RIP Paul Allen

Eboue said:
The us is near the bottom in voter participation among developed countries. We dont have understand billionaires who donate to Republicans. We dont have to understand racists who vote trump. We dont need to understand people who own multiple yachts and defund public schools. We need to defeat them. You cant beat them with facts and logic if they dont care about facts and logic. You have to defeat them.
Click to expand...

Then why the feck you (US people) don't vote them out? If there are so many people who are unhappy, why they don't either vote Democrats, or a third party?

Also, congratulations for calling 63 million people racists. What does this make you? A racist, I guess.

Eboue said:
As for the last part, I dont call people twats for not agreeing with me. I called 4bars a twat because he was making fun of poor people who wanted clean water in their house.
Click to expand...

You have a very extreme attitude that either you fully agree with me (essentially Silva, but the guy is nowhere as nasty as you) or you're wrong, apologist, twat, prat around etc.
 
Eboue said:
Politics is power. Ceding it to people who oppose you is a bad way to accomplish your goals.
Click to expand...

Communicating in a constructive way with people on the other side of a debate however isn't a bad thing, especially if you are confident in your views and are able to convince people who don't agree with you to change their minds. That sort of thing involves a degree communication outside your own tribe.
 
Eboue said:
Paul Allen, a billionaire in his sixties, may have donated to a party hostile to human life whose policies are rapidly destroying the planet even though he will be dead before the worst of it, but at least he knew which fork is for salad.
Click to expand...
He may have donated 100k to Republican Party, and around 2 billion to good causes. The twat!
 
Raoul said:
Communicating in a constructive way with people on the other side of a debate however isn't a bad thing, especially if you are confident in your views and are able to convince people who don't agree with you to change their minds. That sort of thing involves a degree communication outside your own tribe.
Click to expand...
It is the only way to change someone's mind. If your starting point is "I am 100% right and if you don't agree with me you're a moron, apologist or racist" hasn't ever changed someone's mind. It might make you popular in your circles where you're preaching to the converted though, which is exactly what Trump did.
 
Silva said:
real racism is when you think something is racist
Click to expand...
Nope, but when you label an entire group of 63m people (and many more who have not voted, similar to how not every leaning left person didn't vote, not every leaning right person didn't vote too) as a racist group, then you probably need to look at themselves.

I've met plenty of Trump voters (not many who love him though) and have yet to met a racist on them. That doesn't mean that there aren't many racists who voted for Trump exactly for that, but the vast majority of his voters aren't racists.
 
Raoul said:
Communicating in a constructive way with people on the other side of a debate however isn't a bad thing, especially if you are confident in your views and are able to convince people who don't agree with you to change their minds. That sort of thing involves a degree communication outside your own tribe.
Click to expand...

Raoul, they wont be swayed by anything you say. Theyve rejected facts and reason and taken up with their tribe no matter what. Look at how the Warren thing is playing out.

In some fantasy world where everyone goes into each debate with an open mind then I concede your strategy would be the way to go. But that's not the world we live in. When people confront Republicans with their hypocrisy, the GOP doesnt say "well gosh you're right, I'm going to change my vote". They just laugh at us and continue doing what they want.

Debate only works when people recognize the humanity of the other side. That's why I'm willing to debate the libs and the centrists, because there is still hope for them. Theres no hope for the right. We must defeat them.
 
Revan said:
Nope, but when you label an entire group of 63m people (and many more who have not voted, similar to how not every leaning left person didn't vote, not every leaning right person didn't vote too) as a racist group, then you probably need to look at themselves.

I've met plenty of Trump voters (not many who love him though) and have yet to met a racist on them. That doesn't mean that there aren't many racists who voted for Trump exactly for that, but the vast majority of his voters aren't racists.
Click to expand...
look i'm not antisemite, i just think the nazi party will be good for my 401k
 
Silva said:
look i'm not antisemite, i just think the nazi party will be good for my 401k
Click to expand...
And finally we get the Godwin's law.

I think that ultra left are utter morons. But hey, I am not nasty.
 
Revan said:
One of the best programmers of all time, a prodigy who did stuff which is hard to believe it is possible to do. Didn't know that he was battling cancer since 2009, and actually he defeated it the first time he went sick in 1983.

