Bill Gates on American education.

[Deja Q]

"Training the work force of tomorrow with the high-school students of today is like trying to teach kids about today's computers on a 50-year old mainframe. Our high schools were designed 50 years ago to meet the needs of another age. Until we design them to meet the needs of the 21st century, we will keep limiting -- even ruining -- the lives of millions of Americans every year."


Okay, he whines about it. What's he doing to help change things? We don't have the money to do jack splat. Bill DOES. He's taken a lot from society, and it's high time he puts back into it - especially if he complains about it so often.

Or doesn't he care about America at all? (Don't forget, he took his personal wealth and converted it to the Euro in Jan 2005 (according to Bloomberg.com), effectively ditching the dollar.)

If you ask me, based on his own quote, he's satisfied to help ruin the lives of millions of Americans while freely offshoring jobs to countries with the worst piracy rates! (Or so we're told...)

So wait a mo, Joe, isn't Gates big on antipiracy and all that other waffle he freely spews out? Why is he openly supporting pirates and thieves? (Or, again, who we're told are pirates and thieves...)

Source of quote: http://www.jpipes.com/index.php?/archives/26-Gates-Speech-on-American-Education.html

Source of Euro conversion: http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aO.Rl7JwFWy8&refer=news_index

http://www.bsa.org/eupolicy/press/newsreleases/eupolicypressrelease23may2006.cfm

Piracy rates decreased moderately in more than half (51) of the 97 countries covered in this year’s study, and increased in only 19. The global rate was unchanged from 2004 to 2005 as large developed markets like the United States, Western Europe, Japan and a handful of Asian countries continue to dominate the software market while their combined piracy rate hardly moved.
Some positive changes could be seen in the rapidly developing countries of Russia, India and China. Russia saw a four point drop in its PC software piracy rate while India’s piracy rate declined two points. China, with one of the fastest growing IT markets in the world, dropped four points between 2004 and 2005.

• The four countries with the largest percentage point drop in their piracy rate during the past year were China (4 points), Russia (4 points), Ukraine (6 points) and Morocco (4 points).
• The countries with the highest piracy rates were Vietnam (90 percent), Zimbabwe (90 percent), Indonesia (87 percent), China (86 percent) and Pakistan (86 percent).
• The countries with the lowest piracy rates were the United States (21 percent), New Zealand (23 percent), Austria (26 percent) and Finland (26 percent).


Much ado about precious little, the BSA can make a molehill sound like a mountain in terms of efficiency; apparently an 86% piracy rate is one they must tolerate. (from 2004, India's piracy rate dropped from 74% to 72% - cnet Asia dropped the webpage with the full 2004 stats and it's interesting that the US has the lowest piracy rate...)

[NotGivingUp]

1. he's a lying asshole using the education system as an excuse to outsource

there's plenty of those around....he's never been original

[beyurslf]

2. Maybe he is doing this:

" Gates, largely through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is leaving his mark by supporting the creation of small high schools and pumping millions into charter schools, publicly funded and privately run schools."

<http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/ci_4830669>


With a simple Google search, you can find dozens of articles detailing the money he has poured into American education.

[Deja Q]

4. The one thing I learned in debate class is to NOT knock down my own position when debating.

That defeats the purpose of a debate.

That's your job, to knock my point of view down. Not mine.

It'd be no different if the tables were turned.



I will admit it's nice to see him putting back into America's society. But don't patronize me with lines like "With a simple ____, you can _____".

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. Perhaps you should not be arguing a position which is so easily knocked down

[Deja Q]

26. I was never good at debating...

:evilgrin:


But as you can see, I opened a long and multi-faceted conversation of depth and intrigue.

Care to add anything else, or are you content to flame me with a clever one-liner? :evilgrin:

[beyurslf]

32. Your post states that Gates whines about the state of public education

in this country. You ask in the post what is he doing about it. My post gives an example of what he is doing. I also point out that I had many, many choices of what he is doing when I Googled "Bill Gates Education Donations."

