and so whilst I too suffer from having family member afflicted by it, it is relatively well funded and rarely stops one from living a relatively full life. Alternative fuels is primarily a problem for western fossil fuel guzzling countries too and the energy industry itself can and will fund research and infrastructure to the alternatives - because they'll have too eventually.

Bill understands the much bigger picture - things you take for granted - clean water is relatively easy to fund and can save millions of lives, as can more contribution to malaria, which is relatively more preventable and kills millions and millions more than cancer does. There might be enough problems in the US and UK (education etc) but fixing them first will only widen the gap between the western and 3rd worlds. Fixing the 3rd world *is* fixing the world.

RE: Well done
By wien on 12/6/2006 7:26:52 PM , Rating: 4
Say what now? Securing the middle east? In what possible way is the middle east more secure now than it was 5 years ago? The situation hasn't been this bad in ages.

You may have removed one enemy in Saddam, but in the process you've upset the entire region and gained millions of more enemies throughout the arab world. Heck, even large parts of Europe is turning against you because of the mess that is Iraq.

Yep.. Good call that. Money well spent.

RE: Well done
By JS on 12/6/2006 9:31:08 PM , Rating: 2
No, those orphaned kids in Africa should definitely not be getting their malaria and aids medicines for free.

Because. Handouts. Never. Do. ANYTHING. for. ANYONE. Period.

They should have to WORK and EARN their medicines before they get them. Or perhaps sign a contract of debt and pay them afterwards. After all, it will only take them a couple of years in prostitution, right?

Compassion for those who are light years from anything that resembles what we call a life does not equal socialist fuzz balls. You can fight that all you want.

RE: Well done
By UnFaZeD on 12/6/2006 9:01:57 PM , Rating: 1
Secretary of State James Baker said the cost of the war could end up exceeding $1 trillion, in addition to the 2,900 American troops killed and 21,000 wounded thus far.


RE: Well done
By WxGuy192 on 12/6/2006 11:49:34 PM , Rating: 2
I believe that we just passed the $500 billion Iraq war cost mark... Given our long-term intentions, I certainly don't doubt that the total will exceed $1,000,000,000,000 (that's $1 trillion).

Imagine what we could do in our country if we spent that money on domestic issues such as education and public health.

9/11 killed what, 4,000 people? Over 50,000 people die each year in car accidents across the United States. Hundreds of thousands die each year from heart disease, cancer, and other diseases that would benefit from more research money. There are countless homeless people in the country that could benefit from shelters and a helping hand.

Yes, we need to find those behind 9/11 (though the connection with Iraq has been found to be very dubious by independent, non-partisan research groups / commissions), but we have plenty of pressing issues here on our own mainland that could benefit from the money that we're spending elsewhere.

RE: Well done
By therealnickdanger on 12/7/2006 9:21:23 AM , Rating: 2
Over 50,000 people die each year in car accidents across the United States.

Just to get facts straight, it's more like 43,000, but that's still 43,000 too many. You might take comfort in knowing that due to the TRILLIONS of dollars thrown into transportation safety research, innovative safety products, automotive safety, targeted enforcement efforts, and targeted education, many states are on track to reduce annual traffic fatalities by HALF within the next 5-10 years. Keep in mind that the number of annual fatalities has been in decline ever since the 70s while the number of licensed drivers have been in a constant climb.

In the state of Minnesota, we are currently on track to reduce annual fatalities to ZERO by 2020. Is zero possible? We've taken the stance that anything other than a goal of zero is unacceptable. Such efforts would be worthless without the funds set up by President Bush's administration. Just thought I would toss that out there, that we do spend buttloads of money on more than just war. You also have to remember that the government is just one small source of monies when it comes to traffic safety, medical research, local/foreign aid, etc. The American people and corporations invest/donate OBSCENE amounts of money annually to these fields.

When I hear that the Iraq will cost a trillion bucks over 8-10 years, I think it will be worthwhile, assuming we don't back out. While there is evidence of terrorist activities and dollars in pre-war Iraq, the fact is that it was turned into a venerable hotbed of terror since our troops set foot there. You can hate President Bush and think he's evil or greedy or just plain stupid, but what you can't argue is that our presence won't prove beneficial in the long haul.