Unsurprisingly, @Eboue looks at the worst on people (not that donating money to Republicans is neither a crime, nor morally wrong), instead of mentioning how he donated 2 billion dollars during his life, including a large part on AIDS research.
Click to expand...
We always say in the trump thread that there is a tweet for everything. It seems like Eboue sits on troves of online articles that bitch about everyone no matter what good they've done in their lives.
 
Eboue said:
Every single person who still supports trump is a racist. Every single one.
Click to expand...
Not all trump's supporters are racist but all racists are trump supporters. Anyway, I thought you were the champion of the forgotten midwestern working class as you've spat fire for three years over the Hillary "1\2 are deplorable" comment.
I would love to see you're energy directed at the real enemy of democracy, Republicans, but you seem to save most of that frustration for the people that try to do even a little bit of good for us.
 
GiddyUp said:
Not all trump's supporters are racist but all racists are trump supporters. Anyway, I thought you were the champion of the forgotten midwestern working class as you've spat fire for three years over the Hillary "1\2 are deplorable" comment.
I would love to see you're energy directed at the real enemy of democracy, Republicans, but you seem to save most of that frustration for the people that try to do even a little bit of good for us.
Click to expand...

Jesus, this tired shit again? I literally criticize Republicans daily.

..............
 
So someone died and this thread has turned into a political battleground.

Rip Paul Allen. I would say he had no effect on me, but would computers be what they are today without him and Microsoft
 
Oldyella said:
would computers be what they are today without him and Microsoft
Click to expand...
yes and probably better, the good stuff was invented by the US military and IBM, bill and paul had money to market and sell while suppressing competition and making it impossible for independent small-scale developers to even be on the playing field
 
Silva said:
yes and probably better, the good stuff was invented by the US military and IBM, bill and paul had money to market and sell while suppressing competition and making it impossible for independent small-scale developers to even be on the playing field
Click to expand...

Cheers. Never really been that bothered about where tech comes from or is developed so don't pay attention to this kind of stuff.
 
Oldyella said:
Rip Paul Allen. I would say he had no effect on me, but would computers be what they are today without him and Microsoft
Click to expand...

I think so. UNIX and C were already developed, and him didn't have anything to do with Windows (probably it wouldn't have been as shit as it is, if he had some part on it). Probably Apple would have created some monopoly though. Or who knows, maybe all of us would have been using Linux if MS didn't exist, and life would have been better.

Being totally fair though, MS played a large role on making computers accessible for everyone. I think that their products totally suck, but it is possible that the entire technology would have developed less rapid without them as the flagship company of computers (until the middle of last decade).
 
Silva said:
yes and probably better, the good stuff was invented by the US military and IBM, bill and paul had money to market and sell while suppressing competition and making it impossible for independent small-scale developers to even be on the playing field
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Revan said:
Being totally fair though, MS played a large role on making computers accessible for everyone. I think that their products totally suck, but it is possible that the entire technology would have developed less rapid without them as the flagship company of computers (until the middle of last decade).
Click to expand...

Revan said:
:lol:
Click to expand...
there were a lot of companies who tried to make PCs available to everyone, they had less money than bill and paul and couldn't sell at a loss until they had the entire market but hey, let's give managers credit for the work of researchers because they worked real hard, the more you advertise the harder you worked
 
Silva said:
there were a lot of companies who tried to make PCs available to everyone, they had less money than bill and paul and couldn't sell at a loss until they had the entire market but hey, let's give managers credit for the work of researchers because they worked real hard, the more you advertise the harder you worked
Click to expand...
Both Gates and Allen were heavily involved in the development of the first MS products, and neither of them was rich. They were middle class people and Allen actually had to keep a job while building MS to pay for his life expenses.

There were multiple companies but neither of those (bar the big two) had a clear vision on how to achieve their goals. Of course, at some stage MS and Apple created some oligopoly but it wasn't cause of luck, or cause someone gave money to them for shits and giggles, or cause their uncle was rich. They made the companies from the scratch, as much as you like to deny it.

I think that nowadays MS sucks and there is no reason to use their products anymore, but 20 years ago, only super-nerds were able to use open source alternatives like Linux various OS. MS played a significant role on porting computers to houses, with a relatively easy to access OS.