You want to hate Gates, that is your choice. But don't bash him for not doing anything when he clearly is trying to help. If you think it isn't enough given his wealth, then say that. But give him credit for what he has done.

[brokensymmetry]

3. So he thinks the education system stinks?

Fine. Let him come up with a better idea.
What programs, what policies, what methods does
he think are needed?

It's one thing to say something is bad. It's
quite another to come up with something constructive.

[Deja Q]

5. Response #2 seems to shed some insight.

But it's interesting we don't hear or read about those little acts as much as we hear about his offshoring more jobs, piracy problems he loves to complain about (it's virtually a non-issue in the US compared to other countries), and lots of other things as well.

However, "the truth is in the middle". That's why a debate is so much fun... :D

[Mikey929]

6. Gates is a genius

Bill Gates has done more for this country than anyone in the last 30 years. I'm not talking about his personal donations to charity (which are massive in their own right). Think of the number of jobs that have been created in the personal computer and software field. Think of the number of companies that have been spawned because of his innovations. Think of the amount of technology and new products that have come on the scene the last 30 years that make our lives easier and more productive. And you bash the guy because he complains about the schools. What, is he supposed to single-handedly fix every public school in the whole country? How exactly?

The problem with our schools is not Bill Gates. It's the low standards we have for teachers. It's parents who don't do enough with their kids outside of school to teach them. It's buildings that are falling down. It's low expectations of students. It's politicians who would rather spend time seeking donations instead of addressing the issues at hand. It's corrupt union officials who squander money right and left.

[Deja Q]

8. Or are people geniuses for being led?

However, I agree with your tangential points - particularly "the low standards we have for teachers".

But I will add one: Teachers being unable to put children in their place when they act up. Students of the 1950s sure as hell learned and didn't get a free ride if they acted out of place.

Nor can I entirely counter your Union argument as I've seen that too. Maybe it's up to the members of the union to demand justice and righteousness from the union they pay their dues into?

Also, what innovations? Scores of websites have pointed out Bill's "innovations" were "created" by many other folks, of which Gates' company merely copied from. That's not innovation, that's doing what somebody else already did and applying it to a product that if it isn't a monopoly is the next best thing. I give Gates real cred for corporate savvy. For technological savvy, he's not that bright -- he couldn't even get a real Altair to make his Altair BASIC program; he used an emulator and prayed that it would work on the real equipment! (never mind how much he sold it for; as I recall he sold it for the same price as the hardware it worked on... I'm not surprised other people pirated it or even others making their own version and giving it away to other developers. Software the same price as hardware, then or now, is asinine...)

How detailed a list would you like for me to compile to justify my legitimate love/hate relationship of the guy's company, which is not quite as noble as you claim it to be? Now he HAS done good things, and he (like everybody else) has done bad things, but I've been in the computer industry for over 15 years and have used many platforms; many non-Microsoft ones. Microsoft is not very noble and everything Gates does has more to do with appeasing him and/or bringing in more money than it has to do with altruism or anything that is noble. (Their temporary team-up with IBM regarding "OS/2" should have scared the crap out of any company wanting to do business with Microsoft... yet other companies still do, and they are the ones who lose big-time in the end.)

And would you even bother to read it?

Welcome to DU! :party:


Edit: Grammar

[Mikey929]

14. OK

As someone in the computer industry for 15 years, you would have to talk way down to me to have me even understand you. lol. I am not a computer guy. And in saying Gates did all these innovations personally, I was obviously taking some poetic license. I was more referring to the industry which he helped spawn.

My overall point is that Gates -- through his business dealings -- has improved everyone's lives and created a ton of jobs. That is a benefit to society. The original poster had this edge to his post that struck me as wealth envy, i.e., who is this rich SOB to complain about something instead of fixing the problem.

As you point out, sure Gates did what he did to make money. So? Didn't Henry Ford try to make money? Capitalism rewards a few people handsomely, but it also helps the rest of the world too. I just hate to see a business leader knocked for being rich without recognizing the huge benefits that the rest of us have garnered because of it.