In areas where fighting has ceased or slowed, the standard of living for Iraqis has been elevated by a couple decades. Be it education, medicine, technology, or commerce, things are on the upswing. Areas still frought with violence are of interest because of who we are fighting. The enemies of Iraq and the U.S. (and allies) are being drawn out, and to put it mildly, are getting pwnd. When you consider the death toll in an "us versus them" mentality, our boys are really cleaning up over there. When President Bush said all that jazz about fighting them over there so we don't fight them here, he wasn't kidding.

What people have to realize is that these changes will shake things up, they will provoke our enemies, and they will cause death and destruction. In our own country's short history, we have seen tragedy in many wars, including a horrible civil war. I hate to use such a light-hearted phrase as "growing pains", but it applies.

So long as we renew our focus of building up Iraq's infrastructure and do our damndest to keep them from further infighting, a truly sovereign and democratic Iraq will be realized. They may not become America Jr., but do you realize what that's worth in the big picture? Another ally, a strong arab ally in that part of the world with its own productive economy? Iraq truly can be a light in a dark region so long as we don't give up and abandon the Iraqi people.

I may be overly optimistic since I have so many friends stationed there, but despite our failings thus far, there's no reason to believe Iraq will be a failure.

RE: Well done
By Spivonious on 12/7/2006 9:51:50 AM , Rating: 2
About your Iraq comments:

What proof do you have that the areas in which fighting has stopped have an improved quality of life? Saddam, as evil as he was, kept the country in check. He kept the Sunnis and Shiites from killing each other, and he kept Iran out of the country. George W. should have learned from his father that Saddam was a necessary evil.

No matter how long we stay in Iraq, the minute we pull out there will be a civil war and the country will divide into two or three countries, only to be invaded by Iran a few years after that.

RE: Well done
By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 12/7/2006 11:53:19 AM , Rating: 2
In the state of Minnesota, we are currently on track to reduce annual fatalities to ZERO by 2020. Is zero possible?

No. Because as cars and roads get safer, people become more risky in thier driving habits.

RE: Well done
By therealnickdanger on 12/7/2006 12:46:20 PM , Rating: 2
Saddam, as evil as he was, kept the country in check. He kept the Sunnis and Shiites from killing each other, and he kept Iran out of the country. George W. should have learned from his father that Saddam was a necessary evil.

Wow, you should take some time to research that facts of how Saddam and his crew murdered tens of thousands of Iraqis (of all types) via torture, execution, and even chemical weapons. There's no such thing as "necessary evil". That's bullsh*t.

As for quality of life, it's gonna depend on where you go, but Kurdistan (north part of Iraq) has remained mostly peaceful and is doing much better economically than the south. Some have classified Kurdistan's economy as "booming" this year. Again, depending on the area, you may see new schools, new hospitals, new roads, new sewage, water-processing, power grid improvements, etc. The Army engineers along with contractors and the Iraqi people are working very hard - where they can.
Is zero possible?
No. Because as cars and roads get safer, people become more risky in thier driving habits.

Dude, that was a rhetorical question. Besides, where would you place your goal? How many dead people is acceptable to you? 100? 10? 523?

While there is data that shows people take more risks when they believe they are "safe", the evidence (crash data) shows that the safety improvements are overcoming the risk-taking. Roadways and vehicles are becoming more "idiot-proof" every day. The day, while still far away, is coming where your vehicle won't let you make mistakes.

RE: Well done
By peternelson on 12/7/2006 2:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
In comparison to other things, it probably isn't that much.

Let's approximate the UK GBP currency exchange as 2:1. So 44 bn is maybe 22bn GBP or 25bn GBP.

25bn GDP is coincidentally the amount UK are about to spend extending the reduced size Trident missile programme. ie the cost of buying and running 3 new submarines to fire nukes.

So, if spent well, the Gates Foundation money could do some good, that is small compared to the amounts of money government could free up if it reprioritised things.

The problem with reducing aids, is that some countries need to have a strong enforcement policy on rape (considered a social norm by men in places) which spreads aids, and also need to encourage people to have smaller families (population growth is out of control in many developing nations) as the country cannot sustain that many people.