Oh and if you want to give credit to someone who is rarely mentioned, then you should mention Bell Labs. Thompson, Ritchie and Kerninghen built both C and Unix, and the entire field is essentially based on those 2 things. Without them, who knows how stuff would have been developed.
 
DOS, which was what actually catapulted Microsoft, was something they actually bought from another company. Awesome business accumen, but it's not like it would never be invented without them.

And as said above, the ammount of damage done to potential competitors and innovations by virtue of their monopolistic position makes it impossible to ascertain whether Microsoft has, overall been a net positive for consumers. I sure use (and like) many of their products, but if they had their way we'd all be stuck with fecking IE.
 
Revan said:
Of course, at some stage MS and Apple created some oligopoly but it wasn't cause of luck, or cause someone gave money to them for shits and giggles, or cause their uncle was rich. They made the companies from the scratch, as much as you like to deny it.
Click to expand...
xerox gave them the graphic user interface for free because their managers were wealthy dinosaurs who didn't care about it
 
Arruda said:
nd as said above, the ammount of damage done to potential competitors and innovations by virtue of their monopolistic position makes it impossible to ascertain whether Microsoft has, overall been a net positive for consumers.
Click to expand...
this one's pretty easy - the internet was kept shit and developed slower directly because of the monopolistic position and refusal to allow third party clients, software systems were kept shit by the micromanagement of managers like paul and bill who are not good enough to be involved in software development at that level - they were good at capitalism, at stuffing out competition and bankrupting them, they were not good at making the product they sold
 
Silva said:
xerox gave them the graphic user interface for free because their managers were wealthy dinosaurs who didn't care about it
Click to expand...
Having an idea, implementing it and building a successful product on it are different things that require different skills. Only a few people possess all of them. Usually, they are also ultra-successful.
 
Revan said:
Having an idea, implementing it and building a successful product on it are different things that require different skills. Only a few people possess all of them. Usually, they are also ultra-successful.
Click to expand...

But stealing ideas, underpaying for them and using monopolistic business practices to enrich yourself and your partners is laudable.
 
Arruda said:
DOS, which was what actually catapulted Microsoft, was something they actually bought from another company. Awesome business accumen, but it's not like it would never be invented without them.

And as said above, the ammount of damage done to potential competitors and innovations by virtue of their monopolistic position makes it impossible to ascertain whether Microsoft has, overall been a net positive for consumers. I sure use (and like) many of their products, but if they had their way we'd all be stuck with fecking IE.
Click to expand...
I think this is pretty overstated. Take for example Linux. Superior to Windows in every way, yet less than 2% of people on PC use it.

Some people want things for them to be as easy as possible and MS offered it for them. Let's why they dominate the market for PC OS.

At the other extreme look at Google who entered both the markets of search engines and operating systems very late and within a couple of years totally dominated it. The market was already established but because they had such much better products (again, the search engine - their main product - was done by the founders themselves, who Btw, weren't rich) they beat the other competitors.
 
Revan said:
Having an idea, implementing it and building a successful product on it are different things that require different skills. Only a few people possess all of them. Usually, they are also ultra-successful.
Click to expand...
buying, borrowing and stealing ideas does not make your their creator it makes you their owner and that is the major criticism of paul allen, revolutionary technology was created primarily by us military research and the xerox R&D park, but instead of that being used to it's full potential to benefit all of humanity it was used to line the pockets of a handful of managers who actively suppressed the technology for almost 2 decades
 
Dwazza said:
But stealing ideas, underpaying for them and using monopolistic business practices to enrich yourself and your partners is laudable.
Click to expand...
What ideas they stole and how did they underpayed for them?
 
Silva said:
buying, borrowing and stealing ideas does not make your their creator it makes you their owner and that is the major criticism of paul allen, revolutionary technology was created primarily by us military research and the xerox R&D park, but instead of that being used to it's full potential to benefit all of humanity it was used to line the pockets of a handful of managers who actively suppressed the technology for almost 2 decades
Click to expand...
He didn't have an active role in MS since 1983. He just kept his stock cause Gates wanted it to buy cheaply, and their relations had already gone south. He didn't have a role on suppressing anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.