[Deja Q]

20. Much thanks for the clarification.

:)

I quoted in a previous follow-up "Nobody lost their job because of Microsoft". However, that phrase is a bit dated, as is your philosophy. At one point they created jobs. Now they're taking them away, by shifting when not eliminating or dumbing down the product so anybody can do the work. And, quite frankly, middlemen like computer stores take the biggest hits when consumers screw up with an installation or upgrade. Our society will always need specialists and Microsoft wants to eliminate the concept of specialists. Skilled workers. They are bad, you see...

If you look at the newest trends, everything is going away from fat clients (PC desktops) and it's all going to be web-based. Thin clients. Plug'n'play. Mass server farms. I hope those fiber cables can hold up and withstand any force of nature... I don't like the concept of "eggs in one basket".

And all of that is being done by, you guessed it, Microsoft. They are behind the scenes. After all, a centralized subscription service to software (SAAS, et al) means piracy will be heavily reduced and people will have to keep paying to get the same thing. Look at "Software Assurance" (SA). Microsoft devised this so companies would pay and get access to new versions of products as they came out. That was in 2002. Since then we've had ONE Office version and ZERO Windows versions come out. People who were suckered into SA basically paid twice or thrice as much for one license, of which could have been bought off the shelf at CompUSA or whereever.

Capitalism is about exchanging compatible services for money. When few can make sufficient money to survive, let alone offer anything to exchange, a state of decay is introduced. And many who do have skills and talents are left unused because of what boils down to selfishness and greed. The "market influence" means everybody should be in one given field. But as has been said, a nation of health care workers won't cut it. (never mind that industry, much like all the rest, has hopped aboard a plane to Asia...)

Plus there's the ethical angle. And how one defines ethics, but that goes back into years of being in the field and looking at who goes where and does what.

I am trying to see your points fully (as it's true Ford helped everyone... until oil supplies got tight...), but something seems amiss. The missing piece to the argument. And that element is change.

Maybe America should become the land of receptionists. Corporations never tire of fresh new looks... since all the "real" brainwork is now being done in other countries, pretty images is all that's left? (and automation will threaten their jobs too...)

Dunno. All I can fathom is that, without jobs, there's no capital left in America to capitalize upon. Offshoring is a bit of a bugger too...

And with power comes responsibility. Envy has NOTHING to do with it.

[fasttense]

11. Bill Gates was lucky.

You can fawn over the guy as much as you want, but it was luck that he was in on the ground floor of a developing technology. If it wasn't him it would have been someone else. Just because he took advantage of a good situation does not make him responsible for the evolving technology. He built a commercial enterprise on the shoulders of geniuses who discovered and developed the technology.

About ten years ago, Americans could make good money in programming and developing this technology. Today, you are lucky to support your family in a middle class lifestyle in this field. Being in the right place at the right time makes all the difference.

[Mikey929]

17. Luck?

Luck? So if it was you in that Harvard dorm room in the 70's, then you would have been the founder of Microsoft? While luck plays a role in everyone's life, to attriubte Gates' massive amount of success to luck is just silly. You make it seem like he walked into a convenience store and happened to buy the winning lottery ticket. Give the guy credit for some smarts and a ton of hard work. You don't get as big as Gates on luck alone.

[nannah]

21. ruthless attention to squashing competition is also helpful. eom

[Deja Q]

24. Microsoft didn't have it at the time...

Competition, that is.

Once they got in with IBM and the clones came about, Microsoft started a licensing scheme that compelled OEMs to buy licenses for EVERY computer made... even if the computer was to run a different operating system. This is stealing, and not the most ardent MS supporter can deny that, and in 1994 the government finally stepped in to slap 'em, but by then it was far too late. (Microsoft got away with the golden goose of swindles. They were sufficiently big that many systems would use their product and that by using bully tactics they could be assured more money because the consumer arena was blossoming and "nobody lost a job because of microsoft".)