Aside from solving global warming and food shortage, we could likely have had a permanent base on the moon by now if money had been spent more wisely.

RE: Well done
By Spivonious on 12/7/2006 9:53:03 AM , Rating: 2
AIDs spreads in Africa because they have no clue how it spreads. There are still areas that believe that raping a virgin is a "cure."

RE: Well done
By rushfan2006 on 12/8/2006 9:43:56 AM , Rating: 2
I find it funny though. 44 billion isn't a huge sum. The Iraq war has cost us what? 300+ billion dollars over 6 years.

Correct. According to the recently released Iraq Study Group report we are spending about $8 billion per month on the Iraq war, we are on course to hit the $400 billion dollar mark first half of '07.

However. $44 billion is a tremendous amount....just think of what you just did you are comparing the wealth of ONE MAN (Warren Buffet = $44 billion) to an ENTIRE NATION's expenditure's (US spending for Iraq War).

There are many countries on the world that their GDP doesn't equal $44 billion.

Its a huge sum.

I know I'd have a blast trying to spend 40 billion in my lifetime.... :) lol.

RE: Well done
By akugami on 12/7/2006 6:44:09 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not going to comment on how it's spent. I just think there are a lot of good causes that can use the money for the improvement in society as a whole.

I would just like to say that while I think Gates was both smart and lucked out in his success with Microsoft, he is a genuinely nice person and doesn't seem fake in his sincere wish to use his money for good causes. Most celebrities and other types in the rich and famous department seem intent on contributing to charities and the like mainly for the publicity and as a tax writeoff and it's great people like Gates and Buffet are here that really seem to care. It's sad that there aren't more people like Gates and Buffet in the world. Though if there was we wouldn't have all this bullcrap going on.

Might as well add my wishlist.
By TimberJon on 12/6/2006 9:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
> Programmable Nano. (for disassembling viruses and currently incurable diseases like cancer)

> Stable Fusion reactor (plasma past 400 second threshold)

> Rail Guns (Naval, ground-based, tank-based, space-naval, anti-ICBM, and for shooting radioactive waste and other contaminants out of our atmosphere in large cylinders.)

> Battletech

> Mjolnir armor. Any MK.

> Particle Projection Cannon

> The 5-round per shot AutoCannon

hmm more later..

RE: Might as well add my wishlist.
By ZeroGuardian on 12/7/2006 12:56:51 AM , Rating: 2
I find it amusing that you list two worth while causes first followed by several weapon/war related items.

I'm sorry but no charity should ever be used to support war or weaponry. I understand that weapons are (unfortunately) necessary in our society today but we should be concentrating as many resources as we can on preserving and advancing life not destroying it.

As for your list I think you need to add some things...

>Lower emmisions industry.

>Cheap water purification and cheap quality food products.

>More government/charity funded work projects to develop more jobs while building vast projects that improve the quality of life. (Like Hoover Dam)

>Cheap housing/building materials to better construct shelters for homeless or the victims of major catastrophies.

I could go on but there are alot of things that would be relatively inexpensive to research that would save alot of time and money in the long run for the government and charity organizations. Allowing their money to go further and help more people.

By exdeath on 12/7/2006 11:12:15 AM , Rating: 2
>Lower emmisions industry.

<Assuming you are talking vehicle emmisions... maybe you meant industrial/factory emmisions.>


Lower emissions without sacrificing power, functionality, and style choices.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with a 100+ mpg car if it still had 400 HP and didn't look like a Nerf football and lack features other cars have to cut weight.

Besides, emissions in modern cars are as close to 100% *clean* and perfect combustion as we are going to get them. What is lacking is efficiency so that we can get more power without increasing the *quantity* of emissions. The fact that I can get over 700 HP and 25mpg out of my 281 ci engine, unheard of 40 years ago, says we are getting there. Just not very fast.

By Spivonious on 12/7/2006 9:58:53 AM , Rating: 2
Why would we shoot radioactive waste into space? We're going to be living up there soon enough.

