• winterayars@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bill Gates was Bill Gates because he had rich parents who got him access to millions of dollars of computer hardware at a time when that was much harder than today. If you’re not Bill Gates it’s on your parents, imo.

    That said, 100 stars is great. Keep it up! That’s 100 people who looked at the stuff you’re doing, evaluated it using their expertise, and decided it was good enough work to call attention to.

    • spauldo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That part of it, sure, but the guy was good at business and made some smart bets (that the microcomputer industry would explode, for one). Microsoft didn’t get as big as it has based only on their technical ability. They got there because they made the right decisions and were cutthroat against their competitors.

      Bill was at the right time and right place, but he was also the right guy. You gotta have them all.

      • eskimofry@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s easy to make some smart bets when you can make many bets and fail over and over and not become destitute.

      • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Cutthroat is an understatement. He did a lot of illegal stuff in the USA and internationally because governments had no idea how he was exploiting them/breaking commercial law. He also bribed hundreds of governments and stifled innovation. The world would be a better place without him.

        • spauldo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure, but that’s how business works when you’re as big a company as Microsoft. And he was good at it.

          I never said he was a nice guy, only that he was good at business.

          • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            So I agree that’s how it works with businesses under Anglo-Saxon style capitalism, but I disagree with that’s how it works across the world with large companies. There are large multinational corporations that are ethical. Not as successful in profitability as Microsoft, but they are more successful ethically and better for society.

            • aidan@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’d argue that American and some Western European companies are much more ethical than African child labor mines, Chaebol, and Zaibatsu

            • spauldo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Quite possibly. I wouldn’t know. Either way, Microsoft is an American company and plays by (or subverts, or writes) American rules.

              Money is power. Get enough of either and you get corruption. Some people fight the system, some people learn to profit off it. If it doesn’t work that way in other parts of the world, then it’s because their systems work differently than ours.

              Edit: quite possibly, not quit possibly. I’m a touch typist. I type every day. So why does my typing get worse with age?

              • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, what you’re describing is called the “Social Structure of Accumulation” in Political Economic theory.