If you wanted to run a Unix server or IBM's OS/2, tough shit to you. You still had to spend the extra $100 or whatever for Microsoft's product because Dell, Compaq, Packard Bell, whoever had to put it on due to Microsoft's stipulation. And none of those companies were going to cut the contract or offer the CONSUMER a fair deal; it would cost themselves too much and that's just not allowed.

The last I recall, having to pay somebody for a product you're never going to use and don't want and never wanted to buy but because they forced you to you had to isn't moral, ethical, or legal... that's still the case in 2007, right?

Which is why I appreciate the parts industry. I make my own systems from off the shelf parts, and don't have to be chained to anybody's conditions and stipulations or the stipulations of the companies that deal with the product makers. THAT is freedom. Nothing else is. And I still use Windows anyway; Microsoft knows "it's the applications, stupid" and no doubt as to why they hate the emulation industry these days. (ironic as an emulator got them off the ground too!)

Most people not around in the biz AT THE TIME won't fully understand. But at the time it was crooked, and eventually the government stopped their illegal dealings.

Someone said it was out of envy I commented on Microsoft's wealth and position. Not true.

I find Microsoft to be a very interesting business; for reasons both good and bad. But as with all things in life, the bad are always far more interesting. That's why actors prefer to play the villains in movies. :evilgrin:

[unpossibles]

23. lucky enough to have been able to "borrow" the Windows idea from Steve Jobs

yes, he was dedicated and hard-working, but like Henry Ford before him, he did not invent his ideas but improved upon someone else's.

[Deja Q]

25. Not quite. Xerox invented the GUI and mouse...

Apple "borrowed" as well... except the judge that voted for Apple over Xerox was probably drunk. (But I'll admit I don't know enough details of that little spat... still, it's easy enough to fathom why Xerox would sue Apple... they invented it... they were in the wrong time and place. Pity they didn't patent it... :crazy: )

Xerox just never saw the 'need' for it, and system requirements for a GUI were astronomical at the time -- 1972... or was it 1970? Oh well. Definitely early 70s.

[Mikey929]

28. Improve

With the exception of the most rare of geniuses, i.e., Isaac Newton, every scientist/innovator improves upon the work of other people. That is the very essence of invention; you take what currently exists and build upon it. So it's not a valid knock to say Gates built on other peoples' ideas. Of course he did. Name one invention for me that came purely out of thin air without some background work done by other people.

In the history books, we have a tendency to see innovations as the result of one person, when in reality there are many other 2nd tier folks who played a big role.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. Gates is no Isaac Newton.

He's basically just another seedy business man.

[Mikey929]

34. Not Newton

1. I did not say Gates was a Newton.

2. Why say he's another seedy businessman? Is there something seedy about making a product and selling it to make money? Or are you angry because he's successful?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. "Is there something seedy..."

"about making a product and selling it to make money?"

No, it's seedy to steal other people's ideas, stifle innovation, create a monopoly, and rip off consumers.

"Or are you angry because he's successful?"

Nope. Do you idolize him because he's rich?

[Mikey929]

37. Admire

Not idolize him. I admire anyone who can start a business and make a huge success of himself. That does impress me.

I see a lot of wealth envy in your tone. As if anyone who is successful had to engage in illegal activities to do so. That's a nice way to comfort yourself why you're not successful; you're just too nice a person.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. Wealth envy?

I think you're projecting.

"I admire anyone who can start a business and make a huge success of himself. That does impress me."

At any cost?

[Mikey929]

39. Of course not

Of course not at any cost. But I've not seen anything that would make me put Gates in the category of despised businessmen that you've obviously put him in. You say Gates stole, stifled competition, created a monopoly, and ripped off consumers. That's some harsh language. Care to explain it? High-level business is not all flowers and sunshine.

Yes, it seems you have a lot of animosity toward people who are very successful.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. ...

"Yes, it seems you have a lot of animosity toward people who are very successful."

Why? Because I don't like Gates?

"Care to explain it?"

LOL. Haven't been paying much attention to MS, have you? Makes sense.

[unpossibles]

41. I don't disagree with that. Ford did not invent the automobile, but he did improve

its production.

There is a lot of debate however, about just how much Gates stole from Jobs when they worked together (and Jobs from Xerox as another poster noted).

Gates brilliance, imo, had little to do with computers and much to do with business and promotion, which is still impressive.

For the record, I am not bashing him, but I also do not worship the guy.

[Mikey929]

42. OK

I'm not saying I want to give the guy a Monica, for pete's sake. LOL

I just like the guy. I don't LIKE like him.

[Deja Q]

27. The right place at the right time and being consciously aware of it.

That does transcend "luck", I agree.

:)

[Deja Q]

22. True. IBM's own stupidity and greed caused their downfall.

In 1980, Gates told IBM they were working on an operating system that IBM could use on its new "Personal Computer" (PC).

IBM made the PC underpowered, deliberately, because IBM feared its mainframe monopoly would be decimated (it was). Competing technology of the time was far more capable than Intel's embarrassment of an 8086 processor... they saw a threat and jumped in with underpowered, off-the-shelf kiddiewank so they could control that market too. Unfortunately, all that off-the-shelf garbage meant Compaq could clone the PC and get away with it legally (IBM lost the lawsuit, oopsie-doodles to them...)

But I digress.

However, Microsoft had no OS. They simply bought QDOS from somebody else and sold it to IBM and the rest is history. That's a suave business move and they, unlike other companies who walked away from IBM**, saw the greater good. In 1980, IBM was a big name. IBM could sell a bar of soap with flashing lights on it and it'd be a big seller...




** because they did not like IBM's business practices, dealings with the nazis (which was just about a business deal anyway, the concept is simply amoral -- not immoral), or whatever else excuse they wanted to make... those other companies did not see an opportunity or wanted to be involved with IBM's business ethics. (So Microsoft was obviously a good fit. It's just about money, what somebody did in the past had nothing to do with it as far as Microsoft was concerned. And they were right.)

[tavalon]

7. There is much to hate about Gates

Alas, you picked a bad topic to rip him on. He has been dumping plenty of dollars into education (dollars, not Euros). He actually is putting his money where his mouth is and frankly, he speaks truth here. LNCB hasn't helped because it focuses on the wrong thing and doesn't do a good job of helping anyway. Funneling money into infrastructure (read that as computers and OSs is what needs to be done and it's what Gates is doing in spades.

He is target rich but I think you need to pick a different angle.

[nannah]

9. In WA the Tacoma school district pulled the plug on his project

even though it meant losing all his donations. they had begun using his grant project but chose to let it go. At the time I didn't pursue the story so I don't know why they chose to give back his money.

[Deja Q]

13. If they dropped his project, giving his money back would be ethical.

Which poses the remaining question of "Why did they drop it in the first place?" Personal dislike of Gates? Stipulations insisted by Gates that were unreasonable? Both? Neither? Something in the long-winded EULA the district disliked? Or the wrong question entirely?

Thats is something I'm finding to be worth googling. :D

[nannah]

29. i've been trying to google it, but can't find

any reference. I'll keep trying. i remember hearing or reading the information; it stuck in my mind because both my adult children are teachers.

[tavalon]

15. That would be an interesting thing to know

I know I've stood up for him in this thread but I don't deify the man by any stretch, though, these days I get to see the better side of Gates as one of my partners is a microserf and really, they get treated pretty damn well.

[Deja Q]

10. Sorry.

I will clarify he transferred his personal wealth TO the Euro in Jan 2005. That's not the same thing as what you had said, about dumping dollars into education. Either he took dollars directly from somewhere or he converted the relevant amount of cash back into dollars for his dumping.

And, again, I am very glad to be edified he has put back into America. Seriously and genuinely. Many corporate leaders don't. And some corporate leaders are far worse than he is.

Again, the truth is in the middle. and by reading messages from the opposite viewpoint I am starting to see the middle.

And the other poster was right, perhaps I did "bash". However, my style has always been brash and I'll admit my own hypocrisy in that it's better to win people over with honey than with vinegar...

[Laha]

19. I agree, Tavalon

While I have nothing at the moment beyond simple Google searches to back up my claim, the hundreds of millions of dollars of his own personal fortune he has donated to noble, charitable causes is very easy to find.

Yes, the man got rich using the broken American corporate structure - but I can't recall hearing of anyone else who has so sincerely given away so much of what he has earned. Even if I do eventually hear of someone with even greater generosity, and despite the fact that I consider Microsoft to be a vile abomitation, Mr. Gates has easily earned my respect.

[The2ndWheel]

12. What does Gates do again?

Oh yeah, computers. Those are what will be needed for a 21st century school system. Wow, no wonder he makes all that money.

"Training the work force of tomorrow"

Don't you just love how this is what life is about? This is what we've progressed to. Being trained to work, from as early an age as possible. The only time you can maybe stop and just enjoy whatever existence is, is somewhere around 70. That's what we've created; a life built around the last few years. At least we get that little vacation time here and there until then.

Work will make you free.

[Deja Q]

16. Assuming one doesn't die first.

Your point is the best of all and encompasses far more than one corporate leader (who, one way or the other or both is actually more interesting than numerous other leaders or even the figureheads).

Work keeps us in our place. It gives us purpose. It's only truly rewarding when it matches our interests, which is why some people prefer to be in fields that aren't the most financially rewarding. And these days, more and more fields aren't as rewarding.

Having skills is nice, but when one reads articles saying "With ((our product)) you won't need skilled workers to maintain it", it's only disheartening. Skills are worthless these days. Automation is. Look at all the products and trends; they are going towards automation and reduced staff.

Somebody once said "Nobody lost a job because of Microsoft". I wonder what they'd say today... or tomorrow once the web-based initiative is completed. (Though I'd say it's a kick in the fun place to find something new to do. Change is a part of life.)

[Yavin4]

30. Steve Jobs and Apple Are More Responsible for the PC Revolution

than Gates and MS by far. The concept of personal computing originated with Apple. Before Apple, computers were big boxes that sat off in a huge room, and everyone dialed into it. At the time (late 70s) no one even conceived of a computer for home use. Apple was the corporation that came up with using the computer for home use which spawned the mega industry that we know today.

IBM followed suit, and outsourced, yes outsourced, their operating system for the personal computer to Gates. My personal opinion of Gates is highly ambivalent. He was a ruthless businessman in a field of geeky engineers, but he did do a lot to standardized computing. Without him, you would have had a 1000 different operating systems, applications, networks, etc.

In the end, if he didn't exist, someone else or at least a consortium would have replaced him.

[JCMach1]

31. Bill is doing Something about this

At least Gates has start the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation... Is that enough?



Through its partnerships in communities across the United States, the foundation is committed to raising the high school graduation rate and helping all students—regardless of race or family income—graduate as strong citizens ready for college and work. Our Education initiative also works to provide children with opportunities for quality early learning.




Highlights
New Schools for Math and Science
America’s students need stronger math, science, and technology skills to get good jobs. Innovative schools are helping them build those skills... http://www.gatesfoundation.org/UnitedStates/Education/
================================================================

I hate the my capitalist is better than your capitalist game. Jobs and Gates were the right people at the right place at the right time.

Neither Jobs or Gates is God... or even Saints... They are capitalists, both of whom have had a huge role in shaping the information revolution.

Old prejudices die hard though! I would never own an Apple because the Apple II broke down more than any computer I have used before or since. Also, I have never liked the Apple OS. I like to get under the hood. So, Mac notebooks are anathema to me.

[CabalPowered]

35. You don't have to like him to agree with him.

Our education infrastructure is more antiquated than that of any other part of our society.

[nick303]

43. self-delete