By exdeath on 12/7/2006 11:01:51 AM , Rating: 2
The problem with cancer it's not a disease or illness in the classic sense that there is a cure; it is a mutation of native DNA. Simply destroying the cancerous cell or organ does not change the fact that there is still not a healthy cell or organ in its place. It also does nothing to alleviate and reverse wide spread cellular level damage to other healthy bodily systems as a result of that flawed component generating harmful byproducts or inhibiting necessary byproducts over prolonged periods of time.

In addition to eliminating the cancerous object itself, regeneration of tissues and organs is a vital component to recovery. I.e.: stem cells.

I believe the need to cure cancer will be one of the issues that finally breaks the constraints that religion has placed on humanity.

"free vaccines"
By vailr on 12/6/2006 6:51:18 PM , Rating: 2
Hopefully, they can go beyond offering "free vaccines" and "free Microsoft software" to 3rd-world countries. Maybe something useful, like a cleaner burning, high MPG car engine, for example. Or, a large-scale agricultural feasability demonstration of some kind. Like growing pineapples in Alaska, or something...

RE: "free vaccines"
By TomZ on 12/6/2006 9:17:54 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I'm not sure your priorities (growing pineapples in Alaska?!?), but I think that health care and education are great areas to invest in long-term, and I am pleased to see Gates and Buffet working in those areas.

RE: "free vaccines"
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 11:39:20 AM , Rating: 2
Modern engines are as clean burning and stoichiometrically balanced as possible. And a car that makes 1000 HP is just as clean as a car that makes 10 HP. Don't confuse the *quality* of emissions with the fixed *quantity* of emissions necessary to release a fixed amount of power.

Everyone says they want high MPG vehicles but only if they can keep their powerful 400+ HP sports cars and force all their neighbors and competition to own 100 MPG low performance minivans. A clear case of "do as I say, not as I do".

Give me a car that has 400+ HP and 100+MPG. I don’t want a 35 HP plastic Nerf football with 4 wheels. I don’t want to sacrifice common features and styling for weight reduction to compensate for lack of power. I don't want to get just 6 more MPG than my supercharged V8 Cobra that does 0-60 in 3 seconds and costs me a mere $25 more a month to operate. I don't want to be forced to drive in the bicycle lane because the trunk is full of computers on the way to a LAN making the car incapable of accelerating on the freeway safely or even up a hill or passing with 4 passengers and the AC on.

I wish people would be more clear when they say they want better mileage, because its understood what we want is ‘better mileage (without sacrificing power)’

By cciesquare on 12/7/2006 1:58:01 AM , Rating: 3
I know a lot of people have said that the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation contributed tremendously to society and i would like to just give one example of how the money is used.

I am taking a Health Economics class and we have dicuss the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation at great lenghts.

In the pharmaceutical industry the cost of researching, producing and marketing a single drug cost $300 million. The cost is so high, in the US only 3/7 companies are profitable, others get bought out or file for bankruptcy. It is because of this high initial cost that forces many pharmaceutical companies to charge high prices and sometimes commit unethical practices.

The Gates Foundation is willing to put up the high cost, yes, even $300 million to find that next great drug. The great thing and my point in all this is that because its all for the good of everyone they can charge prices at cost, or even cheaper. Where a pharmaceutical company has to charge say $2 while it cost $.50 to make the drug to recover the large $300 million intial cost. The Gates Foundation isnt in it for profits or for any monetary gains. They can charge the $.50 or even give it free, because again its all for charity.

My economics teacher put it this way, "The Bill and Malinda Gates foundation is an economist's dream." They give you money to provide for the greater good, no catch. The foundation even hosts numerous contest to see who can find various cures.

You might hate Bill Gates now, but dont be suprise if his foundation helps produce something that will help save someone you know. People usually dont remember how you start, but they sure remember how you leave. Bill, Malinda, and Warren are leaving in a very honorable way, in my opinion. How many people are willing to give up almost all their life's work for charity? Not many.

