Philanthropist, My Ass

[piratePenguin]

I know what a zealot is. But what I don't get is why I'm supposed to be a zealot for sarcasticly saying "the sky is falling" after you said GNU/Linux isn't the best choice for every purpose.

[Aloone_Jonez]

Oh, fuck it I don't care.

Let's shake hands.

[piratePenguin]

Let's shake hands.

OK.

*prepares the chainsaw*
:p

[muzzy]

Well, Bill's point is that computers cannot be used without a lot of services, and the services are what drive up costs. In his world, average users won't learn to use computers but instead rely on professional help. In his world, users won't help each others but depend on customer support instead.

Obviously, I cannot know about mindsets of the people in third world countries, but his point of view is obviously that people won't learn to use the tools and thus a lot of money is needed to help them use these systems. Personally, I think he's underestimating a lot of people. Then again, when I think about the average windows users, I can see where his point of view is coming from...

[Aloone_Jonez]

I think history will repeat itself in that at first only a well few educated minority will own computers, before they filter down through society until nearly everyone has them. I hope a free operating system dominates (or one that's fully compatable with most free OSes) and it'll be interesting to see what happens if it's Linux they choose and the non-techy people start using it, will it mean thet they'll be better users or will it mean that no one will use a computer unless they really know how to use one.

[DavidB]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry

Interesting...their list of the most common types of computer zealots curiously omits Microsoft whores. And when I recently tried to edit a couple Wikipedia articles about Microsoft and Bill Gates, my additions/corrections were quickly deleted.

But I'd better not speculate that Microsoft has infiltrated Wikipedia, too, lest I be branded a - *GASP* - conspiracy theorist.

[Refalm]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry

Interesting...their list of the most common types of computer zealots curiously omits Microsoft whores. And when I recently tried to edit a couple Wikipedia articles about Microsoft and Bill Gates, my additions/corrections were quickly deleted.

Wikipedia doesn't include not-founded facts, especially when you didn't discuss them first.

[DavidB]

Wikipedia doesn't include not-founded facts, especially when you didn't discuss them first.

I didn't post UNFOUNDED facts. In the meantime, a little additional investigation brought to light several Wikipedia articles that curiously dumped on the open source movement while ignoring Microsoft. Very strange.

[Aloone_Jonez]

How about posting it here first, then we can judge for ourselves?

[DavidB]

How about posting it here first, then we can judge for ourselves?

Read Wikipedia's articles "Bill Gates" and "Microsoft." They include some token criticisms but are overwhelmingly positive, as if they were written by Mary Jane Foley herself. I can't remember everything I wrote, but I mentioned the "sweetheart deal" (to put it politely) Bill Gates got for the new headquarters for his "philanthropy." I mentioned "Microsoft Auditorium" in the Seattle PUBLIC Library as an example of questionable influence and advertising masquerading as philanthropy.

I mentioned that many critics question Bill Gates' role in public education and the fact that his father is the GATES in the Seattle lobby/law firm Preston, Gates & Ellis.

I believe I mentioned the SCO affair and the fact that Seattle's economic and social life has actually declined under Microsoft. I mentioned these things and more in several posts, all of which were deleted. Everything I posted was either an easily verifiable fact (some accompanied by links to MAINSTREAM media articles) or popular opinion supported by facts. (And please don't tell me Wikipedia doesn't publish opinion until you read their articles about Bill Gates and Microsoft.)

You might also check out their article on "Computer Zealotry" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_zealotry The author completely forgot to mention Microsoft zealots (popularly known as Microsofties, Microsoft whores and other choice names).

Microsoft also gets a free ride on the article "Operating System Advocacy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system_advocacy Notice the links at the end of the article. They begin with "Evengelism: A Unix Bigot and Linux Advocate's Spewings" and "Bad Linux Advocacy FAQ."

Yup, there's little evidence to suggest that Wikipedia any more manipulated by Microsoft than are most of the alternative media, the Washington Post, Slashdot and on and on, is there?

[mobrien_12]

There have already been cases where a politician has had members of his staff edit his wikipedia entry to remove (true) things he didn't want in there.

[Aloone_Jonez]

I'm not convinced, perhapps they've just had problems with the anti-Microsoft crowd vandalising the Microsoft sections and they're overeacting to it as a result.

On second thoughts, may be this isn't the best place to discuss this, perhapps Wiki is.

[DavidB]

There have already been cases where a politician has had members of his staff edit his wikipedia entry to remove (true) things he didn't want in there.

Yes, that has received a lot of publicity, and no one owns more politicians than Bill Gates.

[DavidB]

I'm not convinced, perhapps they've just had problems with the anti-Microsoft crowd vandalising the Microsoft sections and they're overeacting to it as a result.

That would still discredit them. I mean, who wants to consult an encyclopedia that responds to vandalism by overreacting?

On second thoughts, may be this isn't the best place to discuss this, perhapps Wiki is.

Oh, I've got much bigger plans than that...

[piratePenguin]

Cheer up! :p

Did you register on wikipedia DavidB? If you did, I think your contributions would be recorded.