RE: example
By iNGEN on 12/7/2006 3:41:52 PM , Rating: 3
I don't know if any of you have even met Bill Gates, let alone know him. I had the occasion to dinner and roundtable with him at a conference once. So I've no great insight into his "inner self". However, in the short hour and a half I spent with him it the following became quite evident to me:

1) Everything you have heard about him being domineering (spelling), coercive, and incredibly demanding...all true.
2) Everything you have heard and suspected about him being equally brilliant and insightful...yep, also true.
3) Everything you have heard about him being greedy and self serving...completely false.

The only real limits to Bill Gates' altruism are youth and his ability to communicate his visions of the future. Bill Gates is without a doubt the "most genuinely good" asshole I have ever met.

The world is a better place, because of him.

Just one death?
By Lord Evermore on 12/7/2006 11:09:46 AM , Rating: 2
Has anybody pointed out that they're saying death, the singular form? That implies they all plan to die at the same time. I'm not perfect at grammar, but I'd put money on the proper word being "deaths".

RE: Just one death?
By ElJefe69 on 12/8/2006 12:47:03 AM , Rating: 2
They will be absorbed into the underworld just in time for armeggedon. one is the beast the other is the prophet.

after i die...
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/6/2006 11:40:53 PM , Rating: 2
I will give 1 trillion dollars to every anandtech reader.

How about supporting Linux with some of it
By Milliamp on 12/6/06, Rating: -1
RE: How about supporting Linux with some of it
By Pandamonium on 12/6/2006 7:17:18 PM , Rating: 2
Screw linux. I don't like it.

Do you honestly think the man behind the company responsible for windows is going to give to those who develop a competing product? I mean, you might as well ask someone to donate to the lawyers suing one's kids.

I guess a linux fanboy will do anything to promote his beliefs.

FWIW, I'm generally open-minded and not really anti-linux, but I can't stand it when people suggest things this stupid- and irrelevant- in the interest of promoting thier own myopic perspectives.

By mindless1 on 12/6/2006 9:43:31 PM , Rating: 2
If one is to be objective, YES, it would be entirely reasonable to donate to Linux if only it was perceived as useful a contribution as in other areas. He might easily feel it wasn't as useful, but it's not the simplistic choice you make it out to be.

To Gates it's no contest about OS, he won. He could still recognize there is open source MS chose not to use but still as merit.

RE: How about supporting Linux with some of it
By lufoxe on 12/7/2006 8:55:24 AM , Rating: 2
I guess a linux fanboy will do anything to promote his beliefs.

FWIW, I'm generally open-minded and not really anti-linux, but I can't stand it when people suggest things this stupid- and irrelevant- in the interest of promoting thier own myopic perspectives.

here here, I do believe solving the AIDS epidemic is just slightly more important than linux, just goes to show the selfishness of the linux community, Don't get me wrong,I don't hate linux, I would love to migrate over, but I'd rather deal with things that are killing people rather than annoying blue screens...

By Milliamp on 12/7/2006 10:11:14 AM , Rating: 2
First, I have been called an anti-Linux Windows fanboy much more often than the reverse.

Second, with the trillions already thrown at "solving" AIDS it would seem we are no closer now than we were in the early 90's. Give a few more billion to American drug companies who have already gotten rich on it, and how much further along will we really be when the people spreading it are still mostly ignoring the problem?

It is the same problem with donating billions in food to the starving Somalians, in the end all you have really done is fed them for a month and driven the semolina farmers out of business which compounds the problem be creating dependency and reduces the chances of them ever becoming self supported.

"Give a man a fish, feed him for a night, teach a man to fish, and feed him for the rest of his life" - unknown

Also, foot donated to Somalia does not put food on the tables in Kenya.

We are moving into an information age and global market now. With English language skills and inexpensive IT infrastructure these countries could make themselves the next best thing in outsourcing since India and potentially even end their 3rd world status.

Unlike free food and drugs that can only be consumed once, free software can be copied and shared by everyone.

I don't think it would be an end to MS either. Lack of real competition has mostly cased them to stagnate. Improving the usefulness of FOSS could potentially give them some much needed motivation and be good for everyone.

You can mod my post down and tell me my ideas are stupid, but history has proven that Welfare has done little to solve or even slow the problems facing these nations.

Welfare does not create independence, it creates welfare dependency. Even as someone that is oft called a Windows fanboy, I believe a large effort to support Linux makes sense because the business model of Linux companies is still retained through free code contributions.

On the other hand, the drug companies getting money to distribute their heavily patented medications are laughing all the way to the bank.

By TomZ on 12/6/2006 9:14:36 PM , Rating: 3
You could spend billions on treating people with aids only to prolong the inevitable.

WTF does that mean?
75 years from now one of the largest problems will be providing people a cheap alternative to proprietary software solutions. Supporting Linux with the money could help everybody.

More likely, we'll have to bail out those poor organizations that decided to adopt open source, after all the hobbyists decided they were no longer interested in helping out. :o)

What a CROCK !
By cornfedone on 12/6/06, Rating: -1
RE: What a CROCK !
By Enoch2001 on 12/6/2006 11:30:12 PM , Rating: 2
Sheesh - a little resentful? Or maybe jealous perhaps?

I can think of worse "criminals" than Bill Gates. If you hate him and his products so much, why buy them? It's not like you were forced to...

Bill Gates has contributed more to society than most other companies. More power to him.

RE: What a CROCK !
By WxGuy192 on 12/6/2006 11:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
LOL This is too funny.

If you don't like him, don't buy his products. If people buy his products (which they have, since Windows have been the foundation for widespread computer adoption), then they do so willingly. It's business, just like almost every other business. You can't blame the businessman if he's successful at selling his product.

RE: What a CROCK !
By peternelson on 12/7/2006 3:01:00 AM , Rating: 2
When I can choose to buy any pc from any store WITHOUT Windows preinstalled, THEN I will believe I (and anyone else) am not forced to buy Microsoft products, the so-called "Microsoft tax", even if I will immediately install and use linux on it.

There are a few places will supply a pc with no OS or linux, but that does not give me choices among some of the best deals, so it is a limited choice as to freedom of OS.

RE: What a CROCK !
By TTLKurtis on 12/7/2006 4:16:16 AM , Rating: 2
Actually Dell for example will credit you for the Windows OS if you choose to use Linux.

RE: What a CROCK !
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 11:16:53 AM , Rating: 2
When I can run games and 3d drivers on Linux at performance comparable to Windows, and when developers target Linux so I can walk into any store and buy software and games for Linux, I will try it out.

I ran Linux for a while, and it was little more than a hacker novelty with little to offer my wanting of a high performance gaming machine.

RE: What a CROCK !
By exdeath on 12/7/2006 11:20:50 AM , Rating: 2
I think people are still rightfully on the 9x bandwagon which totally sucked balls and isn't even a real OS.

But get over it, 9x is long gone at last, NT5x is superior to Linux in many areas, at least the current build of Linux at the time of my comparison.

As for explorer and iexplore (and their 30 ways to hook addons without user intervention) and any user mode software included in the Windows environment... thats another story...

Lets please get it right: the shell sucks, not the OS itself.

RE: What a CROCK !
By rcc on 12/7/2006 6:04:56 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, go to any store that builds on site and you can get just what you are asking for. Go to your average retailer and you get what the market demands of them. Don't expect major retailers to cater to the demands of the one, or the great minority, unless you can prove to them that there is profit in it. : )

RE: What a CROCK !
By Spivonious on 12/7/2006 9:57:20 AM , Rating: 2
How can he have stolen $100 billion if his total net worth is only $24.5 billion?

RE: What a CROCK !
By rushfan2006 on 12/8/2006 9:51:45 AM , Rating: 2
Actually I *think* this guy is posting to be know since so many people slam Gates all the time....

Put it this way I'm hoping this guy is just sarcastic with his comment for his own sake. Because if he is serious he is the biggest asshat I've come across in a while. Not to mention its just sad because this guy doesn't have clue one what is out there in terms of corporate greed and scandal if he things Bill Gates and MS are pure short he is INCREDIBLY naive.

But like I said I think its just sarcasm, no one could be so incredibly clueless......;)

RE: What a CROCK !
By rushfan2006 on 12/8/2006 9:54:22 AM , Rating: 2
So tell us cornfedone...what have YOU contributed to society.....

“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki